SCOTUS 2021

[boutons_deux]

Supreme Court Blocks Power Plant Do ent Release

“The Supreme Court just dealt

a severe blow to government transparency and accountability, as well as the Endangered Species Act,”

said Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity.

“This decision will make it

easier for political appointees to meddle secretly in scientific decisions, gut protections for our air and water, and

push more of our wildlife toward extinction.

Now more than ever, Congress must step in and end the abuse of the deliberative process privilege or we’ll have an unaccountable executive branch.”

https://www.commondreams.org/newswir... ent-release

[boutons_deux]

Justices Gorsuch and Breyer Just Took Turns Accusing Each Other of Judicial Activism in Immigration Decision

a case addressing a legal issue that occurs at the messy intersection of federal immigration law and state criminal law.

SCOTUS ruled against Clemente Pereida,

Breyer warned that the majority decision ignored congressional intent.

“I fear today’s decision will result in precisely the practical difficulties and potential unfairness that Congress intended to avoid,” he wrote.

https://lawandcrime.com/supreme-court/justices-gorsuch-and-breyer-just-took-turns-accusing-each-other-of-judicial-activism-in-immigration-decision/

Active RWNJ SCOTUS assholes pander to the White Supremacy assholes who bought them SCOTUS seats by ruling an activist xenophobic decision.

[boutons_deux]

The Supreme Court Is Poised to Find New Ways to Disenfranchise Black Voters

If the court gives the go-ahead to two new, blatantly discriminatory voting laws, we can say goodbye to free and fair elections.

the Supreme Court entertained a frontal attack on the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Republicans in Arizona, ... have ins uted a pair of new voter restrictions aimed directly at depressing the minority vote.

Passing laws to depress the minority vote is the only policy platform Republicans have.

What’s interesting is that Republicans are being relatively open about the fact that the point of their laws is to suppress votes.

“Because it puts us at a compe ive disadvantage relative to Democrats. Politics is a zero-sum game.”

Republicans are arguing that the Voting Rights Act should be reinterpreted to allow their conduct.

Arizona’s two laws are designed to and will have the effect of decreasing minority turnout in elections in the state. One law prohibits so-called ballot harvesting, which is when people who vote by mail give their ballots to another person to drop off at the polls.

Another law allows Arizona simply to throw away votes that were cast at the wrong precinct.

Both of these laws will disproportionately affect minority communities, just like they’re designed to do.

the Democratic National Committee pointed out that polling places are frequently changed in minority communities, and they are often intentionally changed to counterintuitive locations.

The Republican argument is so obviously reanimated from the Jim Crow era that even some conservatives on the court seemed to fear it would eat their brains.

While Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch revealed themselves to be card carrying members of the Big Lie caucus that is willing to entertain any argument that prevents people of color from voting,

alleged attempted rapist Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, and even Roberts appeared skeptical about effectively shredding the entire Voting Rights Act.

https://www.thenation.com/article/po...voting-rights/

Repugs demanding SCOTUS to violate the "equal treatment" clause of the 14th Amendment.

[boutons_deux]

the politicized, corrupt SCOTUS promoting Christian nationalism and weaponized "freedom of expression"

Supreme Court nixes another California pandemic restriction

The Supreme Court has once again ruled against California in a case concerning religious worship during the coronavirus pandemic.

In a 5-4 decision, mostly along ideological lines,

the court ruled late Friday night that California cannot enforce its three-household limit on at-home religious meetings, such as prayer groups and Bible studies in.

Conservatives were in the majority, with only Chief Justice John Roberts splitting off and siding with the three liberal justices.

https://theweek.com/speedreads/97674...ic-restriction

Gore sucks says a couple people in a secular liquor store is the same as a home or church filled dozens or 100s of Christians.

ACB is now providing Roberts cover so he can bolster his historical reputation as apolitical

while the 5 conservatives, with whom he actually agrees with, over America.

[boutons_deux]

Clarence and Virginia Thomas have an impressively corrupt activist/judge scheme going

quite the scheme going.

She takes in dark money contributions to her Tea Party-connected nonprofit, Liberty Central, and

organizes Republicans on exactly the kind of issues that often reach the Supreme Court.

He sits on the Supreme Court and

never recuses himself as justices are called on by federal law to do in certain situations,

including ones where their spouses have financial interests.

while Justice Stephen Breyer is solemnly warning that

expanding the Supreme Court might be a problem because

“Structural alteration motivated by the perception of political influence can only feed”

the perception that the court is guided by politics, “further eroding that trust.”

As if that ship had not long since sailed.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025108

[boutons_deux]

HOUSE AND SENATE DEMOCRATS PLAN BILL TO ADD FOUR JUSTICES TO SUPREME COURT

The Cons ution allows Congress to set the number of Supreme Court justices.


https://theintercept.com/2021/04/14/...supreme-court/

[boutons_deux]

The Supreme Court Broke Its Own Rules to Radically Redefine Religious Liberty

5–4 decision in Tandon v. Newsom, which blocked California’s COVID-related ban on religious gatherings in private homes.

it radically altered the law of religious liberty.

Since 1990’s Employment Division v. Smith, the Supreme Court has not interpreted the First Amendment’s free exercise clause to require religious exemptions to laws that don’t discriminate against religion.

, the majority effectively overturned Smith by establishing a new rule, often called the “most favored nation” theory.

Under this doctrine, any secular exemption to a law

automatically creates a claim for a religious exemption,

vastly expanding the government’s obligation to provide religious accommodations to countless regulations.

Smith says the free exercise clause of the First Amendment protects against the government targeting religious practice for disfavored treatment,

but does not grant a right to exemptions from general law.

Almost immediately after Smith, there were efforts to read into it a broader

“most favored nation” theory that said:

Any time the government grants an exemption to a law, it has an obligation to grant a religious exemption, too, unless the government meets strict scrutiny.

But that was not the law of the land until Friday night.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...alifornia.html

I read last year that ACB was the dam buster who would allow the Stinky Six, almost all Catholics, to weaponize "freedom of expression". Last Friday's bull is just the beginning.

[boutons_deux]

Sonia Sotomayor rips Brett Kavanaugh with a warning


Kavanagh having an emotional breakdown in his job interview, got hired anyway.

Justice Sotomayor warned this newly-constructed Court,... is "willing to overrule precedent without even acknowledging it is doing so, much less providing any special justification."

Amy Coney Barrett. Justice Barrett's judicial opinions made clear she will not honor precedent, known as stare decisis.

Without that legal guardrail many decidedly settled law targets of conservatives, from the right to choose an abortion to the right to marry, could be struck down by the "Trump Court."

"How low this Court's respect for stare decisis has sunk," Justice Sotomayor warned.

"Not long ago, that doctrine was recognized as a pillar of the 'rule of law,' critical to 'keep the scale of justice even and steady, and not liable to waver with every new judge's opinion,'"

"Now, it seems, the Court is willing to overrule precedent without even acknowledging it is doing so, much less providing any special justification.

It is hard to see how that approach is 'founded in the law rather than in the proclivities of individuals,'"

She called the ruling a "contortion" of previous rulings, and writes: "As this Court has consistently reiterated, 'a departure from precedent demands special justification.'"

"The Court offers no such justification today. Nor could it," she charged.

"Instead of addressing these factors, the Court simply rewrites Miller and Montgomery," ...

"to say what the Court now wishes they had said, and then denies that it has done any such thing."

https://www.alternet.org/2021/04/kavanaugh-sotomayor/

[boutons_deux]

Brett Kavanaugh’s Opinion Restoring Juvenile Life Without Parole Is Dishonest and Barbaric

In an appalling 6–3 decision on Thursday, the Supreme Court effectively reinstated juvenile life without parole by shredding precedents that had sharply limited the sentence in every state.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s majority opinion in Jones v. Mississippi is one of the most dishonest and cynical decisions in recent memory:

While pretending to follow precedent, Kavanaugh tore down judicial restrictions on JLWOP,

ensuring that fully rehabilitated individuals who committed their crimes as children will die behind bars.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent, joined by Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan, pulls no punches in its

biting rebuke of Kavanaugh’s duplicity and inhumanity.

It doubles as an ominous warning that

the conservative majority is more than willing to destroy major precedents while falsely claiming to uphold them.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...ut-parole.html

[boutons_deux]

Barrett slammed for refusing to recuse herself from case involving Koch-funded group that bankrolled ads for her confirmation

The top pe ioner listed in the case is a non-profit organization spearheaded by billionaires David Koch and Charles Koch.

When Barrett was nominated for the nation's highest court by former President Donald Trump,

the group s ed out more than $1 million to cover the cost of advertisements to amplify Barrett's image.

"Justice Barrett is ignoring important ethical standards to rule on a case that could open our democracy to further infiltration by dark-money influence, perhaps permanently,"

"Her choice to press forward in spite of recusal laws also creates a troubling new precedent,

and undermines public confidence in the integrity of the Court."

https://www.rawstory.com/barrett-sla...r-confirmation

She and Repugs don't care.

They know there will be no punishment for their ethical corruption.

Trash showed them they can go as far as they want without punishment

They even care less about "public confidence in the integrity of the Court."

[boutons_deux]

The Supreme Court’s conservatives are quaking over cancel culture

The Court’s right flank is afraid that the monster under their bed will cancel them.

“Requiring people to stand up in public for their political acts fosters civic courage, without which democracy is doomed.

For my part, I do not look forward to a society which, thanks to the Supreme Court, campaigns anonymously ... and

even exercises the direct democracy of initiative and referendum hidden from public scrutiny and protected from the accountability of criticism.

This does not resemble the Home of the Brave.”

Those are the words of the late Justice Antonin Scalia, in a 2010 opinion concerning whether the public should be allowed to learn who signed a pe ion seeking to call a referendum on a state law.

The conservative justices who heard this new case, Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta, showed little of the confidence and “civic courage” that Scalia once celebrated.

Many of them bristled with paranoia that angry mobs lurk in every alleyway, waiting to cancel conservative speakers.

Justice Neil Gorsuch warned of a world where the government could demand to see your Christmas card list or a list of all the people you’ve dated in the past.

Justice Clarence Thomas repeatedly suggested that the Court must provide cons utional protection to any advocacy organization that is accused of being “racist” or “ phobic.”

Justice Samuel Alito warned of “vandalism, death threats, physical violence, economic reprisals, [and] harassment in the workplace” directed against donors to an anti-LGBTQ campaign.

Americans for Prosperity is a fraught case, presenting

sensitive issues concerning when donors to advocacy organizations should be allowed to keep their iden ies secret in order to protect them from reprisals.

the Court’s conservative majority appears to believe that reprisals against political conservatives are now so common that

it may require handing down a sweeping and potentially unprecedented remedy to protect their fellow conservative activists from the horrors of cancel culture.

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/224...thomas-gorsuch

Protecting the oligarchy and others from public view as they finance hate, corruption, rigging of politiicans and judges.

Complete and total FASCISM.

[Ef-man]

Guess government authorities have to provide full details in one notice rather than multiple notices.

U.S. Supreme Court hands victory to immigrants facing deportation.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday offered new hope to thousands of long-term immigrants seeking to avoid deportation in a ruling that faulted the federal government for improperly notifying a man who came to the United States illegally from Guatemala to appear for a removal hearing.

The justices, in a 6-3 decision that divided the high court's conservative bloc, overturned a lower court's decision that had prevented Agusto Niz-Chavez from pursuing his request to cancel the attempted expulsion based on the length of time he had lived in the United States. He lives in Michigan with his family after entering the United States illegally in 2005.

The justices decided that federal immigration law requires authorities to include all relevant details for a notice to appear for a hearing in one do ent rather than sending the information across multiple do ents. While a technical issue, the ruling could affect hundreds of thousands of immigration cases.

"In this case, the law's terms ensure that, when the federal government seeks a procedural advantage against an individual, it will at least supply him with a single and reasonably comprehensive statement of the nature of the proceedings against him," conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the ruling.

Gorsuch was joined by the court's three liberal justices as well as conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Amy Coney Barrett.

In a dissent, conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, said the ruling was "perplexing as a matter of statutory interpretation and common sense."

[Winehole23]

life comes at you fast.

if Roe. v Wade is overturned a bunch of states have trigger laws that instantly criminalize abortion.

[Winehole23]

Radley Balko put it something like this: SCOTUS just ruled non-unianimous jury verdicts uncons utional and acknowledged their origin in racist jurisprudence, but they also denied relief to any claimant injured before SCOTUS started caring about it.

[Winehole23]

[Thread]

...How could this happen, Winester?...

Simple...

Trump President.
Not Clinton.

[Ef-man]

Trump President.
Not Clinton.

[Winehole23]

In unanimous Fourth Amendment ruling, a reminder that there is, in fact, no place like home

decision: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinion...0-157_8mjp.pdf

[Winehole23]

...How could this happen, Winester?...

Simple...

Trump President.
Not Clinton.

it is shocking that a developer/vulgarian like DJT installed one-third of the Supreme Court

[Thread]

it is shocking that a developer/vulgarian like DJT installed one-third of the Supreme Court

Even after Madonna tried to stop him by threatening to blow up the White House the day he moved into it.

***We'll see though if his installations remain RIGHT. Usually we this up, most of the time (on purpose) like with that mother er Bush2 they're really LEFT in RIGHT clothing.

The LEFT? They never up their installations. That er is LEFT and stays LEFT, ever more.

[Ef-man]

Madonna gets to threaten to blow up the White House without penalty.

[spurraider21]

Even after Madonna tried to stop him by threatening to blow up the White House the day he moved into it.

so upset over this

***We'll see though if his installations remain RIGHT. Usually we this up, most of the time (on purpose) like with that mother er Bush2 they're really LEFT in RIGHT clothing.

The LEFT? They never up their installations. That er is LEFT and stays LEFT, ever more.

his installations at least did the right thing during the post-election period

[Thread]

so upset over this

Oh, absolutely. It's pure gold. Let me try that, 21...They'd be at, then thru the front door within mere hours.

"GD, Dale, I told you to stop with this Trump , GD, it."

"Just make sure to DVR Hill Street Blues tonight, uh, honey-bun......."

[Thread]

Madonna gets to threaten to blow up the White House without penalty.

She's laying low now 4 years+. (They'll) let her know when it's time to resurface. You know what she'll do then, Ef? She'll reinforce it, by & by. "I shouldn't have said that in such a way, but I felt strongly then as I do now, perhaps even stronger, well, not stronger, per se, but I'm woman, and so hear me roar, in a numbers too big to like ignore. Now, I'm coming out with a new recording and I hope you all like it. 3% of the proceeds will go to BLM. I hate God. Chow!"

[spurraider21]

Oh, absolutely. It's pure gold. Let me try that, 21...They'd be at, then thru the front door within mere hours.

"GD, Dale, I told you to stop with this Trump , GD, it."

"Just make sure to DVR Hill Street Blues tonight, uh, honey-bun......."

but the secret service did open an investigation.

nothing came of it because obviously there was no actual threat