SCOTUS Catch-all |

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 608
  • Views: 22K
  • Politics 
nycfan said:
Click to expand...

“… Earlier this month, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled, 2-1, that only Congress’ comptroller general — the leader of the Government Accountability Office — has the power to challenge allegedly unlawful impoundments by the president. Groups that rely on foreign aid funding and claim the right to sue over withheld grants are asking the full bench of the D.C. Circuit to reverse that conclusion, but the full court has not yet acted.

For now, an earlier order from U.S. District Judge Amir Ali in favor of the aid groups remains in effect. Ali, a Biden appointee, mandated formal obligation of the funds by the end of September. That order is presently due to be set aside unless the full D.C. Circuit steps in — but the Trump administration seems eager to get the issue in front of the Supreme Court quickly.

Sauer asked the justices to rule by Sept. 2 or to put in place a temporary order that the government need not comply with Ali’s directive.…”
 
nycfan said:


Click to expand...

“… Monday’s order is the latest sign that the Supreme Court’s conservative majority has effectively abandoned a 90-year-old high court precedent that protected some federal agencies from arbitrary presidential action.

In the 1935 decision known as Humphrey’s Executor, the court unanimously held that presidents cannot fire independent board members without cause.

The decision ushered in an era of powerful independent federal agencies charged with regulating labor relations, employment discrimination, the airwaves and much else. But it has long rankled conservative legal theorists who argue the modern administrative state gets the Constitution all wrong because such agencies should answer to the president.…”
 
nycfan said:
Click to expand...

“
The U.S. Supreme Court again backed President Donald Trump's hardline approach toward immigration on Monday, letting federal agents proceed with raids in Southern California targeting people for deportation based on their race or language.

The court granted a Justice Department request to put on hold a federal judge's order temporarily barring agents from stopping or detaining people without "reasonable suspicion" they are in the country illegally, by relying on race or ethnicity, or if they speak Spanish or English with an accent, among other factors.

… The Supreme Court's order was brief and issued without any explanation, a common way it handles emergency matters, but one that has generated confusion in lower courts and criticism from some of the justices themselves. The court has a 6-3 conservative majority.

Concurring with the decision on Monday, conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh said that "apparent ethnicity alone cannot furnish reasonable suspicion" but it can be a "'relevant factor' when considered along with other salient factors."…”
 
nycfan said:
“
The U.S. Supreme Court again backed President Donald Trump's hardline approach toward immigration on Monday, letting federal agents proceed with raids in Southern California targeting people for deportation based on their race or language.

The court granted a Justice Department request to put on hold a federal judge's order temporarily barring agents from stopping or detaining people without "reasonable suspicion" they are in the country illegally, by relying on race or ethnicity, or if they speak Spanish or English with an accent, among other factors.

… The Supreme Court's order was brief and issued without any explanation, a common way it handles emergency matters, but one that has generated confusion in lower courts and criticism from some of the justices themselves. The court has a 6-3 conservative majority.

Concurring with the decision on Monday, conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh said that "apparent ethnicity alone cannot furnish reasonable suspicion" but it can be a "'relevant factor' when considered along with other salient factors."…”
Click to expand...

IMG_9519.jpeg

IMG_9520.jpeg
 
superrific said:
They're not even making Trump win. They are just making the other side lose. Stays, stays, stays. Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit.
Click to expand...
I actually expect that Trump will eventually lose almost all of these cases by 6-3 or 7-2 margins, but the cowards on the court who aren’t ready to come out of the fascist closet are more than happy to let Trump shit all over the constitution for as long as they can manage to delay stopping him and even then only because they don’t want a future liberal president to have such terrible power.
 
BlooVooDoo said:
I actually expect that Trump will eventually lose almost all of these cases by 6-3 or 7-2 margins, but the cowards on the court who aren’t ready to come out of the fascist closet are more than happy to let Trump shit all over the constitution for as long as they can manage to delay stopping him and even then only because they don’t want a future liberal president to have such terrible power.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't count on that.
 
superrific said:
I wouldn't count on that.
Click to expand...
Yeah, on the consideration of race as a factor for stops (so long as not the only factor) Kavanaugh indicated his expectation that ICE will succeed on the merits.
 
nycfan said:
Yeah, on the consideration of race as a factor for stops (so long as not the only factor) Kavanaugh indicated his expectation that ICE will succeed on the merits.
Click to expand...
Recognizing different cases may be handled differently, I think the odds of what SCOTUS will do, once it gets to the merits, are:

Most likely — Find some way to avoid ruling on the merits by either kicking it back to the lower courts or declaring cert to be improvidently granted or something, which will have the effect of keeping its pro-Trump shadow docket decisions intact indefinitely without creating law that could be useful for future Dem presidents.

Next most likely — Rule for Trump, ala Trump v. United States.

Least likely — Rule against Trump.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top