Ongoing discussion of SCOTUS cases (1 Viewer)

[MT15]

With the increased scrutiny due to recent revelations in the press I thought maybe we can use a SCOTUS thread. We can discuss the impending Senate investigation and the legislation proposed today by Murkowski and King in the Senate that will formalize ethical guidelines.

We can also use this thread to highlight cases that possibly don’t deserve their own thread, like the following.

I saw this case today, and I cannot believe the US Government is allowed to do this. Unreasonable search and seizure? The examples he gives in the rest of the thread are just sickening:

 

[LA - L.A.]

Can't the district court draw the map and force them to use it? That should definitely be done if it's possible. You let one state defiy the orders of the SC and soon every state will be defying their orders whenever the Republcians don't want to follow them.

That would mean getting the Alabama secretary of state to abide by that ruling. We're approaching Nullification Crisis levels now with states telling the federal level to fork off.

I think that the courts can't really enforce anything without federal or state executive and/or legislative branches assistance. I don't know if that's correct.

What we are learning is that a lot of our governmental checks and balances work on an honor system requiring people to act cooperatively and in good faith. There seems to be real issues as soon as someone is uncooperative or acts in bad faith.

 

[DaveXA]

I think that the courts can't really enforce anything without federal or state executive and/or legislative branches assistance. I don't know if that's correct.

What we are learning is that a lot of our governmental checks and balances work on an honor system requiring people to act cooperatively and in good faith. There seems to be real issues as soon as someone is uncooperative or acts in bad faith.

There's a good way to get them to adhere to the law. Declare their electors invalid because they failed to follow the law. If their want to disenfranchise their voters, that's their choice.

 

[LA - L.A.]

There's a good way to get them to adhere to the law. Declare their electors invalid because they failed to follow the law. If their want to disenfranchise their voters, that's their choice.

Is that allowed under the Constitution? I'm all for it if it is.

 

[DaveXA]

Is that allowed under the Constitution? I'm all for it if it is.

That I don't really know, but I think it should be.

 

[DaveXA]

Is that allowed under the Constitution? I'm all for it if it is.

Fwiw, I think this will need to be litigated long before the election. SCOTUS need to speak in no uncertain terms as to the consequences of not adhering to their order. I'm not sure there's any precedence for this so I would think this would be a landmark case in testing the boundaries of the federal court.

 

[MT15]

I think part of the decision mentioned that the court would appoint someone to draw the map if AL legislature didn’t comply. Whether they will do it or not -

 

[GrandAdmiral]

fork it. Go full Andrew Jackson and send in troops.

 

[DaveXA]

I think part of the decision mentioned that the court would appoint someone to draw the map if AL legislature didn’t comply. Whether they will do it or not -

Hmm, I didn't know this. If so, they need to do that now, because you know Bama is gonna try and challenge it. Not sure how that would work though.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

So Alabama is basically giving a big fork you to SCOTUS...

US Supreme Court faces 'outright defiance' from Alabama | CNN Politics

It was a legitimate surprise when the conservative-dominated US Supreme Court ordered Alabama’s conservative-dominated state government last month to redraw its congressional map and include either a second majority-Black congressional district or something quite close to it.

www.cnn.com

As expected...

“We are deeply troubled that the State enacted a map that the State readily admits does not provide the remedy we said federal law requires,” the judges, two of whom were appointed by former President Donald Trump, wrote.

This redistricting battle – and separate, pending litigation over congressional maps in states like Georgia and Florida – could determine which party controls the US House of Representatives after next year’s elections. Republicans currently hold a razor-thin majority in the chamber.

The judges ordered a special master to submit three proposed maps that would create a second Black-majority district by September 25.

Federal court strikes down Alabama congressional map after legislature snubbed Supreme Court | CNN Politics

A federal court blocked a newly drawn Alabama congressional map on Tuesday because it didn’t create a second majority-Black district as the Supreme Court had ordered earlier this year.

www.cnn.com

 

[Optimus Prime]

The rightwing activist Leonard Leo has helped fund a network of groups involved in a crucial US supreme court case that could fundamentally weaken the federal government’s ability to hold corporations to account, a leading watchdog said as the conservative-dominated court prepared for its new term.

“Leonard Leo spent years stacking the court with ideological kindred spirits,” said Caroline Ciccone, president of Accountable.US. “Now he’s funding a dark web of special interest groups to push an extreme agenda.”

The case in question, in the term that starts on Tuesday, is Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v Community Financial Services Association of America, or CFPB v CFSAA.

The CFPB was set up under the Obama administration after the global recession of 2008 to 2009, to better protect ordinary Americans from predatory business interests. The CFSAA is an umbrella for a group of payday lenders.

Last week, writing for Scotusblog, Amy Howe, a law professor and counsel in supreme court cases, said: “The stakes in the case are high. The Biden administration … warns that a ruling for the challengers could call into question not only the payday-lending rule at the center of this case but also a wide swath of other regulations that protect consumers.

“And more broadly, the case is the first of several on the court’s docket this term in which the justices will weigh in on the division of authority between the three branches of government, as well as the power of administrative agencies.”

Leo is an immensely successful activist and fundraiser, vastly influential in the appointment of three conservative supreme court justices under Donald Trump and last year the recipient of the largest known US political donation, $1.6bn from the businessman Barre Seid.

Accountable.US is among watchdog groups increasingly scrutinising Leo’s activities. Now, it says, he is playing a central supportive role in a case that could severely damage the federal administrative state, a long-term target of conservative politicians, activists and donors including Leo.

According to Accountable.US research, entities backed by Leo have invested more than $9m in groups that have filed amicus briefs in support of the payday lenders in CFPB v CFSAA.

Sums donated by Leo’s network include $5.3m to the Foundation for Government Accountability, $2m to the New Civil Liberties Alliance, $1m to America’s Future and $737,000 to the Americans for Prosperity Foundation. Other groups received smaller amounts.…….

Rightwing activist helps fund ‘predatory payday lenders’ in supreme court case

Watchdog group says entities backed by Leonard Leo have invested over $9m in ‘dark web’ of special interest groups

www.theguardian.com

 

[MT15]

Interesting

 

[Optimus Prime]

The Koch network, a web of rightwing groups cultivated by billionaire businessman Charles Koch and his late brother David Koch, is spearheading the attack on federal agencies and government regulations that dominates the US supreme court agenda this term.

The network has been working behind the scenes to bring cases before the court that, if successful, could undermine many of the core functionings of the US government. At least two of the biggest cases to be considered by the justices this term have been spurred by groups bankrolled and coordinated within the Koch universe.

Footage of an internal panel discussion between senior operatives from Koch entities held in the summer of 2022 reveals that the network has been quietly planning the current assault on the “administrative state”. The groups are seeking to exploit the supreme court’s new six-to-three rightwing majority secured by Donald Trump to dismantle vital executive powers.

Regulatory controls in their sights include environmental standards to combat pollution and the climate crisis, consumer protections against predatory lenders, and safeguards for workers’ rights. At stake is what the Strict Scrutiny podcast has called “the future of government as we know it”.

The footage, which is made public here for the first time, was obtained by the investigative watchdog Documented and shared with the Guardian. During the 37-minute panel discussion, legal strategists with several Koch-related groups expressed excitement that the new hard-right supreme court supermajority has created the potential for a concerted attack on the functions of federal agencies.

Jorge Lima, an economic policy strategist at the Koch network’s central coordinating group, Stand Together, said that the new composition of the court amounted to a huge “landscape opportunity, particularly on the administrative state. We’re doubling down on this strategy.”

Lima added: “Every dog has its day, and it’s a big day for the administrative state.”

Casey Mattox, a legal strategist at the main Koch advocacy group, Americans for Prosperity, argued that the supreme court was now “primed for a real change in the law” on federal regulations which he said amounted to a “paradigm shift”. Mattox said: “That’s why we are partnering with organizations that can get the right cases to the supreme court.”

The effort appears to have born fruit. Two of the most significant cases before the court in the 2023-24 term, brought with the backing of Koch-linked organizations, attempt to rein back the government’s power to impose regulations on corporations.

The prominence of the cases underlines how the libertarian empire created by the Kochs is still a force to be reckoned with within US politics. Since David Koch’s death in 2019, and the Koch network’s decision to come out in opposition to Trump ahead of next year’s presidential election, the network has receded from public attention.

But the scope of Charles Koch’s reach remains formidable, as was demonstrated earlier this month when the 87-year-old told Forbes that he had given $4.3bn of his Koch Industries stock to Believe in People, a newly-created group named after his book of the same title. He has transferred a further $975m to another new entity, CCKc4, which carries the initials of his son Chase Koch.

The massive combined $5.3bn in donations, one of the largest acts of giving to non-profits in US history, will ensure that the Koch influence will continue to push the US to the right for years to come. Undermining government regulations is central to those ambitions.

Lisa Graves, the executive director of the progressive watchdog True North Research who is a long-time Koch watcher, said that Charles Koch has shown a “fundamental hostility to government regulation” since his early political writings in the 1960s. “This is the through-line of his career. His business operations have a substantial self-interest in assailing regulations that impede his profits.”................

‘Get the right cases to the supreme court’: inside Charles Koch’s network

Billionaire’s web of rightwing groups works to bring cases to court that could undermine core functionings of the US government

www.theguardian.com

 

[Optimus Prime]

Guess this can go here
==================

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor has described being on the highest court in the land as living in frustration, saying that every loss the liberal justices face “traumatises” her.

As one of the three liberal justices on the court, Justice Sotomayor and her colleagues can typically anticipate they will be outnumbered when deciding cases.

Over the last few years, rulings around issues of abortion rights, LGBT+ rights and racial equality have swung in conservatives’ favour.

“Every loss truly traumatises me in my stomach and in my heart,” Justice Sotomayor said on Monday while speaking with students at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law.

Justice Sotomayor, who was the first Latina woman appointed to the court, has become known for crafting passionate dissents. Last year, she wrote that the “symbolic damage” of the court’s decision in 303 Creative LLC v Elenis, an LGBT+ rights case, was “done”.

“But I have to get up the next morning and keep on fighting,” Justice Sotomayor said. “What choice do you have to be to fight the good fight.”…….

Justice Sotomayor says she’s ‘traumatised’ by Supreme Court losses

Supreme Court has limited access to abortion, LGBT+ rights and racial equality in rulings over the last three years

www.independent.co.uk