U.S. Supreme Court: Post-Ginsburg Edition

there's a worse one coming soon

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/01/supreme-court-democrats-president-chevron-precedent.html

Many worse ones still coming. Plus every day they delay issuing the immunity decision helps you know who avoid his trials , and prevents voters from learning about the criminal charges he faces .

Another day, another example of the Republican 6-3 Supreme Court majority tossing aside past progressive legislation (this time it was SEC enforcement of financial crimes and ozone emission restrictions). Whenever this court is dropping decisions, I get the same sense of dread I had when my dad returned home completely blitzed after playing cards with his friends, and the family just hoped he'd fall asleep before he started yelling at us and breaking shit. You knew nothing good was coming, you just hoped to avoid the bad.

We have to hope with all our power that they lose that 6-3 majority before they start coming after even more pro-environment and pro-worker laws, but we also need to flip the court if we want to keep anything new that Dems can ever get through congress to a president's signature. Because even a congress where the Dems had huge majorities and passed every piece of progressive legislation we could dream of, some fuckhead billionaire-funded Christo-fascist conservative organization would sue, and the SCOTUS would slice and dice it into a nothingness worse than even what they they did the Affordable Care Act or Biden's student loan provisions.

Which means we have to be sure Trump doesn't get to replace any more of the SCOTUS if we ever want to see any progressive legislation in our lifetimes.

The best case scenario is that Biden wins, Dems flip the house and hold the Senate, we get to replace Sotomayor if she retires, and Thomas if his smoking catches up to him he has an epiphany and retires, reducing our deficit to 5-4. And maybe - just maybe - one of the other 5 revanchists on the right decides to cash out and retire.

This, unfortunately, requires us to hold our nose and vote for yet another Dem Presidential candidate that annoys the crap out of us on some major issues. But doing so gives us a fighting chance at getting closer to that SCOTUS majority we so badly need if we really want universal health care, environmental protection, women's right to an abortion, LGBTQ+ equality, et al.

There is a strong likelihood of the worst case scenario: if Trump wins, which would likely mean a Republican senate to rubber-stamp his nominees, that rapist piece of shit would get to replace another 2 or 3 justices, meaning that our chances of seeing progressive legislation survive the SCOTUS is over for our lifetimes. Fuck that! I'm voting Biden and a straight Dem ticket (helps that my congressional rep is Ilhan Omar) - the SCOTUS is just too important.

For some reason it just really hit me that Clarence Thomas put a fucking pube on a woman’s coke can. What a weird thing to do. Just really weird sicko energy

The story is slightly different:

Hill accused Thomas of making inappropriate remarks. She said one such comment came as Thomas was drinking a soft drink in the office.

"He got up from the table at which we were working, went over to his desk to get the Coke, looked at the can and asked, 'Who has put pubic hair on my Coke?'" Hill told senators.

that's even weirder

X-post - the Supreme Court majority that insists that that those subject to SEC rulings deserve to get jury trials, also have no problem making workers and employees to agree to arbitration clauses and not be allowed to have a trial

H/t David Dayen of American Prospect

This, unfortunately, requires us to hold our nose and vote for yet another Dem Presidential candidate that annoys the crap out of us on some major issues.

I made a vow in 2017 to treat the Court and lower courts as seriously as the GOP does.

I’m like I don’t care if Biden himself sucks he’s put on the bench great and diverse judges at all levels

I figure it would take 3 consecutive Democratic Presidential wins to flip the Court to 5-4 liberal. Alito and Thomas might hang on another 4 years, but Thomas would probably leave if a dem won in 2028. Alito would only be 78, so he could last until 2032, but if the GOP didn't win he probably pack it in. Wishful thinking, I know.

I don't see Thomas retiring unless he extracts a promise that Ginni will serve in his stead.

Time may make the decision for him

We’d have a 5-4 court if fucking Ginsburg retired when Obama suggested. She’s history’s greatest monster.

Darth Bader Ginsburg

Between her and Biden, old-people-clinging-to-power have a lot to answer for.

medical advancements leading to longer life in this country (for the wealthy and privileged) have actually been negative as a whole

I tend to agree.

Somehow, today feels like the type of day for a 6-3 decision on Trump's immunity to drop

in hindsight, the Twenty-Second Amendment has really worked out to be kind of a dud, on balance

The Supreme Court's first decision is Grants Pass. By a 6–3 vote, the court holds that penalizing homeless people for sleeping outside when there is no available shelter does NOT violate the 8th Amendment. All three liberals dissent. https://t.co/O6Qpov4OqU

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) June 28, 2024

Just for fun they said, "Get a job."

jesus christ

i left a soccer game last year only to see a police gathering on the sidewalk, where a lot of homeless were camped out. it was a sweltering day in the upper 90s, and then I soon saw why the cops were there, as it appeared one of the men on the sidewalk was dead.

literally nobody wants to be sleeping out there. it's much more dangerous than being in a shelter. but now it's outright ok to criminalize doing just that when tehre's no other option and it's sanctioned by SCOTUS

Gorsuch is taking a long time to read his opinion summary. He must be proud of it. This is what the Republican justices like to do.

— Elie Mystal (@ElieNYC) June 28, 2024

Somehow, today feels like the type of day for a 6-3 decision on Trump's immunity to drop

They're ... inching closer toward a trifecta here

Gorsuch is the smuggest of the justices. Absolutely punchable.

Goodbye Chevron, my old friend

insane

🚨The Supreme Court overrules Chevron deference, wiping out 40 years of precedent that required federal courts to defer to expert opinions of federal agencies. All three liberals dissent. This is a HUGE decision. https://t.co/ZRPbcX65Fd

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) June 28, 2024

I don't know much about this area of law, but can the basis of Chevron be restored via statute? This assumes, of course, that Congress wants to play.

but her emails

The irony is that Reagan-era conservative justices cobbled Chevron together to make it easier for Ron's EPA to work its will.

literally want to punch everyone that said Trump being prez was nbd in 2016. RBG dying basically has killed hte country

Kagan: "In one fell swoop, the majority today gives itself exclusive power over every open issue—no matter how expertise-driven or policy-laden—involving the meaning of regulatory law. ... The majority turns itself into the country’s administrative czar." https://t.co/ZRPbcX65Fd pic.twitter.com/IZjwx122pZ

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) June 28, 2024

The irony is that Reagan-era conservative justices cobbled Chevron together to make it easier for Ron's EPA to work its will.

― the talented mr pimply (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, June 28, 2024 10:50 AM (one minute ago) bookmarkflaglink

Ron's EPA run by....

Gorsuch's mom

Justice Jackson joins the majority and writes separately to say that Fischer—and other Jan. 6 defendants—may still be liable if they attempted to impair the availability of electoral vote certificates.

So this is not an unqualified win for J6 defendants. https://t.co/lNsAMeJaYQ pic.twitter.com/SVlQ7prvWF

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) June 28, 2024

In over-ruling Chevron the Court’s conservative majority are now insisting that the nearly 80 years old Administrative Procedures Act that said how agencies like EPA, Education, SSA , Safety & Health issues regulations is now subject to the Supreme Court’s interpretation and wishes that do not have to be reflective of the views of the experts in the agencies at all.

Theoretically I think Congress could specifically spell out in an amendment to the Administrative Procedures Act that such deference should be given .

X-post

Barrett, in a very sharp dissent, says the majority "does textual backflips to find some way—any way—to narrow the reach" of the obstruction law and "failed to respect the prerogatives of the political branches" to punish the conduct that occurred on J6. https://t.co/lNsAMeJaYQ

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) June 28, 2024

Supreme Court says prosecutors improperly charged hundreds of Jan. 6 rioters
Supreme Court’s decision on obstruction charge will impact trials of hundreds of Jan. 6 rioters and, potentially, former president Donald Trump.

Federal prosecutors improperly charged hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants with obstruction, the Supreme Court ruled on Friday, upending many cases against rioters who disrupted the certification of the 2020 presidential election.

Cut through the 2024 election noise. Get The Campaign Moment newsletter.
After the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol, federal prosecutors charged more than 350 participants in the pro-Trump mob with obstructing or impeding an official proceeding. The charge carries a 20-year maximum penalty and is part of a law enacted after the exposure of massive fraud and shredding of documents during the collapse of the energy giant Enron.

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said the government must establish that a defendant “impaired the availability or integrity” of records, documents or other objects used in an official proceeding. The decision returns the case to the lower courts for additional proceedings.

Still no immunity decision yet. I guess next week for that . Supreme Court had traditionally liked to finish in June but not this year. Thomas will have to delay his vacations with billionaires for a few more days

Roberts said the government must establish that a defendant “impaired the availability or integrity” of records, documents or other objects used in an official proceeding.

..........

..........

is it that hard to establish that a coup impairs the integrity of documents used in an official proceeding?

monday is the last day of the term, they announced. what a fucking week, jfc. and to think that sotomayor/kagan abruptly retiring so that the court doesn't go 7-2 (or 8 to fucking 1) is like the best thing we can hope for right now

Are they literally saving the immunity ruling for the last possible second?

“Ugh” is all I’ve got

In over-ruling Chevron the Court’s conservative majority are now insisting that the nearly 80 years old Administrative Procedures Act that said how agencies like EPA, Education, SSA , Safety & Health issues regulations is now subject to the Supreme Court’s interpretation and wishes that do not have to be reflective of the views of the experts in the agencies at all.

Theoretically I think Congress could specifically spell out in an amendment to the Administrative Procedures Act that such deference should be given .

― curmudgeon, Friday, June 28, 2024 9:59 AM (thirty-four minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

I have to imagine that the courts are going to be absolutely clogged with regulatory challenges now.

there will certainly be a lot more 'expertise' coming from both industry and a thoroughly corrupt judiciary

fucking hell.

Turns out judges are the best people to decide everything — history, science, medicine, just let the black robes sort it all out for you.

Strange that the framers didn't write all this Supreme Court power into the Constitution when they so obviously intended them to rule over us.

I mean, they did call them Supreme.