Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 04/22/2025 6:48:33 AM PDT by CFW
This morning at 10:00, the Supreme Court will be releasing Opinions from cases from the October 2024 term.
A list of those cases can be found here:
Scotusblog will be live-blogging the opinion release and we will be following along.
(Excerpt) Read more at scotusblog.com ...
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
After the Opinion announcements, the court will be hearing Oral arguments on the case of:
Mahmoud v. Taylor, No. 24-297 [Arg: 4.22.2025] Issue(s): Whether public schools burden parents’ religious exercise when they compel elementary school children to participate in instruction on gender and sexuality against their parents’ religious convictions and without notice or opportunity to opt out.
You can read about that case here: Mahmoud v. Taylor
Here is a live stream link to the audio of oral arguments:
SCOTUS ping!
Anything fun?
Anything fun?
Not yet!
We have the first and only opinion of the day.
It is Velazquez v. Bondi, the immigration case.
It is by Justice Gorsuch, whose opinion is joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson.
Thomas dissents, joined by Alito, and in part by Kavanaugh and Barrett.
Alito and Barrett both file dissenting opinions, which Kavanaugh joins.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-929_h3ci.pdf
This is a case about calculating deadlines in immigration cases, and in particular how to calculate a deadline when the government delays detention and deportation for up to 60 days to allow immigrants of “good moral character” to leave the United States on their own.
Under other provisions of immigration law, if the final day permitted to take an action falls on a weekend or legal holiday, the deadline rolls over to the next business day.
Thomas and Alito dissenting, sounds like a loss to our side. Ramifications of the decision?
The court today holds that a voluntary-departure deadline that falls on a weekend or legal holiday also extends to the next business day.
So the majority rules in favor of the illegal alien.
Thomas’s dissent says that the “merits-stage briefing revealed a serious, novel jurisdictional objection that may bar our review.” So he would have sent the case back for the court of appeals to consider that issue first.
Formerly Velazquez v. Garland,, but now Velazques v Bondi, No. 23-929 [Arg: 11.12.2024]
Issue(s): Whether, when a noncitizen’s voluntary-departure period ends on a weekend or public holiday, a motion to reopen filed the next business day is sufficient to avoid the penalties for failure to depart under 8 U.S.C. § 1229c(d)(1).
Geez. This decision is almost inconsequential. Waste of time.
Low stakes, very technical.
I am stunned that the incredibly busy Supreme Court would waste time on a case as stupid and minor as this.
Exactly. And these illegal alien are wasting court time and lawyers (which I’m sure we are paying for in one way or another) with all these appeals and appeals on top of appeals. They’re illegal! Just deport them already.
Not much ramifications for our side. This is an old case, originally filed against Garland a few years back. Basically an administrative matter which affects very few cases.
In most court cases when a deadline falls on a weekend, it is extended to the first business day following. So this is not extraordinary.
Opinion day is like a box of chocolates. You never know if it will be ho-hum are “Hot damn!”
Freepers might be interested in listening to the oral arguments in the Mahmoud case which will be starting soon. I linked to the audio in my original post
A comment from a scotusblog staff attorney:
“....it is interesting that so much effort in Velazquez went into determining, essentially a filing deadline, and that the court split 5-4 on it. The opinion and all of the dissents put together are not insubstantial. Not the weighty constitutional questions that many people associate with the Supreme Court, but the lower courts had reached different conclusions and so the Supreme Court decided to step in.”
And these illegal alien are wasting court time and lawyers“
Now imagine if the rats get their way and every illegal gets to have a full hearing any time you try to deport them
That’s why they took it.
To waste time.
Every day I hear Bannon talk about the targeted “10 million” deportations—and then about walking it back by Wall Street’s claims on GDP, which drives me crazy. We should expel the 60 million illegals, and yes, there would be significant economic upheaval with that.
But even that measly 16% looks increasingly like a performative mirage, as the admin continues onesy-twosy squabbles based on our highlighting the most notorious prison on the planet as part of our plan.
Trump II’s planned deportations are looking like pure kabuki.
Supreme Court doesn’t even seem like a serious body anymore. The real judicial power and the consequential decisions are made by little district judges.
Trump II’s planned deportations are looking like pure kabuki.
Whether it’s his fault or not....I agree. We’re not getting what was promised.
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.