Free Republic 4th Quarter Fundraising Target: $85,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $71,301
83%  
Woo hoo!! And now less than $13.7k to go!! We can do this. Thank you all very much!!

Keyword: scotus

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg undergoes surgery to address artery blockage

    11/26/2014 5:30:44 PM PST · by SeekAndFind · 14 replies
    Hotair ^ | 11/26/2014 | NOAH ROTHMAN
    Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was admitted to hospital on Wednesday where she underwent heart surgery to address a blockage in her right coronary artery. “The coronary blockage was discovered after Justice Ginsburg experienced discomfort during routine exercise last night and was taken to the hospital,” read a statement on her condition. “She is resting comfortably and is expected to be discharged in the next 48 hours.”Now, health scares like these are nothing to joke about, and all our readers surely wish “The Notorious R.B.G.” well. That having been said, it would be dishonest to not note the...
  • Ann Coulter: Would It Kill You To Hire More Black Cops? (Yes)

    11/25/2014 6:27:21 AM PST · by KeyLargo · 70 replies
    Townhall.com ^ | August 27, 2014 | Ann Coulter
    Ann Coulter: Would It Kill You To Hire More Black Cops? (Yes) Ann Coulter August 27, 2014 As the story of Ferguson, Missouri, police officer Darren Wilson’s shooting of Michael Brown begins to look less clear-cut than we were led to believe by Brown’s friend, Dorian Johnson, the “voices of oppression” on MSNBC now say the real issue is that there aren’t enough blacks on the Ferguson police force. As Brown may or may not have said seconds before his death: I give up. If the Ferguson police are forced to hire more minorities and women for the sake of...
  • Clues to Chief Justice John Roberts' thinking on new ObamaCare case

    11/23/2014 10:12:56 AM PST · by PROCON · 79 replies
    triblive.com ^ | Nov. 22, 2014 | Richard L. Hasen
    The Supreme Court's surprising decision to hear a new challenge to the Affordable Care Act once again has focused attention on Chief Justice John Roberts, who cast the deciding vote in a 2012 decision that saved ObamaCare from being declared unconstitutional. Many court watchers expect that he will once again be the swing vote in deciding a case crucial to the health-care law, this one involving questions about who qualifies for subsidies under the law. But Roberts' vote in a recent voting rights case suggests he might not step in to save the health law this time. At issue in...
  • Why the Supreme Court may invalidate Obama's amnesty

    11/20/2014 8:01:20 AM PST · by SeekAndFind · 84 replies
    American Thinker ^ | 11/20/2014 | Thomas Lifson
    Mickey Kaus makes an interesting argument that, contrary to the conventional wisdom, the Supreme Court may act on the lawsuit John Boehner is planning to file, and reverse President Obama’s planned executive action on amnesty: With Obama’s executive amnesty imminent, anonymous White House aides are cockily dismissing John Boehner’s threatened lawsuit against it as a stunt. Even among opponents of executive amnesty — and I’m with them — there’s a tendency to pooh pooh the suit. It’s a loser, it will take forever to decide, it’s an attempt to ‘redirect Republican rage’ away from budgetary remedies like denying funding, etc. Not so fast. I’m...
  • The Vindication of John Roberts

    11/19/2014 5:12:10 AM PST · by Servant of the Cross · 65 replies
    American Thinker ^ | 11/19/2014 | Gene Schwimmer
    At the time of this writing, six “Gruber videos” have been released and “gone viral,” as they say in YouTube land. These are the videos of course, in which “Obamacare architect” Jonathan Gruber lets the cat out of the bag on the process of enacting the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, aka The Greatest Consumer Fraud Perpetrated on the American People, Ever. Of the many Gruber quotes burning up the internet, I was especially struck by this one, to which Charles Krauthammer refers in a recent article: Gruber said, the bill’s authors manipulated the nonpartisan Congressional Budget...
  • Executive Orders: The Power of the President’s Pen (Is it really an impeachable offense).

    11/15/2014 5:38:33 AM PST · by Usagi_yo · 20 replies
    The Legality ^ | Oregon Law Review Publishes Volume 87 | Various
    Written by: Kirk Strohman Researched by: Casey E. Sanders Edited by: Daniel Kwak Executive orders can be as socially important as integrating the armed forces or simply a means of calming public anxiety in the face of the “Y2K problem.” They can be White House effective tools to block financing to terrorist organizations or authorize controversial (and later found to be illegal) means for treating detainees.
  • Court gives immigrants in Arizona chance for bail [SCOTUS]

    11/14/2014 6:48:51 AM PST · by GIdget2004 · 11 replies
    Washington Post ^ | 11/14/2014 | Associated Press
    A U.S. Supreme Court ruling has cleared the way for a wave of bail hearings for immigrants across Arizona. Hundreds of immigrants who have been denied bail under a strict Arizona law will now have the opportunity to be released. The high court on Thursday kept intact a lower-court ruling that struck down the law passed in 2006 amid a series of immigration crackdowns in Arizona over the past decade. The law denied bail to immigrants who are in the country illegally and have been charged with a range of felonies that include shoplifting, aggravated identity theft, sexual assault and...
  • Supreme Court lifts hold on gay marriage in Kansas

    11/12/2014 6:50:13 PM PST · by Coronal · 102 replies
    KCTV 5 ^ | Nov 12, 2014 | Laura McCallister
    WASHINGTON (AP) - The U.S. Supreme Court said Wednesday that same-sex marriages can go ahead in Kansas. The nation's highest court denied the state's request to prevent gay and lesbian couples from marrying while Kansas fights the issue in court. The state constitution includes a provision banning gay marriage, approved overwhelmingly by voters in 2005.
  • John Doe lawsuit could be headed to U.S. Supreme Court (WI)

    11/12/2014 6:22:27 AM PST · by afraidfortherepublic · 9 replies
    The Wisconsin Rporter ^ | 11-12-14 | M. D. Kittle
    MADISON, Wis. – Frustrated by one federal court, conservative activists in the crosshairs of a partisan Wisconsin prosecutor say they’ll take their First Amendment case to the Supreme Court. Andrew Grossman, an attorney for veteran political activist Eric O’Keefe and the Wisconsin Club for Growth, said he hopes the high court will settle questions tied to political speech and Wisconsin’s politically charged John Doe investigation. The petition of certiorari, as it’s called, is due by Jan. 21. It’s been a long and winding road to the high court. U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Randa had argued the conservatives showed that...
  • Why Obamacare risks falling into a ‘death spiral’

    11/11/2014 11:36:57 AM PST · by 2ndDivisionVet · 39 replies
    The Washington Post ^ | November 10, 2014 | Dana Milbank
    So it turns out there is an Obamacare death panel after all. It has nine members and it operates out of a marble building directly across the street from the Capitol. When the Supreme Court on Friday announced that it would take up another challenge to the Affordable Care Act in March, it delivered the threat of two mortal blows to the signature achievement of the Obama presidency. First, it raised the possibility that the justices, who narrowly spared the law in 2012, will in June come out with a new ruling that would dismantle the law on different grounds....
  • The Supreme Court Really Might Destroy Obamacare This Time

    11/10/2014 4:25:16 AM PST · by afraidfortherepublic · 101 replies
    The National Journal ^ | 11-10-14 | Sam Baker
    The Supreme Court is taking up another Obamacare case—one that could devastate the health care law's coverage expansion. The justices on Friday agreed to hear oral arguments in King v. Burwell, a lawsuit that challenges the insurance subsidies at the heart of the Affordable Care Act. The suit argues that the subsidies—which roughly 80 percent of Obamacare enrollees received—should only be available in a handful of states. The Supreme Court is taking up another Obamacare case—one that could devastate the health care law's coverage expansion. The justices on Friday agreed to hear oral arguments in King v. Burwell, a lawsuit...
  • Obama unlikely to alter Supreme Court ideology with Republican Senate

    11/09/2014 5:23:54 AM PST · by Oldeconomybuyer · 16 replies
    Los Angeles Times ^ | November 8, 2014 | By DAVID G. SAVAGE, TIMOTHY M. PHELPS
    The window for President Obama to add another liberal justice to the Supreme Court probably closed last week when Republicans took control of the Senate. Over the last 10 years, the Senate's vote on high court nominees has increasingly followed party lines. Republican senators lined up against Obama's first two nominees — Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — but lacked the votes to block them. Now, they will have the majority to stop any nominee, particularly one with a liberal record.
  • If Words Mean Anything, Obamacare Is In Real Trouble

    11/08/2014 9:58:45 AM PST · by rootin tootin · 21 replies
    American Spectaror ^ | 11/8/2014 | David Catron
    The Supreme Court announced on Friday that it will hear a lawsuit challenging an arbitrary IRS decision to issue tax credits and penalties through federally created Obamacare exchanges. Two federal courts have already declared the regulation unconstitutional, but a third court ruled that the IRS has acted within its authority. It was this ruling by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals that prompted the plaintiffs in King v. Burwell to file an appeal with the high court. If the Supreme Court rules against the Obama administration in this case, it could well be the undoing of the reviled health care...
  • Monster Win for Natural Marriage [Great Analysis]

    11/08/2014 12:28:30 AM PST · by GonzoII · 48 replies
    American Family Association ^ | Friday, November 7, 2014 8:53 AM | Bryan Fischer
    Yesterday, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals struck a reverberating blow on behalf of natural marriage and the Constitution by upholding bans on sodomy-based marriages in its jurisdiction.It is impossible to overestimate the importance of this ruling.It means, for one thing, that the issue is now on the fast track to the Supreme Court. If the Court accepts a marriage case by January, a decision will almost certainly be issued by next June.From a constitutional standpoint, the 6th Circuit’s ruling is a model of sound jurisprudence. The ruling observes that the Supreme Court has already settled the question of the...
  • Six potential effects of a Supreme Court ruling against HHS on Obamacare

    11/07/2014 10:25:39 PM PST · by right-wing agnostic · 7 replies
    Washington Examiner ^ | November 7, 2014 | Philip Klein
    On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review whether the insurance subsidies through President Obama's healthcare law are illegal in 36 states, because the text of Obamacare limited subsidies to those states that set up their own exchanges. Here are six potential outcomes if the Supreme Court rules against the Department of Health and Human Services and declares such subsidies illegal. 1. Uncertainty keeps repeal flame alive The Supreme Court is coming at a time when there's an internal debate among Republicans about how the new Senate majority should approach the prospect of repealing Obamacare. Ever since the major...
  • APPEALS COURT: States can define marriage as 1 man, 1 woman

    A three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday stunningly affirmed the rights of voters in four states – Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee – to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman, throwing a boulder into the millpond of complacent assumptions by homosexual-rights advocates that same-sex marriage is a given across the United States. The U.S. Supreme Court recently has refused to take on any same-sex marriage cases, allowing the movement to expand into about 30 states. But Mat Staver, chairman of Liberty Counsel, which has fought on behalf of traditional...
  • Gingrich: High Court Obamacare Decision 'Devastating to President'

    11/07/2014 4:47:15 PM PST · by xzins · 39 replies
    Newsmax ^ | 07 Nov 2014 | Sean Piccoli
    Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich tells Newsmax TV that a Supreme Court decision on Friday to hear another legal challenge to the Affordable Care Act is "devastating to the president." "I have no ability to judge what the Supreme Court will do," Gingrich said, noting that Chief Justice John Roberts once cast the deciding vote to uphold President Barack Obama's signature health care overhaul. But Gingrich said the new challenge is based on making the Affordable Care Act comply with the actual text of the statute that Congress passed and that Obama signed — and Gingrich said that in this...
  • Obamacare Exchange Subsidies Headed to U.S. Supreme Court

    11/07/2014 1:50:24 PM PST · by ThethoughtsofGreg · 7 replies
    American Legislator ^ | 11-7-14 | Sean Riley
    The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments against the availability of exchange subsidies under the Affordable Care Act. Today’s order from the Court granted review in King v. Burwell, one of several cases challenging IRS regulations extending tax-credit subsidies to the states with federal exchanges. Briefings will be submitted over the next few months, and a ruling is not expected until June.
  • The Supreme Court will hear King. That’s bad news for the ACA (aka Obamacare)

    11/07/2014 11:43:33 AM PST · by 2ndDivisionVet · 37 replies
    The Incidental Economist ^ | November 7, 2014 | Nicholas Bagley
    In a significant setback for the Obama administration, the Supreme Court just agreed to review King v. Burwell, the Fourth Circuit’s decision upholding an IRS rule extending tax credits to federally established exchanges. The government had asked the Court to take a pass because there’s no split in the circuit courts over whether the IRS rule is valid. At least four justices—it only takes four to grant certiorari—voted to take the case anyhow. As I see it, what’s troubling here is not that the Court took King in the absence of a split. Its rules permit it to hear cases...
  • Justices to hear challenge to health law subsidies

    11/07/2014 10:12:28 AM PST · by BAW · 44 replies
    AP ^ | Nov 7, 2014 | MARK SHERMAN
    The Supreme Court agreed Friday to hear a new challenge to President Barack Obama's health care law. The justices said they will decide whether the law authorizes subsidies that help millions of low- and middle-income people afford their health insurance premiums. A federal appeals court upheld Internal Revenue Service regulations that allow health-insurance tax credits under the Affordable Care Act for consumers in all 50 states. Opponents argue that most of the subsidies are illegal.
  • Gay marriage ban upheld in 4 states: U.S. Supreme Court cannot avoid this any longer

    11/07/2014 7:45:25 AM PST · by SeekAndFind · 15 replies
    American Thinker ^ | 11/7/2014 | Rick Moran
    The US Court of Appeals in the sixth district  upheld gay marriage bans in Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee, setting the stage for what could be a Supreme Court showdown that would make the practice legal in all 50 states. The 2-1 decision was the first legal setback for gay marriage advocates in federal court and creates a split among the nation's circuit courts. In these sorts of disagreements, the Supreme Cour uisually steps in with a definitive ruling. USA Today: More important, it gives Supreme Court justices an appellate ruling that runs counter to four others from the...
  • 6th Circuit upholds gay marriage bans in several states

    11/06/2014 2:19:13 PM PST · by AbortionIsEvil · 37 replies
    Reuters ^ | November 6, 2014 | Reuters
    (Reuters) - A federal appeals court on Thursday upheld gay marriage bans in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee, reversing a recent trend in the federal courts to strike down such bans.
  • Appeals Court Upholds Same-Sex Marriage Ban

    11/06/2014 2:03:29 PM PST · by reaganaut1 · 33 replies
    New York Times ^ | November 6, 2014 | ERIK ECKHOLM
    By a two-to-one vote, a federal appeals court in Cincinnati upheld the right of states to ban same-sex marriage, overturning lower court decisions in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee that found such restrictions to be unconstitutional.
  • Republicans Just Took Over the Senate—Here’s Why That Sucks (Read for the Schadenfreude!)

    11/04/2014 8:55:16 PM PST · by 2ndDivisionVet · 16 replies
    The Nation ^ | November 4, 2014 | George Zornick
    When Iowa and North Carolina were called almost simultaneously a little before 11:30 pm Tuesday night, the seemingly inevitable became official: Republicans will control the Senate and thus the entire legislative branch. On a variety of fronts, this new alignment is going to be hugely problematic for progressive governance—perhaps for governance, period. These will be the major flash points. The last one is the most important, because it’s how the GOP will force Obama’s most of the rest. 1. Staffing the Executive Branch For much of the Obama presidency, Republicans in the Senate stymied up literally hundreds of presidential appointments...
  • Will the Supreme Court grant certiorari in King v. Burwell?

    11/03/2014 12:09:33 PM PST · by right-wing agnostic · 25 replies
    The Volokh Conspiracy ^ | November 3, 2014 | Jonathan H. Adler
    On Friday, the justices of the Supreme Court held a conference to review petitions for certiorari and other procedural matters. Among the most-watched petitions before the justices was that in King v. Burwell, a challenge to the legality of an IRS rule authorizing tax credits for the purchase of health insurance in federally established exchanges. This morning, the Court released the order list from the conference, and King was absent. Rampant speculation about what this could mean ensued. (See Chris Walker’s walk through the possibilities here.) Shortly thereafter, a notation on the King docket indicated that King has been relisted...
  • Voeltz v. Obama

    11/03/2014 3:20:55 AM PST · by Ray76 · 4 replies
    No. 14-145 Title: In Re Michael Voeltz, Petitioner v. Docketed: August 11, 2014 ~~~Date~~~  ~~~~~~~Proceedings  and  Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Aug 7 2014 Petition for a writ of mandamus filed. (Response due September 10, 2014) Sep 9 2014 Waiver of right of respondent Kenneth W. Detzner to respond filed. Sep 10 2014 Brief of respondent Barack Obama in opposition filed. Sep 12 2014 Waiver of right of respondent Florida Election Canvassing Comission to respond filed. Sep 24 2014 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 10, 2014. Oct 3 2014 Reply of petitioner filed. (Distributed) Oct 14 2014 Petition DENIED.
  • Since when was health care reform authored in the House?

    10/31/2014 6:42:55 PM PDT · by right-wing agnostic · 44 replies
    The Volokh Conspiracy ^ | October 31, 2014 | Jonathan H. Adler
    If you’re trying to convince the Supreme Court not to grant certiorari in a high-profile case, I suspect that publishing an op-ed in the Washington Post on the day the Court is scheduled to consider the petition is not the best strategy. I also suspect that it would be a good idea to ensure than such op-ed not include blatant falsehoods. It would be one thing for such an op-ed for forcefully advocate a given perspective on a contested issue. Quite another for it to simply make stuff up. In this case, however, we see the latter. Friday the Supreme...
  • Does Justice Thomas support the Supreme Court’s notorious Korematsu decision?

    10/20/2014 8:43:26 AM PDT · by right-wing agnostic · 25 replies
    The Volokh Conspiracy ^ | October 20, 2014 | Ilya Somin
    In an interesting recent article, and a post at Prawfsblawg, legal scholar Mark Kende argues that Justice Clarence Thomas approves of Korematsu v. United States, the notorious 1944 Supreme Court decision that upheld the internment of over 100,000 Japanese-Americans during World War II. Here is the article abstract: The U.S. Supreme Court’s infamous decision in Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944) has been in the news recently as some scholars and advocates, such as Peter Irons, have asked the Court to formally repudiate the decision. This essay breaks new ground by demonstrating that Justice Clarence Thomas’s jurisprudence on...
  • Gaming Out the End of the Gay-Marriage Fight (Nausea notice)

    10/30/2014 7:28:36 PM PDT · by 2ndDivisionVet · 10 replies
    The Atlantic ^ | October 29, 2014 | David A. Graham
    Evan Wolfson and Ted Olson aren't pleased with the Supreme Court's decision not to make marriage equality the law of the land, but they're ready to keep fighting. In the heat of the civil-rights fight, when told he shouldn't push too hard for racial equality because of political backlash, Lyndon Johnson famously shot back, "What the hell's the presidency for?" Ted Olson had a similar question for the Supreme Court Wednesday, pondering why the justices had opted not to take a single case on same-sex marriage this term. "I agonize over the court not making a decision," said Olson, an...
  • Could This US Supreme Court Decision Determine Outcome of Houston's 'Bathroom Bill' Petition Suit?

    10/30/2014 8:47:32 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 6 replies
    Christian Post ^ | 10/30/2014 | Napp Nazworth
    A 1999 U.S. Supreme Court decision could play a role in the outcome of a lawsuit over Houston Mayor Annise Parker's denial of a petition to revoke the city's new Equal Rights Ordinance. Around 55,000 signatures were gathered to add to the November ballot a question on whether to repeal the ERO. Since "gender identity" is included in the list of categories that cannot be discriminated against for public accommodations, critics have dubbed the law the "bathroom bill," because males who identify as female would be allowed to use women's bathrooms and females who identify as male would be allowed...
  • US Supreme Court stays Missouri inmate's execution

    10/29/2014 1:50:23 AM PDT · by SoFloFreeper · 15 replies
    kansascity.com ^ | 10/29/14 | Jim Salter
    The U.S. Supreme Court late Tuesday halted the execution of a Missouri man who killed a woman and her two children, citing concerns that his legal counsel was ineffective. Mark Christeson, 35, was scheduled to die by injection at 12:01 a.m. Wednesday at the state prison in Bonne Terre before the late stay of execution was issued.
  • Obama praises Supreme Court on gay marriage, has no plans to be a justice

    10/21/2014 9:51:24 PM PDT · by 2ndDivisionVet · 19 replies
    The Washington Post ^ | October 20, 2014 | Robert Barnes
    The life of a Supreme Court justice would be “a little bit too monastic” for President Obama, according to an interview he gave the New Yorker about his legal legacy. Obama also praised the Supreme Court’s recent decision not to review lower-court rulings that struck down state prohibitions on same-sex marriage, saying he believes that the Constitution provides gays the right to marry. And he said that 81-year-old Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg “gets to decide, not anybody else, when she chooses to go” into retirement. Obama made the remarks to the magazine’s legal correspondent, Jeffrey Toobin. Toobin noted that the...
  • Caught on film for the first time -- The Supreme Court of the US in deliberation (humor)

    10/21/2014 9:04:19 AM PDT · by afraidfortherepublic · 7 replies
    Last Week Tonight with John Oliver ^ | 10-20-14 | John Oliver
    Link only: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJ9prhPV2PI
  • Supreme court to decide whether US government can 'strip' felons' gun rights

    10/20/2014 12:55:55 PM PDT · by Laissez-faire capitalist · 310 replies
    The Guardian ^ | 10/20/2014 | Staff
    Former border patrol agent, convicted on drug charges, appeals to high justices after lower courts bar him from selling weapons. The Supreme Court will decide whether the federal prohibition on firearms for felons terminates all ownership rights. The US Supreme Court agreed on Monday to decide whether a Florida man convicted on drug charges and forced to give up his firearms under federal law could sell the guns or transfer ownership to his wife or a friend. The court agreed to hear an appeal filed by Tony Henderson, a former US border patrol agent who was convicted of distributing marijuana...
  • Obama Doesn't Want to Be Supreme Court Justice: 'Too Monastic For Me'

    10/20/2014 1:11:20 PM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 63 replies
    Weekly Standard ^ | 10/20/2014 | Daniel Halper
    President Obama does not want to be a Supreme Court justice. He calls it "too monastic" for his own personality. Besides, in an interview with the New Yorker, President Obama acknowledges that he needs to get out of the "bubble" after what will be eight years as president of the United States. “I love the law, intellectually,” the president tell the New Yorker, which says he sounds "tempted" at the idea of being on the Court. “I love nutting out these problems, wrestling with these arguments. I love teaching. I miss the classroom and engaging with students. But I think...
  • Obama praises Supreme Court’s gay marriage orders

    10/20/2014 10:18:23 AM PDT · by Olog-hai · 26 replies
    Associated Press ^ | Oct 20, 2014 11:22 AM EDT
    President Barack Obama says the Supreme Court’s recent gay marriage orders may have the biggest impact of any ruling of his presidency. Obama told The New Yorker that the court’s Oct. 6 rejection of appeals from states seeking to preserve gay marriage bans is the best of his tenure. …
  • Supreme Court Allows Texas to Use Strict Voter ID Law in Coming Election

    10/18/2014 4:34:03 PM PDT · by Enlightened1 · 61 replies
    NY Times ^ | 10/18/14 | ADAM LIPTAK
    The Supreme Court on Saturday allowed Texas to use its strict voter identification law in the November election. The court’s order, issued just after 5 a.m., was unsigned and contained no reasoning.
  • Supreme Court to decide police access to hotel guest registries

    10/20/2014 7:48:36 AM PDT · by GIdget2004 · 5 replies
    Reuters ^ | 10/20/2014 | LAWRENCE HURLEY
    The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to decide whether hotel operators have grounds to challenge a Los Angeles city ordinance that allows police to view guest registries, a power that local officials say helps them investigate crimes including prostitution. The City of Los Angeles asked the Supreme Court to intervene after an appeals court said the ordinance violated the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment, which protects against unlawful searches and seizures. The ordinance requires hotel and motel operators to collect a detailed list of information on each guest, including name and address, car model, license plate number and method of...
  • Justice Ginsburg has it backwards

    10/18/2014 3:30:54 PM PDT · by right-wing agnostic · 18 replies
    American Thinker ^ | October 18, 2014 | Walt Bussey
    In her dissent to the Supreme Court’s ruling that Texas could enforce its voter ID law, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote: "The greatest threat to public confidence in elections in this case is the prospect of enforcing a purposefully discriminatory law, one that likely imposes an unconstitutional poll tax and risks denying the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of eligible voters." No, Justice Ginsburg; the greatest threat to confidence in our election process is that too many people may vote who are not legally qualified to vote, or that may vote fraudulently. How confident can honest citizen voters...
  • One Last Hurrah for Texas Voter ID

    10/18/2014 11:55:41 AM PDT · by jazusamo · 43 replies
    PJ Media ^ | October 18, 2014 | J. Christian Adams
    Overnight the Supreme Court refused to reverse the stay imposed by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and thus allowed voter ID to be required in the mid-term election in Texas. This is procedural delay based on the idea that election rules shouldn’t change at the last second. So voter ID gets one last hurrah in Texas. But election integrity advocates shouldn’t celebrate too much. Texas Voter ID is doomed. After this next election, it is prohibited from being used. Nor should much faith be placed in any appeal. The plaintiffs won on two separate theories under the Voting Rights...
  • Supreme Court rules Texas can enforce voter ID law [Sotomayor, Kagan and Bader dissented]

    10/18/2014 6:52:10 AM PDT · by Cincinatus' Wife · 31 replies
    The Hill ^ | October 16, 2014 | Rachel Huggins
    The Supreme Court will allow Texas to use its controversial new voter identification law for the November election, the court said Saturday morning, despite a lower court’s ruling that the law unfairly targets minorities. By a 6-3 vote, the majority of justices rejected emergency appeals from the Justice Department and civil rights groups to prohibit requiring voters to produce certain forms of photo identification in order to cast ballots in the state. “The greatest threat to public confidence in elections in this case is the prospect of enforcing a purposefully discriminatory law, one that likely imposes an unconstitutional poll tax...
  • Justices allow Texas use of new voter ID law

    10/18/2014 6:52:11 AM PDT · by Cincinatus' Wife
    The Houston Chronicle ^ | October 18, 2014 | SAM HANANEL
    The Supreme Court will allow Texas to use its controversial new voter identification law for the November election, the court said Saturday morning, despite a lower court’s ruling that the law unfairly targets minorities. By a 6-3 vote, the majority of justices rejected emergency appeals from the Justice Department and civil rights groups to prohibit requiring voters to produce certain forms of photo identification in order to cast ballots in the state. “The greatest threat to public confidence in elections in this case is the prospect of enforcing a purposefully discriminatory law, one that likely imposes an unconstitutional poll tax...
  • Supreme Court Upholds Texas Voter ID Law

    10/18/2014 4:44:33 AM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 46 replies
    Huffington Post ^ | October 18, 2014 | By SAM HANANEL
    The Supreme Court said Saturday that Texas can use its controversial new voter identification law for the November election. The Supreme Court's order was unsigned, as it typically is in these situations. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan dissented, saying they would have left the district court decision in place. "The greatest threat to public confidence in elections in this case is the prospect of enforcing a purposefully discriminatory law, one that likely imposes an unconstitutional poll tax and risks denying the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of eligible voters," Ginsburg wrote in dissent.
  • US to recognize gay marriage in seven more states

    10/17/2014 2:35:45 PM PDT · by 2ndDivisionVet · 19 replies
    The US government announced Friday it would recognize same-sex marriages in seven additional states, after the Supreme Court declined to take up the debate. A total of 26 of the 50 US states, and the capital Washington, now legally recognize gay and lesbian marriages, giving them the same legal rights and federal benefits as married heterosexual couples. "We will not delay in fulfilling our responsibility to afford every eligible couple, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, the full rights and responsibilities to which they are entitled," US Attorney General Eric Holder said in a video message. "With their long-awaited unions, we are...
  • Opponents ask U.S. Supreme Court to block Texas voter ID law

    10/15/2014 11:03:20 AM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 27 replies
    Reuters ^ | October 14, 2014 | BY LAWRENCE HURLEY
    Civil rights lawyers on Wednesday asked a U.S. Supreme Court justice to block a Texas law requiring voters in the state to show certain forms of identification in order to cast a ballot. The request, made to Justice Anton Scalia, was filed by lawyers representing various plaintiffs who challenged the law, including the League of United Latin American Citizens.
  • Supreme Court Blocks Parts of Texas Abortion Law

    10/14/2014 7:59:43 PM PDT · by lbryce · 13 replies
    AP via Fox ^ | October 14, 2014 | Staff
    The Supreme Court on Tuesday blocked key parts of a 2013 law in Texas that had closed all but eight facilities providing abortions in America's second most-populous state. In an unsigned order, the justices sided with abortion rights advocates and health care providers in suspending an Oct. 2 ruling by a panel of the New Orleans-based U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals that Texas could immediately apply a rule making abortion clinics statewide spend millions of dollars on hospital-level upgrades.
  • An Unlikely Trio Files a Rare Supreme Court Protest (Ginsburg, Scalia, Thomas)

    10/14/2014 7:40:57 PM PDT · by EveningStar · 8 replies
    The Atlantic ^ | October 14, 2014 | Russell Berman
    Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia share a famous fondness for the opera, but they don't often find themselves on the same side of divided Supreme Court decisions. So it was noteworthy on Tuesday when, along with conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, Ginsburg and Scalia teamed up to file a strongly-worded dissent in the court's decision to reject an appeal in a crack-cocaine sentencing case. The move to submit a signed dissent, noted first by Reason.com, was rare enough. The Supreme Court denies a vast majority of the petitions it receives, usually without any explanation or dissenting opinions. That's true...
  • Supreme Court won’t touch foie gras ban (California’s ban)

    10/14/2014 12:22:09 PM PDT · by Olog-hai · 69 replies
    Associated Press ^ | Oct 14, 2014 9:41 AM EDT
    The Supreme Court is allowing California to continue enforcing a law that bans the sale of foie gras. The justices on Tuesday rejected a challenge to the law from producers of the delicacy in New York and Canada. …
  • Supreme Court Won't Back Stay On Idaho Gay Marriages

    10/14/2014 11:07:23 AM PDT · by Lurking Libertarian · 23 replies
    Law 360 ^ | October 10, 2014 | Kat Greene
    Law360, Los Angeles (October 10, 2014, 8:14 PM ET) -- The U.S. Supreme Court refused Friday to grant an emergency stay preventing Idaho from issuing marriage licenses and recognizing same-sex nuptials from out of state, greenlighting the Ninth Circuit to enter an order allowing its ruling to go into effect. The short order included no reasoning for the decision, stating simply that the Idaho governor's application for a stay, which had been granted by Justice Anthony Kennedy on Wednesday, was denied, and that Justice Kennedy's order was vacated.
  • Black leaders slam Supreme Court’s 'cowardice' in marriage protection ruling

    10/13/2014 8:34:22 PM PDT · by ForYourChildren · 16 replies
    Examiner.com ^ | 10/13/14 | Jim Kouri
    A number of black Christian pastors and church leaders slammed the United States Supreme Court justices for turning down a case that would once and for all settle the dispute and divisiveness created by the issue of same-sex marriage. The National Coalition of Black Pastors and Christian Leaders characterized the court's decision -- "not to hear the case" and send it back to the lower courts -- as cowardice on the part of the nine members of the nation's highest court. On Monday, Oct. 6, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court simply stated that it would not review cases which overturned...