Keyword: scotus

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Supreme Court Deals Blow to Property Rights

    06/23/2017 2:20:20 PM PDT · by Sopater · 32 replies
    Reason ^ | 6/23/17 | Eric Boehm
    When governments issue regulations that undermine the value of property, bureaucrats don't necessarily have to compensate property holders, the Supreme Court ruled Friday. The court voted 5-3, in Murr V. Wisconsin, a closely watched Fifth Amendment property rights case. The case arose from a dispute over two tiny parcels of land along the St. Croix River in western Wisconsin and morphed into a major property rights case that drew several western states into the debate before the court. Chief Justice John Roberts, in a scathing dissent, wrote that ruling was a significant blow for property rights and would give greater...
  • Trump's lawyers make final plea to Supreme Court on travel ban, with eye toward Justice Kennedy

    06/22/2017 1:32:11 PM PDT · by johnk · 23 replies
    La Times ^ | JUNE 21, 2017, 1:54 P.M. | David Savage
    <p>President Trump's lawyers made a final appeal to the Supreme Court on Wednesday in the pending dispute over his travel ban and quoted Justice Anthony Kennedy — likely a key swing vote — on the need to defer to the chief executive on matters of national security.</p>

    06/22/2017 12:43:03 PM PDT · by Lurking Libertarian · 71 replies
    Associated Press ^ | June 22, 2017 | Mark Sherman
    WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court on Thursday limited the government's ability to strip U.S. citizenship from immigrants for lying during the naturalization process. The justices ruled unanimously in favor of an ethnic Serb from Bosnia who lied about her husband's military service. Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the court that false statements can lead to the revocation of citizenship only if they "played some role in her naturalization." The court rejected the position taken by the Trump administration that even minor lies can lead to loss of citizenship. The woman, Divna Maslenjak, and her family were granted refugee status...
  • RUMOR: Justice Kennedy retiring next week?

    06/20/2017 7:30:36 PM PDT · by Personal Responsibility · 187 replies
    Twitter @Cernovich ^ | June 20 2017 | Mike Cernovich
  • SCOTUS Rules September 11 Detainees Can't Sue Government

    06/20/2017 4:59:53 AM PDT · by Kaslin · 28 replies ^ | June 20, 2017 | Courtney O'Brian
    A busy Supreme Court on Monday ruled, in a vote of 4-2, that former September 11 detainees do not have the right to sue government officials for money damages. This is an issue for Congress, not the judiciary, Justice Anthony Kennedy argued in the court’s opinion. Furthermore, he said, the Second Circuit “erred” in allowing respondents’ detention policy claims to move forward under the context of Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, which determined that federal officers would need to pay damages to compensate individuals who were subjected to unconstitutional conditions. Expanding Bivens is a “disfavored” judicial activity,...
  • Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Free Speech

    06/19/2017 1:20:43 PM PDT · by Kaslin · 13 replies
    Rush ^ | June 19, 2017 | Rush Limbaugh
    RUSH: Hey, the Supreme Court has handed down a decision that’s gonna have some ramifications. They have ruled for, in favor of an Asian-American rock band that calls themselves The Slants. Snerdley, you’re a big music guy. Have you ever heard of The Slants, Asian-American rock band called The Slants? I never have. You have heard of them? You like their music? Ohhh, but you’ve not heard their music, you never heard of ’em ’til the story hit? All right. Well, get this. In a win for Asian-American rock band The Slants — and this has got possible ramifications, good...
  • Justices say law on offensive trademarks is unconstitutional

    06/19/2017 8:02:07 AM PDT · by COBOL2Java · 129 replies
    WTOP News [Washington DC] ^ | June 19, 2017 10:35 am | AP
    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Monday struck down part of a law that bans offensive trademarks in a ruling that is expected to help the Washington Redskins in their legal fight over the team name. The justices ruled that the 71-year-old trademark law barring disparaging terms infringes free speech rights. The ruling is a victory for the Asian-American rock band called the Slants, but the case was closely watched for the impact it would have on the separate dispute involving the Washington football team. Slants founder Simon Tam tried to trademark the band name in 2011, but the...
  • Did James Comey Cover Up a Massive and Illegal FBI-CIA Spying Operation?

    06/11/2017 9:40:28 PM PDT · by ForYourChildren · 37 replies
    Lifezette ^ | 06/10/2017 | Kathryn Blackhurst
    Whistleblower says CIA spied on Supreme Court justices, Trump, and 20 million other Americans using FBI computers. The Senate Judiciary Committee is considering whether to subpoena former FBI Director James Comey to appear before the committee following his testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. He initially had refused a request to testify to the Judiciary Committee. Should Comey appear before the Judiciary Committee, he may be asked about his disclosure that he gave a “close friend” memos detailing his meetings with President Donald Trump. But he may also face questions about the bombshell lawsuit, filed Monday by a...
  • Scotus Expedites President Trump’s Petition On Executive Order Case

    06/06/2017 3:51:48 PM PDT · by xzins · 24 replies
    OANN ^ | 5 Jun 17 | OANN
    In a rare move, the Supreme Court expedites consideration for a major case coming from the Trump administration. On Friday, the justices ordered the ACLU to file responses to the Department of Justice regarding President Trump’s executive order on travel from six terror-prone countries. This comes after the DOJ asked for a stay on an appellate court’s decision to block part of the order until justices can decide the matter. However, the Supreme Court’s decision could push everything up by months and justices could hold arguments on the case before summer recess.
  • Supreme Court exempts church-affiliated hospitals from federal pension law: 5 things to know

    06/06/2017 5:47:43 AM PDT · by buckalfa · 17 replies
    Becker's Hospital Review ^ | June 5, 2017 | Ayla Ellison
    The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday held that church-affiliated hospitals do not have to comply with the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act, which governs employee pensions. Here are five things to know about the case and the high court's ruling. 1. The Supreme Court agreed in December to take up appeals filed by religiously affiliated hospital systems that were accused of underfunding their employee pension plans. 2. In three lawsuits, which were consolidated into one case, the high court was asked to decide whether the health systems can rely on their church affiliations to avoid complying with ERISA, which...
  • Ginsburg Better Do Right Thing and Recuse Herself From Trump Travel Ban Case

    06/05/2017 4:35:49 AM PDT · by simpson96 · 20 replies ^ | 6/4/2017 | Robert Barnes
    If campaign comments are evidence of bias in a way that invalidates the actions of a decision-maker (as the 4th Circuit claimed), then the same logic the 4th Circuit used to deny Trump’s travel ban must require Ginsburg’s recusal in the Supreme Court’s review of that travel ban. The standard for recusal does not require a judge admit their bias. It only requires a review whether the public might “reasonably question” the “impartiality” of the judge in the matter. Liberals argued Justice Scalia merely hunting with a Vice President compelled his recusal. As Justice Scalia recognized, recusal is appropriate whenever...
  • Vanity - Where is the SCOTUS?

    06/04/2017 6:48:47 AM PDT · by JLAGRAYFOX · 21 replies
    Folks, where in God's name is the Supreme Court of the United States? Nowhere to be found, or heard from!!! I guess we can get an indicator from Justice, Ruth Gingsburg, who adores her naps, more then passing verdicts on life saving policy and procedures on vetting dangerous potential Muslim terrorist migrants!!! How long will the American people remain exposed to Muslim terrorist slaughter, before the SCOTUS takes action and gives POTUS Trump a green light on his legal travel ban executive order? Maybe, we too, can celebrate (As Democrats will), or more likely mourn the slaughter of innocent Americans...
  • Kathy Griffin and Hillary Clinton: The new Democratic Normal

    06/03/2017 10:36:37 PM PDT · by 2ndDivisionVet · 21 replies
    Communities Digital News ^ | June 3, 2017 | Eric Golub
    Normalcy among Democrats is Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and her voice scrambler, Kathy Griffin and her bloody head, and Hillary Clinton, the queen of denial. Democrats have been enjoying the difficulty Republicans and the Trump administration have in governing, but their schadenfreude is worse than useless. Cheering the deaths of their enemies’ children is fun for people who are depraved, but it does not heal the hole in their own black hearts. Democrats are sick and getting worse. Emotionally, Democrats are disconnected from reality. Hillary Clinton in an interview blamed her election loss on a combination of Russian and Macedonian conspiracists with...
  • How can Ginsburg participate in Travel Order case after her *campaign* statements about Trump?

    06/03/2017 7:29:10 AM PDT · by digger48 · 48 replies ^ | Friday, June 2, 2017 | William A. Jacobson
    Donald TrumpÂ’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 CircuitÂ’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 CircuitÂ’s decision found that...
  • Supreme Court Expedites Trump’s Petition on Executive Order Case

    06/03/2017 11:16:18 AM PDT · by COUNTrecount · 86 replies
    Breitbart ^ | June 3, 2017 | by Ken Klukowski
    WASHINGTON, D.C.—The Supreme Court took the rare step on Friday of expediting consideration of a major case, rapidly accelerating the schedule for reviewing the Fourth Circuit’s blocking of President Donald Trump’s travel ban executive order. President Trump issued Executive Order 13780 (EO) on March 6, Section 2(c) of which temporarily restricted travel from six Muslim-majority countries associated with terrorism while the United States developed new vetting procedures to keep the nation safe. Immigration activists sued, along with several immigrants and their families. A liberal federal district judge in Maryland granted a preliminary injunction blocking Section 2(c) of the EO. The...
  • Weekly Update: Shocking New Clinton Emails (+Ohio Voter Rolls & Soros Watch)

    06/03/2017 11:56:49 AM PDT · by jazusamo · 14 replies
    Judicial Watch ^ | June 2, 2017 | Tom Fitton
    The Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Ohio’s Clean Voter Rolls Case Soros Watch Judicial Watch Uncovers Shocking New Clinton Emails The Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Ohio’s Clean Voter Rolls Case You might think that everyone wants integrity in elections. That, as you know, is naďve, as events in Ohio and other states demonstrate. We were encouraged this week, however, when the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari and agreed to hear a case related to Ohio’s efforts to maintain accurate voting rolls. The citizens of Ohio may yet see their right to clean and fair elections upheld. Clearly, dirty...
  • Trump travel ban: Where things go after the Supreme Court appeal

    06/03/2017 12:37:05 AM PDT · by blueplum · 4 replies
    ABC News ^ | 02 June 2017 4:31pm ET | James Hill Lauren Pearle
    ...Should the Supreme Court decline to issue the temporary stay, the government is asking that the court agree to put the case on an accelerated schedule that would allow the justices to schedule arguments at the beginning of the fall term in October. Four votes are required to grant the request for the court to hear the case -- to determine if the travel ban is constitutional. But because the executive order is temporary -- the entry ban is to last for 90 days and the refugee provisions for 120 days –- it is conceivable that the executive order could...
  • Trump formally asks SCOTUS to overturn lower-court rulings against travel ban

    06/02/2017 1:33:21 PM PDT · by NoCmpromiz · 30 replies ^ | 6/2/2017 | Dan Calabrese
    Understand what's at stake here, because it's a lot more than the implementation of one policy. What the administration is asserting here is exactly what they should be - that the lower courts should not be mindreading the president's intentions based on statements on the campaign trail or anything else. If his action is legal and he has the authority to take it, that's it, full stop. Game over. Whatever you might think he really wants to do is irrelevant. It seems almost inconceivable to me that SCOTUS doesn't deliver at least five votes affirming that argument. It ought to...
  • The Supreme Court Just Bolstered Your Right to Repair Stuff

    06/01/2017 1:17:17 PM PDT · by Thalean · 36 replies
    Wired ^ | June 1, 2017 | Kyle Wiens
    The Supreme Court heard arguments in March and considered the principle of patent exhaustion. This idea stipulates that a patent owner’s rights over a product should vanish once the patent owner sells the product to a consumer. By attaching a post-sale restriction to its single-use cartridge, Lexmark aimed to create a zombie patent that’s never exhausted. You may have bought that cartridge, but Lexmark still controls it. The justices agreed 7-1 that Lexmark can’t do that. (Justice Neil Gorsuch was appointed after the court heard the case.) The court held that Lexmark exhausted its patent rights when it sold its...
  • Trump travel ban blocked; fight headed for Supreme Court

    05/25/2017 5:19:50 PM PDT · by Pinkbell · 40 replies
    AP ^ | May 25, 2017 | JESSICA GRESKO
    WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump's revised travel ban "speaks with vague words of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus and discrimination," a federal appeals court said Thursday in ruling against the executive order targeting six Muslim-majority countries. Trump's administration vowed to take the fight to the U.S. Supreme Court. In a 10-3 vote, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit said the ban likely violates the Constitution. And it upheld a lower court ruling that blocks the Republican administration from cutting off visas for people from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and...