US Supreme Court

Should a healthy Republic ever have to route for an unelected body of individuals - appointed for life - to decide its fate?

Congress writes the laws.

Supreme Court interprets them.

Executive Branch is supposed to enforce and execute the law Congress writes, as interpreted by the Court.

POTUS is above the law. Can't be indicted. 

i see "i like beer" guy is still a dick....

nice. 

they also ruled on allowing the atlantic coast pipeline to proceed construction from west virginia to the east coast, plowing right thru the appalachian trail. 

7-2 ruling. 

neoliberal trash rbg voted yes. 

So, all they ruled on is whether the Forest Service can legally grant easements through National Forests? That's a far cry from allowing the pipelines to be built.

Good for the Supreme Court on the gay rights opinion.  Roberts is really shaping up to be the next Justice Kennedy style swing vote.   And it wasn't even the classic 5-4 split, with Gorsuch joining the majority to extend protections to LBGTQ employees.

>>>Should a healthy Republic ever have to route for an unelected body of individuals - appointed for life - to decide its fate?

Anything the Supreme court decides can be overturned by congress with new laws or if necessary changing the constitution. They aren't all powerful. That said I would be fine with 16 year appointments

>>>Should a healthy Republic ever have to route for an unelected body of individuals - appointed for life - to decide its fate?

Anything the Supreme court decides can be overturned by congress with new laws or if necessary changing the constitution. They aren't all powerful. That said I would be fine with 16 year appointments<<<

You're correct, but does it play itself out as such in reality?  Gridlock in Congress is the rule, not the exception.  Special interests have hijacked the process and $$ rules the day.  Consequently, those unelected judges effectively have a power that is not enumerated or prescribed in the Constitution.   I challenge anyone to find the words "judicial review" or reference to such a process in the Constitution.

We need her. Her work is vital to the rights of women, people of color, LGBTQ folks, etc.

>>> I challenge anyone to find the words "judicial review" or reference to such a process in the Constitution.

Article III, section 2 gives the federal courts broad power to resolve cases and controversies involving the Constitution and the laws of the United States, which by implication allows for judicial review of federal legislation and actions as discussed in the 1803 case of Marbury v. Madison:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marbury_v._Madison

Well, as far as gay rights go...   this round...  

>>> I challenge anyone to find the words "judicial review" or reference to such a process in the Constitution.

Article III, section 2 gives the federal courts broad power to resolve cases and controversies involving the Constitution and the laws of the United States, which by implication allows for judicial review of federal legislation and actions as discussed in the 1803 case of Marbury v. Madison:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marbury_v._Madison<<<

The operative phrase "by implication".

In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.

^ I find it interesting how the language of the section you referenced appears to reference what appears to be more of a strict calling of "balls and strikes", yet we've found ourselves over 230 years down the road from a completely different "5 mph era"';  whereby justices are being asked to interpret modern world applications under the context of relatively ancient Constitutional text and a body of evolving derivative case law.

Another interesting note:   would some form of "Marbury v Madison" ever have come into existence if not for the midnight appointment of Marshall by John Adams?

My primary objection is in regard to how a Republic's sovereignty is derived through the Will of The People and primarily and most wholely transmitted via the Legislature, not the SCOTUS.  I don't believe it's by accident SCOTUS is the last Article.

someone check our court's astrological chart.

Well, Mercury is in retrograde....

they're setting up the eventual fall. 

you guys are funny. 

Hey Heater.  Have you begun investing in the healthcare of your associate yet?

^haha. trumper. 

What a selfish Employer. Sad.  Shameful.

My wife signed us up for Obamacare. Saving money and we still have Kaiser. 

What would you ever do without your wife?  

Racket, I hope it's many years til he has to find out what he'd have to do without his wife. While Greg didn't take care of those sorts of things for me, it's been so shitty without him.

>>> they're setting up the eventual fall.  <<<

pyramidheat, who's setting up what eventual fall? 

>>> they're setting up the eventual fall.  <<<

pelosi and the rest of the trump democrats, judit. 

racket is so mad. lol. 

what a bitch you are. 

I'm so confused, Pelosi has what direct connection with the Supreme Court? The sun is out, I'm going out for a walk.

Pyramid 

sees rain 

when it's sunny

"hate is a beautiful thing "

Pyramid 

sees rain 

when it's sunny

"hate is a beautiful thing "

Judit

I do hope you had a nice walk 

I am sad that you are sad    At least you had him, and you do have us (?).
I for one value and respect you

And you know you can't make sense of a lot of what flies across this screen

people are fascinating 

this thread has been psychobabbled. 

well done, lltd. 

one of the recommendations is an 18 yr term limit for supreme court...

The DACA decision will be released in the morning.   The case involves judicial review of Trump's authority under the Administrative Procedure Act to revoke Obama era protections to undocumented people living in the US who came over as kids and have otherwise been living as any other American would.

The court finds that Trump's revocation of DACA was "arbitrary and capricious."

Great news

>#SCOTUS rules against Trump administration in challenge to decision to end #DACA program, which allowed noncitizens brought to this country illegally as children to apply for protection from deportation, holding decision was arbitrary and capricious

Trump's getting the Barr DOJ to appeal all these SCOTUS rulings to his SCOTAF:  Supreme Court of Trumps Alternative Facts ...

Your Honor: we was robbed

From the prez:

Donald J. Trump✔@realDonaldTrump

These horrible & politically charged decisions coming out of the Supreme Court are shotgun blasts into the face of people that are proud to call themselves Republicans or Conservatives. We need more Justices or we will lose our 2nd. Amendment & everything else. Vote Trump 2020!

Dog-whistle much...

Lol that 7-2 ruling was a huge win for OIL. Crazy that you guys can't read through the lines. It's just setting up the inevitable construction for the pipeline. Just as always OIL prevails with th e help of Dems and repubs. Always and forever

And for the - there is no difference between the parties crowd let’s remember that there were 55 votes in the Senate to make DACA law and the Republican’s filibustered the bill and killed it.  That forced Obama to issue the Executive Order which the current Republican administration tried to overturn.  And four Justices appointed by Republicans voted to overturn DACA.

terminal defeatist frame of mind

i see rain on a sunny day

psychobabble?

too bad ras can't shake that racism. 

turn Hate off heater

Actually Pyramid knows more than any of you about the big picture.  He just needs to be more pragmatic.

ras you makes the posts man -- you've made racists posts here. lol. 

just calling it as everyone sees it. 

sucks to be you. 

Mark.  Lol

 heat may not know more than all of us

and his style of communicating fails

(kinda trumpian I'm smarter than you nanny nanny. And often insulting)

IMO

I do hope we eventually see one another at some point this year

jonesin

i like you, lltd. 

sorry. 

I'ma hope'n too LLTD.   Jones'n big time.

rbg is a neoliberal 

https://www.npr.org/2020/06/25/883312496/supreme-court-sides-with-trump-...

>>> rbg is a neoliberal  <<<   You've said this before, how does it help us to hear it at this point? I'm sincere.

And what can I learn from this when my concerns are about future appointees.

RBG is working harder than anyone to keep this nation in a half-decent state with strength and abilities some consider to be unnatural.  Respect.

 ((( RBG is working harder than anyone to keep this nation in a half-decent state with strength and abilities some consider to be unnatural. )))

R.E.S.P.E.C.T.
 

>>rbg is a neoliberal 

Do you attach some significance (positive or negative) to that label? Is it essentially "moderate Democrat" in your mind?

To be clear: those questions are actually interrogative statements intended to gather information and help me clarify your opinion, not an implied criticism of that opinion. 

That might come later. :)

you haven't heard of the term neoliberal? 

corporate dem doing the work of their corporate master, rather than working for the people.

so pelosi and schumer and hrc and biden and harris are neoliberals.

somebody like ilhan omar and aoc are not. they work for their constituents, not BOA or big oil or pharma or big Ag, etc. 

the dem party is full of neoliberals, and those at the top are pushing hard for that reign within the party to continue to keep the people down. 

this is why we just elect progressives imo. 

Well said.  Except maybe for the last line.  We gotta work for progressives and vote for the best choice.

the high court is here to serve corporations and billionaires 

https://sirota.substack.com/p/the-supreme-court-is-a-corporate

David Sirota is a bernie bro whiny lil bitch 

anybody who wants to know about this clown shoes history

just google David Sirota media bias
 

The Former Journalist Who Is Bernie Sanders’s Media Critic

David Sirota’s job is to remind the candidate’s supporters why he dislikes the news media.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/21/us/politics/david-sirota-bernie-sande...

really sad to see you taking the whole bernie thing so bad...

chin up bro.

lol. you sound like a trumper. 

and you have always sounded like a whiny little bitch. 

facts hurt your brain. 

settle down chin strap

go have a donut

lol

you stalk my instagram page? 

that's weird man. 

I've told you like 34 times

I ain't got time for that shit

lol

what's go have a donut mean?

it's Sunday 

donut day, duh

hmm. that's strange. 

please don't stalk me. 

^^ lol

paranoid af, you is

do you check under the bed before night night?
 

the boogeyman is real

jfc

you also commented on my appearance tho. 

what explains that? 

so you really do have a pube chin strap?

damn

Thod and Raz are creeps. 

not sure why you would look at my page when you don't care for me. 

or, that is why?

super strange man. 

I'm long gone TOD and I love everybody I know

Well this thread took a strange turn...

Stranger

https://www.oregonlive.com/nation/2020/06/supreme-court-strikes-down-res...

5-4 with Roberts joining the liberal justices in striking down Louisiana's restrictive abortion laws.

Not a good day for Susan Collins the campaign ads are already out there about how she trusted Kavanaugh to uphold abortion rights

If we slow down the pregnancy testing, our pregnancy numbers would decrease, no?

And this is why we need Ruth Bader Ginsburg to hang on. And why we need people to vote the present pres out. It's simple, vote against him, even for a Dem candidate you wouldn't otherwise choose. The women you know and those you don't need the next pick for the Supreme Court to uphold women's rights. Thanks in advance.

(((((Hang On Ruthie)))))

I don't know who needs to hear this but:

Lashy outty word salads are thread killers.

if you MUST toss one up, at least keep it to one post,

so people interested in the conversation at hand

just have to step over it instead

of pole vault scrolling through every fucking thread

Jesus

Fucking

Christ

Of course this will just motivate the conservative base to stick with trumplestiltskin so ruthie ain’t the only one who needs to hang on

I guess Thod is a bigger creep than JR and Ned. They don't stalk people's social media pages. They just stalk people on viva. Still pretty creepy but Thod you take the cake man. Go figure out something better to do with your life, guy.

RBG has been rolling over for big businesses for years. She's like a pop star of a

Supreme Court justice. 

what the fuck you babblin' about?

that's some 1 guy 2 socks shit, bro

You know it's gonna get stranger...

^^Weird stalky old guy. 

I'm trying to understand your need to be on the heaters dick all the time.

he never comes to your defense and you get pummeled pretty much everyday.

somebody mentions donuts on a sunday, boom!

you're stalking on social media guy.

really strange man

smh

^Dude, you're stalking a guy on Instagram that you only know through a drugband message board. Get a grip.

Also, I just enjoy making fun of you because you're an idiot.

Timpane, not sure how you got my email but please stop sending me google hangouts invites. I am busy man and don't have time to chat with you or be your internet friend. 

^Nice fake troll for attention

thod is def a creep and no doubt stalks my instagram.

please stop, thod. 

there was an interesting take on the radio yesterday.

basically roberts made his own opinion in the matter which in th expert's eyes, is exactly what you are saying Ras. It leaves room to open up...

 

Have you seen

 T.O.D. on Monday, June 29, 2020 – 05:56 pm

what the fuck you babblin' about?

that's some 1 guy 2 socks shit, bro

LOL, there are MANY more than 2...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fOqE8ToGEY

BREAKING: Today the Supreme Court ruled to uphold the Trump administration’s attempt to allow employers with religious objections to deny their employees health insurance coverage for birth control.
 

In her dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg writes:

"Ready access to contraceptives and other preventive measures...both safeguards women’s health and enables women to chart their own life’s course."

Hang on, Ruthie!

does rbg support m4a? 

also, that would solve this. lol. 

we are trash. 

I don't know if she supports m4a. She is not a legislator, how would her support help pass better laws? I think what matters is her work interpreting the existing laws about health care and the suits against them.

At this point, she is trying her best to have the court support women's and everyone's healthcare while ruling on the cases brought before the Court.

What's the lol for?

There are so many forces working against us, she is at least working for us.

i was just curious is she does. my guess is no -- she's set tho, that's all that really matters.

well if we had m4a we wouldn't even be having this conversation. 

it just makes us stupid. incredible waste of time (not you and i -- the entire country). 

it's really sad actually. 

Judicial activism, especially at the Supreme Court level, is a double-edged sword and it sucks. What sucks even more is that there are currently 2 activists on the Court, and they are both far right. Fuck Thomas and Kavanaugh.

I like my SCOTUS justices to base their rulings on interpretations of the Constitution, not their political views. If any justice is guaranteed to vote certain ways on certain issues, there's a problem.

Decision pending today on Dumpster Don's taxes and if/to what level SDNY and/or Congress get access. I am doubtful that his goes the way I'd prefer and think it should land but at least would like to see SDNY get the nod to proceed and prosecute accordingly. Even though Congress has broad subpoena powers which includes tax info (and we've seen how that gets ignored without immediate consequence) I suspect SC would side against that while citing "political" reasons and no reasonably valid need ... from this lobsided court.

Nothing happened. Many more months of nothing. The lawyers will never be your heroes. 

Supreme Court Upholds Grand Jury Subpoena For Trump’s Tax Returns

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/supreme-court-trump-v-vance_n_5f06026bc5b...

The Supreme Court upheld a subpoena from Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance for President Donald Trump’s financial records held by Trump’s accounting firm.

In a 7-2 decision, Justice Roberts wrote that the Constitution does not prevent a grand jury from issuing a subpoena for the private records of the president of the United States as part of a criminal investigation into their activities as a private citizen.

“In our judicial system, ‘the public has a right to every man’s evidence,’” Roberts wrote. “Since the earliest days of the Republic, ‘every man’ has included the President of the United States.”

The decision means that Mazars USA LLP, Trump’s accounting firm, must comply with the subpoena issued by the grand jury that Vance’s office empaneled, and must hand over the president’s financial records, including his tax returns. 

Vance issued the subpoenas as part of his continued investigation into whether the Trump Organization falsified documents concealing Trump’s involvement in hush-money payments to two women who allege they had sexual relationships with the married president. The investigation stems from Trump’s former fixer Michael Cohen’s admission that he broke campaign finance laws by making the hush-money payments.

> In a 7-2 decision

Wow. Seven voted for this? That's surprising. I haven't clicked the link yet, but I'm guessing Kavanaugh and Thomas dissented.

WTF. "Supreme Court rules Trump not immune, but blocks access to financial records for now."

Looks like the "2nd piece" (House subpoena) was basically denied.

The Supreme Court ruled that President Trump can for now block the release of his financial records to Congress but that prosecutors in New York may see them, a stunning defeat for Mr. Trump but a decision that probably means the records will be shielded from public scrutiny until after the election, perhaps indefinitely.

The vote in both cases was 7 to 2.  In both cases, the justices ruled 7 to 2.  Trump nominees Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh joining the majorities. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. dissented.

The 7-2 opinion in Trump v. Mazars USA, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, states that Congress has the power to subpoena the president’s financial records.

However, the Supreme Court sent the case back to lower courts to reassess the matter with a new and narrower interpretation of Congress’ power to subpoena the chief executive’s records. 

....and kicking the can back and forth instead of taking decisive action.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority, rejected Trump’s claim of immunity.

“We reaffirm that principle today and hold that the president is neither absolutely immune from state criminal subpoenas seeking his private papers nor entitled to a heightened standard of need.”

This is a legal defeat for Donald Trump, but a practical victory.

He hasn't ever been and won't ever be immune or held in higher standard except for the last four years and the next four years.

Huge win for tribal sovereignty today in the case of Oklahoma v. McGrit.  In a 5-4 decision, the Court  held that most of eastern Oklahoma, which was given to five southeastern tribes who were forced out along the Trail of Tears, remained Indian country (at least for purposes of criminal jurisdiction) because the tribal boundaries were never officially disestablished by Congress, but were instead informally moved over the years by the state, which had no power to do so.    We will see how this plays out for other aspects of tribal sovereignty in the lands subject to the decision, but it looks like Oklahoma just got a lot smaller and the five tribes got a lot bigger:

Writing for the majority, Justice Gorsuch wrote:   "On the far end of the Trail of Tears was a promise.  Forced to leave their ancestral lands in Georgia and Alabama, the Creek Nation received assurances that their new lands in the West would be secure forever. . . We hold the government to its word."

Wow, Ken. Thanks for the head's up on that one. Important. And Gorsuch? Wow. Good to see. The Ute Tribe in Utah will be interested in that one for their suit with Uintah County.