Free Republic

Tomorrow, beginning at 10 a.m. in the East, the Supreme Court will start issuing its final opinions of the term. The big cases yet to be decided include: June Medical Services v. Russo (regarding abortion), Trump v. Mazars USA and Trump v. Vance (regarding access to President Trump’s tax returns case), Little Sisters of the Poor Sts. Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania (regarding the conscience exemption from Obamacare’s birth control mandate), and Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue (regarding tax credits and religious schools). Having incorrectly predicted the result of Michael Flynn’s case in the D.C. Circuit, and not...

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday for the Trump administration in a key immigration case, determining that a federal law limiting an asylum applicant’s ability to appeal a determination that he lacked a credible fear of persecution from his home country does not violate the Constitution. The ruling means the administration can deport some people seeking asylum without allowing them to make their case to a federal judge. The 7-2 ruling applies to those who fail their initial asylum screenings, making them eligible for quick deportation. In a decision in the case of Dept. of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam, the court...

The Supreme Court handed the Trump administration a win on Thursday by ruling that asylum seekers have no right to a federal court hearing before being removed from the U.S. The 7-2 decision allows the administration to fast-track the removal process, and could affect thousands of immigrants. The majority opinion was written by conservative Justice Samuel Alito, who was joined by all but two of the court’s more liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, who dissented. – Developing

Subtitle: Scotus – The Fourth Political Institution. As opposed to political and illogical court decisions like that of the 6-3 majority in Bostock v. Clayton County, decisions that leave readers scratching their heads, the Kavanaugh dissent is a waft of easy-to-read constitutional clarity. Right away Kavanaugh asks, “Who decides?” What institution makes the laws? What happened to separation of powers? What happened to the ordinary meaning of words? It’s unfortunately a multigeneration problem with the scotus. Absolute power has a way of getting away. As illustrated in the 2015 Obergefell decision, based on wholesale abuse of the 14th Amendment, I...

In an unexpected move, the Supreme Court has voted to deny certiorari (refuse to hear) ten Second Amendment cases which have been held at the court, some of which have been waiting for years. Much speculation has been written about the cases, with the expectation the Supreme Court would hear at least one of them in order to clarify splits that have occurred in the circuit courts on the issues of carrying firearms outside the home, bans on gun magazines and semi-automatic rifles. The court is believed to have four justices inclined to enforce the Second Amendment:  Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch,...

Some thoughts on Supreme Court jurisprudence, what the Constitution actually protects, and why we can't trust the courts.

One of the men at the center of the recent Supreme Court decision that held that firing people based on sexual orientation is a form of sex discrimination, was not ousted because he was gay, his former employer says. In a 6-3 decision that was released Monday in Bostock v. Clayton County — which was consolidated along with two other cases involving firings of homosexual and trans-identified employees — the high court ruled that Title VII, the civil rights provision within the 1964 Civil Rights Act that pertains specifically to employment, extends nondiscrimination protections to sexual orientation and transgender status....

John Roberts is a politician — a politician who consistently makes laws, inconsistently applies the Constitution, and can't be voted out of office. Knock, knock. Who’s there? Unelected leftist politicians in robes with lifetime tenure. Turns out, the Supreme Court is a joke, and the punchline is Chief Justice John Roberts.Two high court decisions this week brought that reality into focus, when the George W. Bush-appointed chief sided with leftist justices to say sexual orientation is “sex,” and that the current commander in chief can’t undo unlawful executive action from a past president because of his reasons.Roberts has quite the...

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled Thursday that the Trump administration’s plan to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program was illegal. Chief Justice John Roberts was the swing vote in the 5-4 decision. The dissenting opinion was written by Justice Thomas: “Separation of powers? We don’t need no stinkin’ separation of powers: we’ve got the Supreme Court.” I don’t know what the progressive cabal has on Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts, but have it they do. So take your little elephant friend and go away while we fundamentally transform Amerika. Posted from: MOTUS A.D.

President Trump, in the wake of Thursday's defeat at the Supreme Court in his efforts to repeal the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, called for new justices as conservatives took aim at Chief Justice John Roberts for what they called a “pattern” of siding with the liberal wing in key decisions. “The recent Supreme Court decisions, not only on DACA, Sanctuary Cities, Census, and others, tell you only one thing, we need NEW JUSTICES of the Supreme Court. If the Radical Left Democrats assume power, your Second Amendment, Right to Life, Secure Borders, and m Religious Liberty,...

The ruling will lead to a tsunami of polarizing court cases and further degradation of Americans' natural rights to free speech, to free association, and to worshipping God as their consciences require... ruling inserting “gender identity” into the word “sex” in a 1964 employment law, the U.S. Supreme Court called a man a woman, possibly leading to eventually forcing everyone else to do so also. The ruling will lead to a tsunami of polarizing court cases and further degradation of Americans’ natural rights to free speech, to free association, and to worshipping God as their consciences require. All this in...

June Medical Services v. Russo (formerly Gee) is the first major abortion case before the Supreme Court since Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh were appointed to the bench. Before this month ends, a decision expected in the case will be particularly useful for forecasting the future of abortion in the United States. Advocates on both sides of the issue are looking to see how the court and its new 5-4 conservative majority will handle state laws restricting abortion for the second time. First, Predictions: The Supreme Court is likely to affirm the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals decision and allow Louisiana’s Unsafe Abortion...

This past week, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision in Bostock v. Clayton County. Hailed as a landmark decision for LGBT Americans, the 6-3 opinion written by Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch concludes that the use of the word "sex" in Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act protects gay and transgender people from workplace discrimination. This seems like a straightforward question with an easy answer: Should gay and transgender people be discriminated against in hiring and firing decisions? Most would say no. Why should a bank teller be fired for being gay? Why shouldn't an accounting firm...

...The prematurely gray dad of two kicked off his opening statement talking about his wife and family - joking about his daughters, who were probably out "bathing chickens for the county fair," his extended family and childhood pranks, the values of working hard. Gorsuch thought back to the first time he put on his black robe - how it reminded him of the important job he had to do. He told the senators he didn't realize how big it was until he slipped on it and fell. "Everything went flying," he recalled. Now, three years later, that robe is still...

The fact that four justices who complained that the court needed to hear Second Amendment cases passed on 10 chances to do so tells us much about the courtÂ’s 'swing vote.' The U.S. Supreme CourtÂ’s decision to pass on nearly a dozen gun-rights-related cases is breathtaking, not in the denial of hearing any, but in the seeming admission that the conservative associate justices think Chief Justice John Roberts canÂ’t be trusted to protect the Bill of Rights.The nationÂ’s top court denied writ of certiorari to 10 cases. The National Shooting Sports Foundation, the firearm industry trade association, submitted amicus curiae...

What we need is a more forceful conservative legal movement, just as willing as the left to make moral arguments in court, based on principles of justice, natural law (the rules embedded in our very nature as human beings), the common good and the religious and moral traditions underlying Anglo-American constitutional order.

On Monday, the Supreme Court concluded that homosexuality and transgenderism are covered under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This post doesn’t have enough space to explain why, legally, that is an incorrect decision. Put simply, the Civil Rights Act does not cover sexual orientation and was never intended to. If Congress wants to change that, it can; it is not the Supreme Court’s role, though, to make that change. This post focuses only on the fact that the Supreme Court, in Bostock v. Clayton County, wrongly accepted the premise that transgenderism is part of the homosexuality spectrum. It...

Congratulations to Chief Justice Elena Kagan on her big win Monday at the Supreme Court on gay and transgender rights in Bostock v. Clayton County. Ok, she isn’t the Chief, but she might as well be as her redefining of Antonin Scalia’s jurisprudence prevailed in a startling 6-3 ruling that included Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Neil Gorsuch. Justice Kagan didn’t write the majority opinion, but her views are all over Justice Gorsuch's opinion that essentially rewrites Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. That law bars discrimination in employment on the basis of “race, color, religion, sex,...

Washington — The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that it is illegal for an employer to fire someone because of their sexual orientation or gender identity, delivering a major victory in the fight for civil rights for LGBT people. The court's 6-3 ruling extends the scope of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which bars discrimination on the basis of sex, race, color, national origin and religion, to include LGBT people. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Neil Gorsuch, who authored the majority's opinion, joined the liberal wing of the bench in ruling that "an employer who fires an...

The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear the administration’s challenge to California’s main sanctuary city law protecting illegal immigrants, dealing a significant blow to President Trump’s hopes of forcing jurisdictions to cooperate with ICE. The justices did not offer comment on their decision, though two — Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. — said they wanted to hear the case. It takes four justices to put a case on the court’s calendar......."