Posted on 06/21/2024 6:30:15 AM PDT by CFW
The Supreme Court will release Opinions this morning at 10:00 a.m. Attorneys at scotusblog will be in the press room and live-blogging the Opinions as they are received.
There were four opinions released yesterday which leaves 19 cases remaining for this term. Yesterday's thread on those opinions is here:
For those keeping score, thus far Roberts has written 2 opinions; Thomas 7, Alito, 4, Kagan 5, Gorsuch 2, Kavanaugh 5, Sotomayor, 7, Barrett 3, and Jackson 4. (three cases were per curiam)
Cases of interest and great importance that remain undecided are the Trump immunity case (Trump v. U.S.), the Fischer case (relating to Jan 6 and Trump), and the two cases relating to the Chevron deference issues, Loper Bright and Relentless.
There is also a 2nd Amendment case, Rahimi, regarding possession of a firearm by persons subject to domestic-violence restraining orders.
And of course, there are the First Amendment case. First is NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton, then Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, and finally Missouri v. Murthy Issues: Whether respondents have Article III standing; (2) whether the government’s challenged conduct transformed private social media companies’ content-moderation decisions into state action and violated respondents’ First Amendment rights; and (3) whether the terms and breadth of the preliminary injunction are proper.
A list of the cases for this term can be found at October 23 term
Happy SCOTUS Opinion day. Say a prayer for the Justices.
(Excerpt) Read more at scotusblog.com ...
They're going to assume that every American male is just like OJ Simpson.
And she should have gotten a restraining order.
Yes, to both, and to using the firearm to kill that thug before he killed her and her friend.
I suspect Alito and Roberts will hit the hot-button opinions on Immunity, Chevron, and J6. Those will probably be issued last on Friday morning. Unless they send the Immunity case back to the lower courts to determine what constitutes Presidential duties and which charges would fall under Presidential Immunity. That will piss off some people but not to the point of riots. It would maintain the integrity of the Court, which is all Roberts cares about.
It is also possible that Roberts will issue all three. That would worry me. America could become a cesspool, and Roberts would be fine with that as long as he can claim he maintained the integrity of the Court.
I think Alito will issue an opinion on Chevron, Roberts will issue an opinion on Immunity, and Fischer (J6). The remainder will be split between Barret, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh. We could also hear from Jackson and Kagan, but I suspect the hot-button issues will go to Alito and Roberts.
IMO:
KEY WORD:
TEMPORARILY
It is sad how ACB can base one ruling on Historical context and then completely ignore it on another. The USSC has no credibility IMO.
She is a real lemon and Kavanaugh isn’t much better.
This is where we stand on the cases not yet decided.
October sitting: All opinions have been released;
November sitting: All opinions have been released;
December sitting: There is two cases pending. A case involving the Securities Exchange Commission, and a bankruptcy case regarding Purdue Pharma;
January sitting: Two cases remain. These are the two Chevron deference cases. Relentless and Loper Bright. I suspect the Opinion in those cases will be released as one.
February sitting: Four cases pending.
Corner Post v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, (a Administrative Procedure Act issue), the Ohio v. EPA case, and the two First Amendment cases. Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, and NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton.
March sitting: Two cases remaining to be decided. Becerra v. San Carlos Apache Tribe and then the First Amendment case of
Murthy v. Missouri. This is the case regarding government using social media to censor speech they don’t like.
That brings us to...
April sitting: There are five cases remaining. The Trump immunity case and the Fischer case involving Jan 6 defendants.
Third is Snyder v. US, (Whether section 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(1)(B) criminalizes gratuities, i.e., payments in recognition of actions a state or local official has already taken or committed to take, without any quid pro quo agreement to take those actions).
The final two from the April sitting are City of Grants Pass, Oregon v. Johnson, (Whether the enforcement of generally applicable laws regulating camping on public property constitutes “cruel and unusual punishment” prohibited by the Eighth Amendment.); and
Moyle v. U.S. (Whether the Supreme Court should stay the order by the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho enjoining the enforcement of Idaho’s Defense of Life Act, which prohibits abortions unless necessary to save the life of the mother, on the ground that the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act preempts it.)
We will definitely get Opinions on Wednesday before the debate. Which ones they will be are anyone’s guess but I bet they will wait until after the debate to issue the immunity case.
Thanks for info! You’re a tribute to this site.
There should be great debate on this since as Constitutional Scholar Judge Robert Bork has said, the right way to read and apply the Constitution is AS WRITTEN and ORGINALLY UNDERSTOOD AND INTENDED.
Amen.
That’s a lot pending. I suspect they’ll finish in July.
My deepest apologies. I was wrong to post my comment.
“I read that opinions are released by seniority (Justices), so we should see at least one more from Kavanaugh and Alito and a couple of opinions from Roberts. I heard they will release around 15 opinions next week, so they added Wednesday for release. How many opinions has Barret issued?”
They are released in reverse order of seniority but that starts over every opinion day. Next Wednesday, the opinions released could start with Jackson and then work its way up to Roberts. Barrett has written just 4 opinions this term.
Yes! Include me.
Sounds like she should join the Leftist Bloc on the SCOTUS if she believes that the Constitution is a "living document".
I’d already added you to the list by default assuming you’d ask to be taken off if you didn’t want to be on the list. LOL
BTW, People on X are pointing out that the Erlinger v. United States decision today could have ramifications with regards to the Trump New York case. Tuxedo had made that point up-thread.
In 6-3 decision issued today, the Supreme Court ruled that 1) a jury must be unanimous in its findings on criminal convictions, and 2) sentencing enhancements cannot be arbitrarily implemented by judicial fiat.
Please add me to the ping list. Your work is awesome
“Please add me to the ping list. Your work is awesome”
Thanks! You’ve been added.
Wow, that’s very interesting. So does that mean Trump’s legal team can file suit based on this ruling perhaps and get it over turn based on that?
“Wow, that’s very interesting. So does that mean Trump’s legal team can file suit based on this ruling perhaps and get it over turn based on that?”
They are appealing the verdict to higher courts, but yes, this gives Trump’s team additional ammunition.
“may be temporarily disarmed consistent with the Second Amendment.”
I wonder what the definition of temporarily is, I need to go back and read this one. I’m glad to see it is temporary though
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.