Kind of a wild day for SCOTUS

[dank69]

At least to someone like me who has not read the opinions and does not plan on reading them.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-supreme-court-spurns-virginia-143413283.html

Thomas votes against partisan gerrymandering, as does Gorsuch, while Breyer dissents.
(I know they didn't actually rule on gerrymandering but on whether or not the Republicans had standing, but still...)


Meanwhile:
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/supreme-c...ame-crime-143955208--abc-news-topstories.html

Gorsuch protecting Trump here, I understand. Did not expect Ginsberg to also dissent...

 

[dank69]

Now also seeing Breyer joined Alito and Roberts to dissent against the Uranium ruling. Did Breyer have a stroke maybe?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-allows-virginia-block-152609189.html

 

[JSt0rm]

good. If we can get rid of this gerrymandering we can get a less extreme republican party.

 

[dawp]

Meanwhile:
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/supreme-c...ame-crime-143955208--abc-news-topstories.html

Gorsuch protecting Trump here, I understand. Did not expect Ginsberg to also dissent...

with this ruling trump could be could be charged by new york AFTER being pardoned by pence on fed charges and trump could do nothing about it.

 

[JSt0rm]

with this ruling trump could be could be charged by new york AFTER being pardoned by pence on fed charges and trump could do nothing about it.

yeah trump is gonna spend the rest of his life in court.

 

[Maxima1]

Now also seeing Breyer joined Alito and Roberts to dissent against the Uranium ruling. Did Breyer have a stroke maybe?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-allows-virginia-block-152609189.html

Not really surprising. Breyer is more moderate than any of the other liberal leaning justices.

good. If we can get rid of this gerrymandering we can get a less extreme republican party.

The ruling to look to is the purely partisan one. I actually don't find Thomas ruling as he did that surprising. He sometimes comes to his senses, and says, "Whoa now, that's racist". Interesting in regards to Gorsuch, but I believe the conservatives will allow "purely partisan" gerrymandering to effectively continue.

Gorsuch protecting Trump here, I understand. Did not expect Ginsberg to also dissent...

Laurence Tribe thinks the dissent is more persuasive. i think both positions could potentially be argued.

 

[glenn1]

with this ruling trump could be could be charged by new york AFTER being pardoned by pence on fed charges and trump could do nothing about it.

I'd be OK with that in the case of Trump the way it's likely to play out. I'd highly object if someone (including Trump) was acquitted in a trial and then tried again by a separate sovereign (state or feds) for basically the same crime. Being found "not guilty" is an entirely different situation than if you were pre-exemptively pardoned by POTUS or found guilty then pardoned, both involved either a finding or admittance of guilt (accepting a pardon is an implicit admission of guilt in our system).

 

[dank69]

Not really surprising. Breyer is more moderate than any of the other liberal leaning justices.

To me, this defection is the most surprising. Giving the feds the power to force states to extract resources? Maybe I don't fully understand the intricacies but that seems crazy on the surface.

The ruling to look to is the purely partisan one. I actually don't find Thomas ruling as he did that surprising. He sometimes comes to his senses, and says, "Whoa now, that's racist". Interesting in regards to Gorsuch, but I believe the conservatives will allow "purely partisan" gerrymandering to effectively continue.



Laurence Tribe thinks the dissent is more persuasive. i think both positions could potentially be argued.

I get that. I'm not a big fan of expanding government powers over the citizens, because we know those powers can be used to pick and choose winners and losers, but with everything we are witnessing with Trump right now it seems necessary. I would like to see protections against doubling up. I'm fine with one or the other imposing a more strict sentence, or in the case of a pardon, attempting to restore justice and sanity, but I don't think it should be used to double a person's sentence or worse.

 

[glenn1]

I get that. I'm not a big fan of expanding government powers over the citizens, because we know those powers can be used to pick and choose winners and losers, but with everything we are witnessing with Trump right now it seems necessary. I would like to see protections against doubling up. I'm fine with one or the other imposing a more strict sentence, or in the case of a pardon, attempting to restore justice and sanity, but I don't think it should be used to double a person's sentence or worse.

In practice what generally happens is the other sovereign charges a different but related crime. If a cop shoots an unarmed person and the cop is acquitted of murder charges, the feds will prosecute them for violation of civil rights or something.

IMHO the Ginsburg premise is correct - "different parts of the 'WHOLE' Untied States should not be positioned to prosecute a defendant a second time for the same offense." Ideally this would be done by feds, states, and other sovereigns all agreeing in advance what charge(s) they could prosecute beforehand and by whom so 'double jeopardy' wasn't an issue. Once a trial by any of the sovereigns began that would "lock in" the prosecution approach developed by the feds/states/local governments absent a huge amount of new evidence coming to light or something in which case a new charge could be brought using the same collaborative process a second time. Having one sovereign attempt to prosecute and failing then having others take second (or third, fourth, etc) bites of the apple are exactly what the 5th Amendment was written to prevent.

 

[IronWing]

To me, this defection is the most surprising. Giving the feds the power to force states to extract resources? Maybe I don't fully understand the intricacies but that seems crazy on the surface.

The Atomic Energy Act is an extremely broad law and gives the feds power over almost every aspect of nuclear materials use. I'm surprised that the court saw to limit the scope of the law.

 

[glenn1]

The Virginia ruling is a tactical “defeat” for the GOP but a strategic victory. States with divided governments will be considered to lack standing to challenge lower court rulings. With state governments tending to GOP advantages and courts with an increasingly right wing composition (thanks Trump) that will kneecap blue states. They’ll both have more cases go against them to begin with and unless Dems have unified control it greatly hampers Dems in appealing judgments that go against them.

 

[MovingTarget]

The Virginia ruling is a tactical “defeat” for the GOP but a strategic victory. States with divided governments will be considered to lack standing to challenge lower court rulings. With state governments tending to GOP advantages and courts with an increasingly right wing composition (thanks Trump) that will kneecap blue states. They’ll both have more cases go against them to begin with and unless Dems have unified control it greatly hampers Dems in appealing judgments that go against them.

Is it though? It kinda seems like SCOTUS punted on standing in the VA case. It will be interesting to see if/how they rule on the Maryland/South Carolina cases.

 

[JSt0rm]

The Virginia ruling is a tactical “defeat” for the GOP but a strategic victory. States with divided governments will be considered to lack standing to challenge lower court rulings. With state governments tending to GOP advantages and courts with an increasingly right wing composition (thanks Trump) that will kneecap blue states. They’ll both have more cases go against them to begin with and unless Dems have unified control it greatly hampers Dems in appealing judgments that go against them.

do you think its good that ohio gop got 52% of the votes but 74% of the congress seats?

 

[Jhhnn]

Is it though? It kinda seems like SCOTUS punted on standing in the VA case. It will be interesting to see if/how they rule on the Maryland/South Carolina cases.

Not really. The only defendant to have standing to advance this or any other case like it is the SoS of the state in question. If they don't defend their position then the lower court ruling stands. Plaintiff's standing was not denied. Glenn's observations lack merit in that the plaintiffs are always anti-gerrymandering citizens' groups.

 

[sactoking]

Indeed, the majority opinion also noted that the Virginia Assembly lacked standing to defend because of Virginia-specific laws on the books relating to the Attorney General and redistricting. This won't directly impact anything else going forward.

 

[dank69]

More rulings coming out today. Seems Gorsuch sides with the Constitution against judicial power:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-rules-sex-offender-140851131.html

Conservatives are trying to paint this as liberals siding with pedophiles, but what else is new? Next thing you know, liberals will be voting for child molesters over Republicans.

But Gorsuch reveals when it comes to business vs. government, he is a corporate stooge, as is Kavanaugh. Thankfully Roberts sided with the liberals on this one:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-rebuffs-businesses-wont-141217081.html

 

[hal2kilo]

Now also seeing Breyer joined Alito and Roberts to dissent against the Uranium ruling. Did Breyer have a stroke maybe?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-allows-virginia-block-152609189.html

Wow. Did not know that the largest deposit of Uranium in the world was found in Virginia. Good on them for understanding that they have to live with the leftovers for a 1000 years.
EDIT: This isn't an area of complete emptiness like lots of Nevada, Utah or the dry west in general.

 

[glenn1]

The Atomic Energy Act is an extremely broad law and gives the feds power over almost every aspect of nuclear materials use. I'm surprised that the court saw to limit the scope of the law.

This was a good ruling since if Congress feels very strongly about it, they can change the scope of the law instead of having SCOTUS do it for them.

 

[hal2kilo]

More surprises. The ruling makes sense. Had not thought about it this way.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/s...-power-of-judges-juries/ar-AADsajy?li=BBnb7Kz

Must be clearing off the desk for summer break.
Also, the Gorsach factor is getting interesting. The libertarian and liberals coming together.

 

[Exterous]

Tennessee is about to get more liquor competition

https://www.npr.org/2019/06/26/7325...e-other-out-of-state-liquor-retailers-big-win

 

[UNCjigga]

Should be a big decision day today. I predict at least one of these decisions will upset progressives and make Mitch McConnell smile.

 

[K1052]

5-4 decision that federal courts can't strike down gerrymandering.

Assuming SCOTUS allows the citizenship question the GOP will have succeeded in fundamentally tilting electoral dynamics in their favor for the foreseeable future. The GOP's bargain with Trump starting it's big payout.

 

[UNCjigga]

Welp, as many predicted, SCOTUS punted on jerrymandering back to state courts. While this should help some rulings stand in NC, Republicans elsewhere are free to keep on keepin on as long as they control the state AG’s office.

 

[UNCjigga]

Prediction #2: Clarence Thomas will announce his retirement within a few weeks. Trump and McConnell already have a fresh young candidate to take his seat.

 

[K1052]

Kind of sums up my view of the logic conservatives on the court used to get there on the partisan gerrymander case:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1144250000391716864