Posted on 07/02/2024 11:00:04 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Former President Donald J. Trump had a very good year at the Supreme Court. On Monday, the court ruled that he is substantially immune from prosecution on charges that he tried to subvert the 2020 election. On Friday, the court cast doubt on two of the four charges against him in what remains of that prosecution. And in March, the justices allowed him to seek another term despite a constitutional provision barring insurrectionists from holding office.
Administrative agencies had a horrible term. In three 6-to-3 rulings along ideological lines, the court’s conservative supermajority erased a foundational precedent that had required courts to defer to agency expertise, dramatically lengthened the time available to challenge agencies’ actions and torpedoed the administrative tribunals in which the Securities and Exchange Commission brings enforcement actions.
The court itself had a volatile term, taking on a stunning array of major disputes and assuming a commanding role in shaping American society and democracy. If the justices felt chastened by the backlash over their 2022 abortion decision, the persistent questions about their ethical standards and the drop in their public approval, there were only glimmers of restraint, notably in ducking two abortion cases in an election year.
The court was divided 6 to 3 along partisan lines not only in Monday’s decision on Mr. Trump’s immunity and the three cases on agency power, but also in a run of major cases on homelessness, voting rights, guns and public corruption.
An unusually high proportion of divided decisions in argued cases — more than two-thirds — were decided by 6-to-3 votes. But only half of those decisions featured the most common split, with the six Republican appointees in the majority and the...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Article presented for entertainment purposes only.
The dissenting opinion of the Supreme Court’s three stooges leads off with a picket sign slogan. “No one is above the law.”...Other than, of course. themselves as judges, DAs, governors performing official duties, congress folks free to defame from the well, etc, all of whom enjoy the same immunity the Supreme Court reiterated the President has in performance of official duties. Apparently, led by the wise latina freshly back from crying in her chambers, they shepardized this case precedent from stacks of picket signs rather than stacks of case law and the actual Constitution.
As my dad said, NYT “all the news fit to tint”.
Editing the editors.
Supreme Court has only very slightly “nudged” the status-quo of 60 years of judicial activism and deference to leftist and statist trends in America.
I suspect that the three Obama justices will become huge proponents of the immunity decision come Jan 21, 2025.
Only people on the "far-left" (we need to use this term more often) held this view.
Everyone else, including all the independent voters viewed the events of 1/6 as a protest.
According to the First Amendment, the American people have the right to assemble.
Fractured?
Volatile?
WTF!
total hyperbolic BS
The FACT is, a president could ALWAYS pardon himself and anyone he wished for any and all federal crimes they even might have committed during his administration.
And there is NOTHING anyone could have done about it.
But they ALWAYS had that power. Even if the court had ruled the way Democrats wanted. After Trump won, he could have pardoned himself, the J6 protestors, and anyone else in his old administration. Trump could also (in hindsite) have pre emptively pardoned everyone including himself before leaving office. He just never imagined, the Democrats would attack him, the J6 protestors and members of his administration with lawfare they way they have.
But going forward, all presidents will almost certainly preemptively pardon everyone before leaving office.
I'm sure the distorter, er, reporter's choice of words was an innocent failure of . . . education.
NYT: “All the news we fit to print”!
The Supreme Court returned America to being America!!
“despite a constitutional provision barring insurrectionists from holding office.”
“conservative supermajority”
“a foundational precedent”
.
.
But, it has long been recognized:
The week in whoppers: NY Times’ Master of Misinformation
Behind The Curtain: How The New York Times Manufactures Lies For Democrats To Attack Their Opponents
They use “landmark” when they win. It’s “bitterly divided” and “fractured” when the NYT scum lose.
Bat crap crazy.
The NYT have appointed themselves as Supreme?
How cute.
“...the three Obama justices...”
Are you kidding?
Traitor Roberts has found, by declaration, that there are NO 0bama judges....
I say, “NY Slimes: all the news print to fit” (their leftist agenda).
When Trump actually fundamentally changes America, the New York Times calls it "fractured."
Go figure...
-PJ
To: Adam Liptak, Alicia Parlapiano
Oh shut up!
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.