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 ...
This current Court’s makeup has worked to reverse Federal over reach.
Decisions making issues covered under RvW back to each state recognizes such unconstitutional upshur of powers.
Two decisions signalling the 1946 Administrative State Act has become beyond the intended scope, Congress was first notified they alone are law makers, and Acency Rules are not an enforceable legal constraint giving them dictatorial powers. The Chevron decision raised awareness and the legal mechanism by which long standing rules will cease to constrain.
The Biden Monday night attack on SCOTUS may well have set into motion the conservative justice’s next legal opinion that destroys the fire of Admin Rule and revoke going forward the Agencies ability to push the DNC agenda. This will now happen on Bidens watch. It will most likely happen in December after the November election humiliating Biden and the Administrative State defending rules, and making previous funding or expenses illegal. The cut off if funds to agencies for rule enforcement will help Trump reduce or limit departments.
The next 40 years will be the rise of State rights and reduction of Federal Budgets.
A 67% approval percentage is “fractured”?
If you look closely from overturning Affirmative Action to Chevron Deference, to Roe V Wade, the vast majority of what this court has done is to overturn what the Leftist Burger Court did from 1969 to 1986.
The only really major case they’ve decided in the last few years that wasn’t overturning a decision of the Burger court was Bruen in which they restored the constitutional interpretation of the 2nd amendment that had prevailed until the mid 20th century.
From your lips to God's ears.
No they didn’t. Next idiotic statement from NYT is no doubt waiting in the wings.
Is there a challenge to Wickard v Filburn in the pipeline. A ruling overturning that would really make the libs’ heads explode.
Except cops, federal agents, prosecutors, judges, and democRATs.
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.