Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

US Supreme Court Tag

Posted by William A. Jacobson on June 12, 2017 28 Comments
We've been here before. Another judicial opinion upholding an injunction against Trump's Travel Order No. 2. This time from the 9th Circuit arising out of the injunction by the Hawaii District Court. The Opinion (pdf.) is embedded below. The Trump administration already has the Hawaii injunction before the Supreme Court, as it previously filed for contingent review of a possible 9th Circuit decision, expecting a losing result. The 4th Circuit Opinion also is before the Supreme Court for a stay of the injunctions, the opposition to which is due today.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on June 05, 2017 34 Comments
There he went again. Early this morning Donald Trump launched a twitter storm regarding the issue of the Executive Orders regarding visa entry to the U.S. from 6 (originally 7) majority Muslim nations previously identified by the Obama administration as posing unique security risks. On January 28, 2017, just after the first Executive Order, I addressed much of the nonsense in the media about the substance of the Executive Order, Most claims about Trump’s visa Executive Order are false or misleading. Most significantly, it was inaccurate to describe it as a "Muslim ban," which was the media descriptor of choice.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on June 02, 2017 52 Comments
Donald Trump's second Executive Order on visa entry from six majority Muslim countries is now before the Supreme Court. Trump is seeking review of the 4th Circuit's decision upholding a Maryland District Court injunction halting the Executive Order. In addition to the Petition for  a Writ of Certiorari asking SCOTUS to hear the case on the merits, Trump has a request for a stay of the lower court injunctions pending a decision on the merits. The application is on a fast track, with the Court setting June 12 as the deadline for opposition papers. The 4th Circuit's decision found that the Executive Order, though facially neutral, "in context drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination" and that context was "a backdrop of public statements by the President and his advisors and representatives at different points in time, both before and after the election and President Trump’s assumption of office."

Posted by William A. Jacobson on June 02, 2017 17 Comments
IF the U.S. Supreme Court wants to weigh in quickly on the legality of Donald Trump's Second Executive Order temporarily barring new visa entries on people from six high-risk countries, SCOTUS has an opportunity to do so. Yesterday the Justice Department filed requests for review of the case (Petition for Certiorari) and for a stay of 4th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmance of a Maryland District Court injunction pending determination of whether SCOTUS will hear the case.

Posted by Mary Chastain on May 22, 2017 23 Comments
The Supreme court has ruled that Republicans in North Carolina used race and not politics when they drew congressional districts in 2011. A lower court ruled the same, which "forced legislators to create new maps last year." The News & Observer continued:
The 5-3 ruling, written by Justice Elena Kagan, is among a series by the justices against the excessive use of race in redistricting that state lawmakers across the country take up every 10 years after the release of new Census data. Justice Clarence Thomas joined the majority, taking a stand with more liberal justices with whom he often disagrees.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on May 15, 2017 20 Comments
Okay, I'll admit this is a good bit of trolling, but I can't help myself this morning. You remember Merrick Garland? He's the guy Obama nominated for the Scalia seat, but who never got a vote. That was like an injection of hot sauce into the veins of Democrats. Senator Mike Lee recently floated the idea of Trump nominating Garland to replace James Comey as FBI Director. Lee did it in a very Trumpian way - on Twitter:

Posted by Mike LaChance on May 14, 2017 27 Comments
The liberal freakout over the recent confirmation of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court was just a preview. If another vacancy opens up this summer, we'll see the main attraction. And just so you know, there is already talk of another vacancy. Max Greenwood writes at The Hill:
Grassley: There will be a Supreme Court vacancy this year A top GOP senator is predicting another vacancy on the Supreme Court this year. "Every year you get these rumors. Somebody's going to quit. Everybody looking – 'Have they hired their clerks?' Etcetera, etcetera. You know, are they sick or something?" Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said on C-SPAN's "Newsmakers."

Posted by Mary Chastain on April 17, 2017 21 Comments
New Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch took his chair on the high court for the first time Monday and wasted no time making his voice heard. During his long confirmation process, Gorsuch told the Senate that he would not allow his personal beliefs to persuade his judicial interpretation.

Posted by Mary Chastain on April 10, 2017 7 Comments
The Honorable Neil Gorsuch took his Constitutional oath in a private ceremony and the Judicial Oath in the Rose Garden today to become the 113th justice of the Supreme Court. From Fox News:
Gorsuch took the Constitutional Oath in a private ceremony, administered by Chief Justice John Roberts in the Supreme Court’s Justice’s Conference Room. He was accompanied by his wife Louise, who held the Bible, and his two daughters. That oath will be followed by a public ceremony at the White House where Justice Anthony Kennedy – Gorsuch’s former boss – will administer the Judicial Oath.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on April 06, 2017 20 Comments
Neil Gorsuch will be confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday, April 7, 2017, on a straight up or down vote. That up or down vote will happen after Democrats filibustered the nomination by getting 45 Democrats to vote against closing debate. Republicans then exercised what usually is referred to as the Nuclear Option, but really should be called the Harry Reid Option, to eliminate the need for 60 votes to close debate. It should be called the Harry Reid Option because in 2013 Democrats used that procedure to eliminate the 60-vote requirement for all nominations, judicial or otherwise, other than the Supreme Court.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on April 06, 2017 33 Comments
The Senate Republicans used the "nuclear option" to end the filibuster on Judge Neil Gorsuch's nomination to the Supreme Court. The Senate now has 30 hours to debate before the confirmation vote, which should take place on Friday at 7PM EST. The Senate voted 55-45 to end the debate with three Democrats voting yes: Donnelly (IN), Heitkamp (ND), and Manchin (WV). With this change, a Supreme Court nominee can receive confirmation with a simple majority instead of 60 votes.

Posted by Fuzzy Slippers on April 02, 2017 28 Comments
Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) appeared this morning on Meet the Press and announced that the Republicans are unlikely to reach the 60 votes needed to confirm Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.   Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell (R-) later appeared on the same show and announced that Gorsuch would indeed be confirmed and that it would happen as early as this week. The NY Daily News reports:
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Sunday that President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, likely won’t get the 60 Senate votes he needs for confirmation — even as the GOP ensured Gorsuch is a go.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on March 29, 2017 18 Comments
Donald Trump moved fairly quickly in the nomination of Neil Gorsuch to fill the Scalia Seat on the U.S. Supreme Court. The hearings have moved more slowly than many of us would have liked, but Mitch McConnell is promising an up or down vote by April 7, regardless of any attempts by Democrats to filibuster. Whether Republicans will exercise the Nuclear Option is a current media obsession. Yet there is another aspect of the federal judiciary on which Trump can have a lasting legacy, the lower federal courts (appeals and district courts).

Posted by William A. Jacobson on March 24, 2017 18 Comments
Chuck Schumer thinks he has the votes to prevent 8 Democratic Senators from voting for cloture on the nomination of Neil Gorsuch, effectively creating a filibuster:
“After careful deliberation I have concluded that I cannot support Judge Neil Gorsuch’s nomination to the Supreme Court,” Mr. Schumer said, citing concerns over Judge Gorsuch’s record on workers’ rights and his degree of independence, adding, “My vote will be no, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.” Judge Gorsuch must earn the support of at least eight Democrats to break a filibuster — a threshold he is not on track to meet, at least so far, according to interviews and internal party discussions.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on March 21, 2017 18 Comments
Neil Gorsuch's confirmation hearing today was blah, blah, (try to stay awake), (don't let anyone know you're snoozing), (Dem Senators made to look foolish), (trite platitudes repeated endlessly on media). You still with me. Sure, there were some real moments, but they were entirely focused on Democrat Senators who were made to look like fools.
Accessibility by WAH