U.S. Supreme Court: Post-Nino Edition

(It bore repeating.)

Well the ruling was against how he went about it, so I guess they can take another run at it if he wins in nov

Second (and *not* last) #SCOTUS decision is in June Medical. Court *strikes down* Louisiana abortion ban.

4-1-4, with Chief Justice Roberts concurring in the judgment:https://t.co/4VQgovHgjK

— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) June 29, 2020

Money quote from Roberts' concurrence in the judgment, which goes on for 16 pages: pic.twitter.com/1s5D2d0VhJ

— Cristian Farias (@cristianafarias) June 29, 2020

I think I actually feel a trace of optimism for this country for the first time since Reagan was elected

has someone awakened Susan Collins from her faint

You're saying because she voted for him, thinking abortion safe? I'd love to have her gone, but didn't she spike up in her polling again? You think people will be sophisticated enough to turn this against her again?

She’s like nine points behind her democratic challenger according to what I just read

https://d279m997dpfwgl.cloudfront.net/wp/2019/03/AP_18334546967309.jpg

oh I see Roberts has now gotten back to destroying the country

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/06/supreme-court-espinoza-montana-religious-schools.html

correct!

he's only interested in preserving the reputation of the court as being free from outside influence. in these lower public profile cases, he's more than fine with shitting out these garbage rulings.

really didn't need to read this before it was time to sleep but thanks for sharing, cos I would have otherwise missed it tomorrow.

"Thomas, joined by Gorsuch, asserted that the very concept of separating church and state “communicates a message that religion is dangerous and in need of policing, which in turn has the effect of tilting society in favor of devaluing religion.”

you're saying that like it's a bad thing, guys.

does he not know what happened in europe after… the reformation

the Cerberos of SCOTUS needs to choke on a chicken bone.

After reading my latest Post report, @hughhewitt tells his radio audience this morning that he hears from several leading conservatives that Justice Alito, 70, is considering retirement, and adds that he also hears the Alito family is ready to leave Washington, D.C.

— Robert Costa (@costareports) July 1, 2020

make way for Justice Pirro

I heard on MJ this morning the news about a potential vacancy.

If the Republicans push through a replacement between now and January I will go insane.

No, of course McConnell wouldn't, duh.

At least it would be swapping a conservative for a conservative

And, some speculate, a man for a woman. (LOL, pundits.)

Maybe NOW is Harriet Miers' time

Alito just leave in January man

https://i.imgur.com/OG8GqtO.gif

https://i.imgur.com/OG8GqtO.gif

poor Sonia has to breathe in his farts

https://www.politico.com/interactives/2017/politico50/neomi-rao/

The 538 people who cast the actual votes for president in December as part of the Electoral College are not free agents and must vote as the laws of their states direct, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday.

Would take an American history class from Justice Kagan https://t.co/iwiB06PoKe pic.twitter.com/Cu94ohrJVp

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) July 6, 2020

Did the media articles have misleading titles earlier today? Saw a bunch of people celebrating, thinking SCOTUS was requiring electors to vote for the winner of the Federal popular vote, then blaming a confusing headline, but every article I've seen clearly says state popular vote.

Note though it really just ruled states with laws on the books against faithless electors can punish the electors, but not mandating that they have to, or that any of the states with no such laws must follow suit

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/08/supreme-court-says-trump-administration-can-let-religious-employers-deny-birth-control-coverage.html

Today is a good day for those who believe that religious employers, from churches to private corporations, should be allowed to impose their beliefs on employees, even when doing so inflicts real harm. The court's expansion of (what it deems) religious liberty is breathtaking.

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) July 8, 2020

Such a twisted view of freedom of religion.

if it were possible to encourage even more suburban women to turn out to vote against trump & the GOP, this seems like it ought to help

At this point I’m basically yelling Retire Bitch at every Justice except Sotomayor

(After 1/21/21 obv)

xp please refrain from further yelling until late december
okay you're forgiven

This is some Kafka-esque shit:
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/07/supreme-court-ministerial-exception-religious-employers.html

The upshot of this new constitutional rule is that religious employers now have carte blanche to discriminate against workers. After all, if anyone sues, their employer can simply deem them “ministerial” under Alito’s deferential test, thwarting litigation. (Indeed, that appears to be exactly what happened to Biel and Morrissey-Berru.) As Sotomayor pointed out in her scathing dissent, Alito’s “laissez-faire analysis appears to allow that employer to make employment decisions because of a person’s skin color, age, disability, sex, or any other protected trait for reasons having nothing to do with religion.”

The court, Sotomayor continued, defeated the very purpose of civil rights laws by allowing employers “to decide for themselves whether discrimination is actionable.” In short, it “traded legal analysis for a rubber stamp.” Alito’s opinion, she concluded, “absolves religious institutions of any animus completely irrelevant to their religious beliefs or practices and all but forbids courts to inquire further about whether the employee is in fact a leader of the religion. This sweeping result is profoundly unfair.”

Morrissey-Berru comes on the heels of Espinoza v. Montana, a 5–4 decision that will force a majority of states to fund parochial schools. Taken together, these two decisions mark a startling expansion of constitutional “religious liberty.” Most states must now provide taxpayer money to parochial schools—yet they are handcuffed from enforcing their own civil rights laws against the institutions they fund. The Supreme Court has not only bulldozed the wall separating church and state; it has also handed religious institutions a trump card they can use when the state asks them to follow the rules that apply to the rest of us. Religious liberty is a fundamental American value. But in the hands of this court, it has become a weapon that employers can use to make the rest of us less free.

fuck this fucking country and burn it to the goddamn ground

is it safe to say this is the most damaging decision since citizens united?

This one wasn't even close, either... 7-2?

Constantly don't understand how "religious freedom" keeps getting expanded legally

The public funding parochial and religious schools I find even more upsetting, that's going to be the source of a lot of corruption

were the liberal concurrences just referencing Hobby Lobby v Burwell and respecting precedent they didn't agree with, or something else

I don’t have a good feeling about this one but at least it won’t be a shock. Other than like if it’s another 7-2 blowout


https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/08/supreme-court-trump-tax-returns-financial-records-353428

Tax returns lol better late than never I guess

Also gorsuch again

💥 BREAKING: CREEK LANDS IN OKLAHOMA REMAIN "INDIAN COUNTRY"

Justice Gorsuch writes for a 5-4 majority

— Steven Mazie (@stevenmazie) July 9, 2020

The Supreme Court said a New York prosecutor can see Trump’s private and business financial records, ending an intense legal battle waged by the president to keep them secret - via @scotusreporter https://t.co/lNFTkUbYyK

— Terri Rupar (@terri_rupar) July 9, 2020

well damb

lol

PreSiDenTial HaRassMent !!!

The NYTimes article threw in this line, "but a decision that probably means the records will continue to be shielded from public scrutiny until after the election and perhaps indefinitely". Does that just mean since it will be in prosecutor's hands it will still be withheld from the general public until when/if it gets entered as evidence?