U.S. Supreme Court: Post-Ginsburg Edition

That thread's perspective on the VRA is valuable and good, and I did note on a quick read of it that the decision leaves open future narrowing of that section. But hell, these days you take what you can get.

Don't ask me to explain why, but Justice Gorsuch is the strongest and most consistent ally of Native American tribes ever to sit on the Supreme Court. And it's not particularly close. https://t.co/spqRRwCZSW pic.twitter.com/kSwQtZ5sYG

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) June 15, 2023

I'm guessing he sees a parallel with religious groups

I've sort of imagined that being from Colorado has something to do with it too, some sort of romanticization of the old west. Whatever the case, it's a very good thing that he has that quirk (though the ICWA ruling was 7-2!)

he was raised Catholic but he's Episcopalian; the Episcopal Church recognizes and repents of its harmful treatment of Native Americans (their language from BBcode didn't want quotes in the link) and is active in this -- my "I believe what people tell me" naïveté should be factored in here, statements on websites are easy to do, but I think Gorsuch is informed by his reading of his faith on this & it's an active question in his church

The work of a law prof who my spouse works with regularly was cited a number of times in the decision and they were very HOLY SHIT about it.

It made us wonder how you cite "supreme court decision" on your academic CV

Love these guys.

https://www.propublica.org/article/samuel-alito-luxury-fishing-trip-paul-singer-scotus-supreme-court

ProPublica emailed some questions for a story to Sam Alito and instead of answering the questions or just ignoring the email, he ran to his little gremlin friends at the WSJ Opinion section and wrote a blog post about it https://t.co/Jti0xZz9Tk pic.twitter.com/TmodINRuTA

— Jay Willis (@jaywillis) June 20, 2023

fucking hell. that's even worse than the thomas/crow stuff.

That collusion with the WSJ is super fucked up.

WSJ shouldn't exist

Thomas' response was classy in comparison

Thomas DGAF about anything. Alito has a bug in his butt about everything. He is perpetually aggrieved.

Good

[BREAKING] Building on @propublica's bombshell exposing Justice Alito's ties to billionaire investor Paul Singer, we dug into Singer's support for litigants in the SCOTUS student debt relief cases.

This is #corruption.

Alito must immediately recuse.https://t.co/LccKKuEUK2 pic.twitter.com/ljfesI4dT0

— Student Borrower Protection Center (@theSBPC) June 21, 2023

Alito on wine

On the trip Alito was served "meals of Alaskan king crab legs or Kobe filet," and while "one. of the lodge's fishing guides" heard guests bragging that the wine was over $1000, Alito insists that 👏he 👏knows 👏what👏 $1000 👏wine 👏tastes 👏like 👏and 👏this 👏wasn't👏 it👏. pic.twitter.com/rhUudGjiId

— Leah Litman - @leahlitman.bsky.social (@LeahLitman) June 21, 2023

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/21/durbin-announces-vote-on-supreme-court-ethics-bill-00102935

The Illinois Democrat announced Wednesday that his panel will vote on ethics legislation for the high court in July,...Even if Durbin can round up Democratic votes on his committee, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell made clear he will try and sink anything on the Senate floor.

these motherfuckers

SCOTUS is the ultimate example in the U.S. system of great power with basically no accountability, so corruption feels more inevitable than in any way surprising. I’m glad they’re at least being made uncomfortable enough to be mad about it, even if it’s hard to see any real consequences.

With great power comes no responsibility.

Don't you see, it is precisely *because* they are totally independent and accountable to no one that these lavish trips and gifts have absolutely no sway.

good morning!

shorter Alito:

https://i.makeagif.com/media/5-06-2017/izImbu.gif

The Supreme Court's first decision of the day is Arizona v. Navajo Nation. In a 5–4 opinion, Kavanaugh holds that the federal government is NOT required to secure water for the tribe under an 1868 treaty. Gorsuch and the liberals dissent. https://t.co/OMno9VA1if pic.twitter.com/KgKJ8eDyqC

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) June 22, 2023

UGH final op is Jones . Thomas writes (6-3) that even if an intervening federal case shows *you were convicted of something that isn't a crime* OR *were sentenced to more time than the law allows* you CANNOT file a federal habeas petition. https://t.co/fUE5TnGtJ2

— Leah Litman - @leahlitman.bsky.social (@LeahLitman) June 22, 2023

The Supreme Court's second decision is Pugin v. Garland. In a 6–3 opinion, Kavanaugh holds that a federal "obstruction of justice" law may be violated even when there's no pending investigation or proceeding to obstruct. https://t.co/YAa8PnnEoB pic.twitter.com/x5leB9DzVX

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) June 22, 2023

these motherfuckers

and Gorsuch the indigenous advocate

More decisions expected 10 am ET Friday today

So, in conclusion:

Alabama asked SCOTUS to stay an 11th Circuit decision finding that an intellectually disabled person is ineligible for the death penalty; Thomas denied the request today without formally referring it to the full court.

Application: https://t.co/ndNbu2mECe

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) June 23, 2023

The Supreme Court's first decision of the day is U.S. v. Hansen. Barrett's 7–2 opinion for the court finds that a criminal bar on "encouraging or inducing" illegal immigration does not violate the First Amendment. Sotomayor and KBJ dissent. https://t.co/Rj3m7Zilp2 pic.twitter.com/F6AuYi5KkY

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) June 23, 2023

From a May 2023 Mark Stern article for Slate

Look at any single Supreme Court opinion—as the press and the public usually do, for a maximum of one news cycle—and you’ll miss the cumulative impact of its jurisprudence. But the layers of decisions stack atop one another until they suffocate the rights of the most marginalized people. In one opinion, the court will say it has no power to protect people from state abortion bans, striking a pose of deference; in another, it will claim that states have no power to protect people from predatory CPCs, rejecting the work of the democratic process. If you string together these decisions, the court’s sweeping ideological project comes sharply into focus. If you examine them in isolation, you can get caught up in the minutiae: which side had a better reading of precedent, or more persuasive rhetoric, or better historical analysis, or whatever else distracts us from the court’s broader agenda. When the press covers cases this way, it loses sight of the real story: the arc that this court is most assuredly not bending toward justice.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/05/crisis-pregnancy-centers-influence-post-dobbs-abortion-supreme-court.html

SCOTUS REJECTS INDEPENDENT STATE LEGISLATURE THEORY:

"The Elections Clause does not vest exclusive and independent authority in state legislatures to set the rules regarding federal elections."https://t.co/T9IjFQwNdM pic.twitter.com/R0T3v8OxoC

— Mike Sacks (@MikeSacksEsq) June 27, 2023

whew

3 Justices endorse the dumbest fucking theory ever

Chief Justice Roberts' opinion for the court holds that state legislatures do NOT have plenary authority over election law, and that federal courts do NOT have freestanding authority to strike down election laws that ostensibly conflict with the state legislature's preferences. pic.twitter.com/tf6QLUH8KW

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) June 27, 2023

I'd love to read a Toobin book just on Roberts' behind-the-scenes wooing of Kav and Barrett.

3 Justices endorse the dumbest fucking theory ever

Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch dissent...not to endorse the ISL, but rather to say the case became moot when the NC Supreme Court reversed itself. pic.twitter.com/S5mWVxuIJJ

— Mike Sacks (@MikeSacksEsq) June 27, 2023

xp I was under the impression Kavanaugh was pretty close to Roberts to begin with in terms of wanting to maintain the court's legitimacy

Hold on to your butts as we await the John-Roberts-saved-democracy op-eds and cable news gasbags.

It is darkly funny watching Roberts staring at his place in history and going “oh, oh NO” at parts of it

genuinely surprised at this decision. I had this one penned in as a certainty.

Hold on to your butts as we await the John-Roberts-saved-democracy op-eds and cable news gasbags.

I mean, given where we've gotten of late, not entirely off the mark? (I'll grant it's Munchausen syndrome by proxy.)

genuinely surprised at this decision. I had this one penned in as a certainty.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/06/27/supreme-court-true-threat-stalking/

The Supreme Court on Tuesday reversed the conviction of a man who made extensive online threats to a stranger, saying free speech protections require prosecutors to prove the stalker was aware of the threatening nature of his communications.

In a 7-2 ruling authored by Justice Elena Kagan, the court emphasized that true threats of violence are not protected by the First Amendment. But to guard against a chilling effect on non-threatening speech, the majority said states must prove that a criminal defendant has “disregarded a substantial risk that his communications would be viewed as threatening violence.”

Justices Clarence Thomas and Amy Coney Barrett dissented.

The case concerned a Colorado law used to convict Billy Raymond Counterman of stalking and causing “emotional distress” for Coles Whalen, a singer-songwriter he had never met. Counterman, who had previously been convicted of making threats to others, served four years in prison in the Whalen case.

https://i.imgur.com/Fn4jhba.gif

Thanks for the kind message! I loved this photo of you, but if you want some tips on squatting to build up those legs, I’m here for you. https://t.co/ssMZSzy4NO pic.twitter.com/xSmBPi7B47

— Arnold (@Schwarzenegger) October 26, 2022

Wait, here's the current tweet:

Hi Jeff! I know the Supreme Court went my way in Moore v. Harper and not yours, but I’m still here for leg training tips! You can get some free workouts and positivity here (it might help you!): https://t.co/vhhrgxQq1x https://t.co/2rUVJBcTHZ

— Arnold (@Schwarzenegger) June 27, 2023

lol wow

Remind me: Was Clark the guy who was jockeying before January 6 to be the top guy at the justice department so he could let Trump declare a “state of emergency” or suspend the constitution or whatever?