U.S. Supreme Court: Post-Ginsburg Edition

New: Justice Barrett rejects request without bothering to ask for response or refer to full court. She gave no explanation. https://t.co/MYVa9Jsvon

— Greg Stohr (@GregStohr) October 20, 2022

The fact that the plaintiff states CHOOSE not to tax student debt relief as income does not give them standing to sue. They could redress the alleged harm by changing their laws. A bit sad that the court even had to explain this. https://t.co/4ToEnjPJrf pic.twitter.com/sr7F2PvxKz

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) October 20, 2022

BREAKING: Justice Clarence Thomas, acting unilaterally, issues a "shadow docket" ruling for Sen. Lindsey Graham, agreeing to temporarily halt Graham from testifying in probe of pro-Trump election interference in Georgia

— John Kruzel (@johnkruzel) October 24, 2022

To be clear, Justice Thomas issued an “administrative stay,” which blocks the Eleventh Circuit ruling only temporarily while the full Court decides whether to block it pending appeal.

Such a ruling is *not* predictive of how the full Court (or even Thomas) will vote on the stay. https://t.co/CSrBaDg9JP

— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) October 24, 2022

What a piece of shit

so then, you're saying he hasn't changed at all over these several decades? seems correct.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alito-supreme-court-abortion-opinion-leak-targets-for-assassination/

Whatever, Alito, you asshole.

Chances of a SCOTUS justice being killed in an assassination still much lower than a SCOTUS justice being killed in a mass shooting twiw

It fucking rules that these people got everything they’ve been fighting for for their entire legal careers, and have now pivoted to complaining that people aren’t sufficiently respectful of them as a result https://t.co/UFHSyuKrkG pic.twitter.com/beTfDipBJE

— Jay Willis (@jaywillis) October 26, 2022

Alito is like a medieval conqueror, drinking wine from the skulls of his defeated enemies while his mind turns toward plots to overthrow him.

He's 100% right, it goes to character. The current Court is full of bad actors, of whom Alito and Thomas are only the most obvious examples.

Hope Alito chokes on a ham sandwich.

"It's not the bad shit we're doing, it's the *leaking* of the bad shit that's bad" is such a typical conservative take.

"can you explain these pictures of you torturing prisoners?"

"can you explain your violating my privacy?"

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/justice-alito-leaked-hobby-lobby-decision-contraception-2014-report_n_6378e896e4b0f04daf537b65

ClaudeRains.jpg

“We were invited to use seats from Nino and Sam,” she had written to Mr. Schenck days earlier, using nicknames for the justices. “Wow!”

From NY Times article on Alito and Hobby Lobby 2014 release :

Mr. Schenck recruited wealthy donors like Mrs. Wright and her husband, Donald, encouraging them to invite some of the justices to meals, to their vacation homes or to private clubs. He advised allies to contribute money to the Supreme Court Historical Society and then mingle with justices at its functions. He ingratiated himself with court officials who could help give him access, records show.

All the while, he leveraged his connections to raise money for his nonprofit, Faith and Action. Mr. Schenck said he pursued the Hobby Lobby information to cultivate the business’s president, Steve Green, as a donor.

Does Alito denial statement unfortunately make this a one day story for mainstream media and even for Senate Dems? Seems worthy of more investigation and coverage

Could a larger issue be the trust placed in Supreme Court Justices to decide their conflicts of interest? To me it seems like an egregious violation of trust. (No wonder Roberts hates Alito -- suspicion only!)

(How did Hobby Lobby get its name?(!))

They’re not going to allow ethic rules to apply to themselves.

at a certain level some people are so inherently moral and self-limiting that suspicion beyond self-suspicion is unnecessary. and improper really, right? riiiight.

Conservative majority up to no good in another way-

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/29/opinion/supreme-court-decisions-vacated.html

The Supreme Court is increasingly setting aside legally significant decisions from the lower courts as if they had never happened, invalidating them in brief procedural orders. The pace of these actions has increased in the past 22 months, neutralizing important civil rights and civil liberties decisions.

Reasoned opinions by the federal appeals courts on issues ranging from voting rights to Donald Trump’s border wall have been wiped from the books, leaving no precedent for the lower federal courts to follow. Legally, it is as if these decisions by the appeals courts, one rung below the Supreme Court, had never existed. The Supreme Court’s final, unilateral exercises of power in these cases have gone largely unreported.....

The Supreme Court is increasingly setting aside legally significant decisions from the lower courts as if they had never happened, invalidating them in brief procedural orders. The pace of these actions has increased in the past 22 months, neutralizing important civil rights and civil liberties decisions.

Reasoned opinions by the federal appeals courts on issues ranging from voting rights to Donald Trump’s border wall have been wiped from the books, leaving no precedent for the lower federal courts to follow. Legally, it is as if these decisions by the appeals courts, one rung below the Supreme Court, had never existed. The Supreme Court’s final, unilateral exercises of power in these cases have gone largely unreported....

,,,In 12 of the 13 lower court rulings vacated by the justices in the past 22 months, the court erased decisions that seemed to align with progressive values and objectives...

This court is the main reason I take little heart in the passing of the Respect for Marriage Act

Yep, the majority just invent their own rules. And then they have their lawyer stonewall questions from Congress on things like the Alito Hobby Lobby matter

https://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-stonewalls-defense-samuel-010255406.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAFSvzIM6fx3gYLhH1pvNRvnmrqnWSqdLHNqfWZdtOBCXlpbB6Jsy7QZf0Zo8sY5PPA7-UsQO9XjADxvlr8EAq4X-P1Jt6LTLHZj8-6FCFtL-5GztBfSuxPuC2yvFvKdE2Ucrc3DUyPjj9oW0lfqdTHmZKspLOD4RuLgAFOjHBI9s

Torrey did not answer any of Whitehouse and Johnson’s questions regarding ongoing or potential ethics inquiries into the court’s leaked draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, or into Alito’s alleged leak of the Hobby Lobby outcome. Nor did he say which justices received gifts as part of the religious right pressure campaign.

Torrey instead takes the tone of a defense counsel stonewalling an investigative body.

“There is nothing to suggest that Justice Alito’s actions violated ethical standards,” he wrote.

Torrey’s letter simply restates Alito’s denial of the alleged leak, saying that The New York Times report that the conservative justice leaked the Hobby Lobby outcome to Donald and Gail Wright, two supporters of Faith & Action remained “uncorroborated.” He goes on to say that Alito did not violate ethics rules in accepting meals and lodging from the Wrights because the couple “never had a financial interest in a matter before the Court.”

When lawyers call this Supreme Court lawless, this is what we mean. They're hearing oral argument on a case seeking an advisory opinion... something we all agreed they couldn't do in the 1790s. https://t.co/sqGa2NCclq

— Joe Patrice (@JosephPatrice) December 5, 2022

Dud

Today Wednesday this evil nonsensical theory gets discussed in a gerrymandering case

At the center of their case is a controversial legal concept called the "independent state legislature theory," which contends that state legislators alone have the power to govern federal elections unencumbered by traditional oversight from state constitutions, courts and governors.
The concept, if embraced by the justices in its most extreme application, could upend election laws across the country, experts previously told ABC News -- all before the 2024 presidential election.

I think we know how this, and all future ones, end

Fully expecting another half dozen cases in the next 2 years or so reiterating that, yes, Christians can tell gay people exactly how to go to hell

well they are the experts

Justice Jackson can barely contain her rage.

Kinda hope she doesn't

This dude making the independent state legislature keeps redefining "procedural" vs "substantive" and it's got the three lib justices in a lather. Sotomayor has been A+.

He's also a jerk. He refers to "my friends on the other side" with barely suppressed contempt like a small town defense attorney.

I'm not listening because Armond's take on S&S was quite enough for me this morning

The arguments in Moore v. Harper did not go as terribly as I had feared. Clearly, there are three votes for a maximalist version of the "independent state legislature" theory (Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch) and one vote for SOME version of it (Kavanaugh). Barrett sounded skeptical.

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) December 7, 2022

Yeah, Barrett and Kav sounded at best on the fence. It didn't help that Robertson was just awful.

these cases that threaten to completely upend a major part of the legal framework seem to be a red line that Robert and Barrett don't want to touch, hopefully that's the case here

Katya, wow, was fantastic. I'd never heard him in oral argument; I know him from his boring cable show appearances. He had the facts on hand, was crisp, and wasted no time. Several times he exasperated Gorsuch and Alito, who were reduced to impatient "Fine, fine"s.

https://www.salon.com/2022/12/13/law-professors-raise-ethics-concerns-as-kavanaugh-parties-with-at-worst-possible-time/

legal scholars raised concerns about the judicial code of ethics after a report from Politico that revealed Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh recently attended a private holiday party hosted by Conservative Political Action Coalition (CPAC) chairman Matt Schlapp.

Also in attendance at the party on Friday night was Stephen Miller, a top adviser to former president Donald Trump and head of the America First Legal Foundation, which has cases pending in court.

Seb Gorka, Erik Prince, & many more right-wing crazies were there in Alexandria, VA

Old Town Alexandria is also home to Flynn. It attracts the crazies who want to cosplay as founding fathers.

This speech on "originalism" by judge Robert L Wilkins is an absolute scorcher

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/12/representation-judiciary-federal-bench-judge-wilkins.html

That is very good. Thanks.

wow, thanks

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/30/us/politics/supreme-court-historical-society-donors-justices.html

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the historical society’s most significant source of identifiable funds — more than 34 percent — is the lawyers and law firms that practice before the Supreme Court, according to the Times analysis

Judge Wilkins otfm.

i remember my first time covering a case in a federal courthouse (Elon Musk was there vs. the SEC lol). they take your electronics. like i had to pick up my iPhone at coat check when my day ended.

i can’t imagine putting money into creating an entire product & not knowing this pic.twitter.com/ll6MAUboPh

— Matt Binder (@MattBinder) January 9, 2023