Ongoing discussion of SCOTUS cases

[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