Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SCOTUS Opinion day [July 1, 2024]
Scotusblog ^ | 7/1/24 | staff

Posted on 07/01/2024 6:33:16 AM PDT by CFW

The Supreme Court will be issuing Opinions at 10:00 a.m. this morning for the October 2023 term. You can read the opinions released thus far at Supreme Court opinions.

The attorneys at scotusblog will be liveblogging the release of opinions from the pressroom.

There are four cases remaining undecided for the October 2023 term.

October sitting: All opinions have been released;
November sitting: All opinions have been released;
December sitting: All opinions have been released;
January sitting: All opinions have been released.

February sitting: There are three cases pending.

Corner Post v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, (an Administrative Procedure Act issue), and the two First Amendment cases. Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, and NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton.

March sitting: All opinions have been released.

And then there is the case we are all waiting for from the...

April setting: There is one case remaining undecided.

Which is the case of Trump v. U.S., No. 23-939 [Arg: 4.25.2024]

Issue(s): Whether and if so to what extent does a former president enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office.

Opinion days are fun but nerve-racking. Join the fun, post your comments and insights here at the thread, and, say a prayer for the Justices!

(Excerpt) Read more at scotusblog.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: constitution; immunity; opinions; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281-295 next last
To: teeman8r
Well? We’re waiting.

Ted Baxter, is that you?

41 posted on 07/01/2024 7:09:35 AM PDT by newfreep ("There is no race problem...just a problem race")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: CFW

THIS AND CHRVRON ARE BEGINING TO REIGN IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE STATE.


42 posted on 07/01/2024 7:09:51 AM PDT by cowboyusa (YESHUA IS KING AMERICA, AND HE WILL HAVE NO OTHER GODS BEFORE HIM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: cowboyusa

clawing back our republic one ruling at a time!


43 posted on 07/01/2024 7:10:33 AM PDT by TexasFreeper2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009

The decision to prosecute a sitting or former president is inherently a political decision. The Constitutiion lays out the process to be followed.


44 posted on 07/01/2024 7:10:36 AM PDT by DugwayDuke (Most pick the expert who says the things they agree with.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: teeman8r

Well? We’re waiting.

for the 10 am decisions.


And they began announcing opinions at 10:00. It just takes a while for the decisions to make it from the bench to cyperspace.


45 posted on 07/01/2024 7:10:39 AM PDT by CFW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: CFW

My sense is that if they don’t find a strong level of immunity, that presidents will be forced at the end of any term to issue blanket pardons for themselves their families and anyone who worked for them in any capacity


46 posted on 07/01/2024 7:10:40 AM PDT by xzins (Retired US Army chaplain. Support our troops by praying for their victory. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CFW
“there is effectively no longer any limitations period for lawsuits that challenge agency regulations on their face.”

Sweet

47 posted on 07/01/2024 7:11:36 AM PDT by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: DugwayDuke

I agree


48 posted on 07/01/2024 7:11:40 AM PDT by TexasFreeper2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: xzins

exactly, which is why I predict they will say presidents have “effective immunity” from any crime for which they have the power to pardon themselves.


49 posted on 07/01/2024 7:12:35 AM PDT by TexasFreeper2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: DugwayDuke

The decision to prosecute a sitting or former president is inherently a political decision. The Constitutiion lays out the process to be followed.


You are correct. If it is allowed, it opens up a new can of worms that will severely limit any President’s governing and decision-making abilities.

Jackson is reading her dissent from the bench.

“Justice Jackson in her conclusion: “At the end of a momentous Term, this much is clear: The tsunami of lawsuits against agencies that the Court’s holdings in this case and Loper Bright have authorized has the potential to devastate the functioning of the Federal Government.””


50 posted on 07/01/2024 7:12:54 AM PDT by CFW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: CFW

Did Amy note for us how many justices of the 9 were present today?

I presume that any justice not reading from an opinion could already be on the beach, trekking to Europe, have mai-tai in hand, or tooling down the highway in his RV.


51 posted on 07/01/2024 7:13:01 AM PDT by C210N (Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: C210N

Amy didn’t mention how many of the Justices were present.


52 posted on 07/01/2024 7:14:09 AM PDT by CFW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: CFW

quote “has the potential to devastate the functioning of the Federal Government”

we can only hope!!!!!


53 posted on 07/01/2024 7:14:11 AM PDT by TexasFreeper2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: CFW
“Justice Jackson in her conclusion: “At the end of a momentous Term, this much is clear: The tsunami of lawsuits against agencies that the Court’s holdings in this case and Loper Bright have authorized has the potential to devastate the functioning of the Federal Government.”

She says that like it’s a bad thing. Sounds to me like the sweetest of music.

54 posted on 07/01/2024 7:15:23 AM PDT by noiseman (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: CFW
the potential to devastate the functioning of the Federal Government.””

Good, rein in Government abuses.

55 posted on 07/01/2024 7:15:23 AM PDT by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009

That all sounds reasonable.

But…since when is government “reasonable.”


56 posted on 07/01/2024 7:15:29 AM PDT by Vermont Lt (Don’t vote for anyone over 70 years old. Get rid of the geriatric politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009

Good thoughts. Makes perfect sense


57 posted on 07/01/2024 7:17:31 AM PDT by xzins (Retired US Army chaplain. Support our troops by praying for their victory. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: 1Old Pro

Justice Kavanaugh suggests in a concurring opinion that the “Government’s position . . . would fundamentally change administrative law, leaving administrative agencies with extraordinary new power to issue rules free from potential suits by unregulated but adversely affected parties—businesses, environmental plaintiffs, workers, the list goes on.”


58 posted on 07/01/2024 7:17:34 AM PDT by CFW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: noiseman
Sounds to me like the sweetest of music.

Sounds to me like NESARA and Common Law. Sounds to me like repudiation of Woodrow Wilson's agenda.

59 posted on 07/01/2024 7:17:55 AM PDT by C210N (Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: DugwayDuke

So, it would be “legal” for the Vice President to murder the President in the White House?

The VP becomes president and pardons themselves?

That doesn’t sound right.


60 posted on 07/01/2024 7:17:59 AM PDT by Vermont Lt (Don’t vote for anyone over 70 years old. Get rid of the geriatric politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281-295 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson