Free Republic 1st Qtr 2024 Fundraising Target: $81,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $43,614
Woo hoo!! And we're now over 53%!! Thank you everyone!! God bless.

Keyword: scotus

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Supreme Court set to block Biden’s abuse of power yet again

    02/26/2024 8:06:36 AM PST · by Twotone · 13 replies
    Washington Examiner ^ | February 25, 2024 | Staff
    The Supreme Court heard a case this week in which, by following the Constitution, it can help states save money, electricity generation, and lives while lower courts consider a legal challenge to strict new regulations that President Joe Biden is trying to impose. In agency after agency, Biden’s appointees wildly exceed their legal authority, which is why radical new regulations have been struck down so often by courts in areas from education to energy to immigration to health, among others. This time the power grabbers come from the Environmental Protection Agency. Regulatory law is complicated, and several states are challenging...
  • Supreme Court to Weigh Constitutionality of Laws Regulating Social Media Giants

    02/26/2024 6:40:54 AM PST · by CFW · 24 replies
    The Epoch Times ^ | 2/26/24 | Sam Dorman
    The Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments on Feb. 26 in two big social media cases that could have wide-reaching implications for how companies like Facebook can moderate or censor content. Two cases—Moody v. Netchoice and Netchoice v. Paxton—are coming before the court in disputes over Texas’ and Florida’s social media laws. The states’ attempts to rein in big tech laid out many parameters for how companies could remove content they found objectionable. Netchoice, an organization representing multiple social media companies, has sued alleging that both laws violate the companies’ First Amendment rights. The group has likened their activities to...
  • The Biggest Supreme Court Case That Nobody Seems to Be Talking About

    02/24/2024 5:53:49 PM PST · by thecodont · 44 replies
    Slate ^ | Feb 23, 20245:45 AM | By Richard L. Hasen
    On Monday, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in a pair of cases out of Texas and Florida that could force major social media platforms to carry posts from Donald Trump or others who lie about elections being stolen or obliquely encourage election-related violence. A ruling in favor of these states would turn the First Amendment upside down and create the conditions for undermining American democracy. If there wasn’t so much else swirling around our elections and democracy right now, this case would be commanding everyone’s attention. Moody v. NetChoice LLC and NetChoice LLC v. Paxton arise out of the...
  • Biden administration cancels ANOTHER $1.2 billion in student debt for 150,000 borrowers: White House has now wiped $138 BILLION in loans for 3.9 million Americans despite the Supreme Court ruling he overstepped his authority

    02/21/2024 7:35:59 AM PST · by hillarys cankles · 39 replies ^ | February 21, 2024 | Sarah Ewall-Wice
    The Biden administration forgave a further $1.2 billion in student debts for more than 150,000 borrowers on Wednesday as part of the White House's aggressive push to help Americans paying back their loans. The move means Biden has cancelled nearly $138 billion for nearly 3.9 million borrowers since he took office, despite the Supreme Court killing his plan to wipe the debts seven months ago.
  • Non-profit behind ‘He Gets Us’ Super Bowl ads is main funder for US hate group

    02/21/2024 6:04:02 AM PST · by Paul46360 · 29 replies
    A US non-profit that aired two ads during yesterday's Super Bowl attempting to rebrand Jesus for Gen Z is also the main funder of a designated hate group opposing abortion and LGBTIQ rights, openDemocracy can reveal. The Servant Foundation has plunged millions of dollars into its ‘He Gets Us’ ads, which paint Jesus as an “influencer” who was “cancelled” for standing up for his beliefs. The controversial adverts were shown at the Super Bowl for the second year running and have been plastered across billboards in the United States over the last year.
  • Supreme Court Opinions [2/21/24]

    02/21/2024 7:10:14 AM PST · by CFW · 7 replies
    Scotusblog ^ | 2/21/24 | staff
    SCOTUS issued opinions at 10:00 this morning on the following cases: We have two opinions, apparently. The first is from Justice Jackson, in McElrath v. Georgia. It is unanimous. McElrath v. Georgia, No. 22-721 [Arg: 11.28.2023] Issue(s): Whether the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment prohibits a second prosecution for a crime of which a defendant was previously acquitted. The court holds that the jury's verdict that McElrath was not guilty of "malice murder" by reason of insanity constituted an acquittal for double jeopardy purposes despite any inconsistency with the jury's other verdicts. The state court's decision is reversed...
  • The Consequences of Jack Smith's Rush to Trial

    02/15/2024 4:46:31 AM PST · by Fury · 16 replies
    Lawfare ^ | 02/14/2024 | Jack Goldsmith
    Special Counsel Jack Smith’s rush to try Donald Trump violates Justice Department rules and presents tricky issues for the Supreme Court on the immunity issue.
  • Special counsel Jack Smith urges Supreme Court to reject Trump bid to delay election trial

    02/15/2024 3:12:33 AM PST · by Fury · 11 replies
    NBC News ^ | 02/14/2024 | Lawrence Hurley
    The court filing is in response to Trump's effort to prevent a court ruling that rejected his broad immunity claim from going into effect. Special counsel Jack Smith asked the Supreme Court on Wednesday to reject an emergency application filed by Donald Trump that sought to further delay the former president's criminal trial arising from efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
  • Supreme Court Responds to Trump Request to Pause Immunity Ruling in Jack Smith January 6 Case

    02/13/2024 5:57:39 PM PST · by bitt · 47 replies
    gatewaypundit ^ | 2/13/2024 | cristina laila
    The US Supreme Court on Tuesday responded to President Trump’s emergency application requesting the high court pause the immunity ruling in Jack Smith’s January 6 case in DC. Chief Justice Roberts on Tuesday responded to Trump’s emergency request and told Special Counsel Jack Smith he has a week to respond. The Supreme Court gave Jack Smith until Tuesday, February 20 to file a response to Trump’s request to pause the appellate court’s ruling on immunity. Last week a federal appeals court stacked with Biden judges denied Trump immunity in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s January 6 DC case. The three-judge panel...
  • SCOTUS Is Troubled by the Claim That States Can Disqualify Trump From the Election As an Insurrectionist

    02/12/2024 2:12:18 PM PST · by nickcarraway · 48 replies
    Reason ^ | 2.12.2024 | Jacob Sullum
    Most of the justices are clearly inclined to reject a Colorado Supreme Court decision asserting that power under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.Judging from last week's oral arguments in Trump v. Anderson, the Supreme Court will reject the claim that he is disqualified from running for president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment because he "engaged in insurrection" by inciting the Capitol riot on January 6, 2021. The only real question is which of several possible rationales will attract a majority of the justices. Section 3, which was aimed at preventing former Confederates from returning to public office...
  • Colorado’s Anti-Trump Lawyer Tells SCOTUS: States Could Legally Void a Candidate 3 Days Before an Election

    02/10/2024 4:23:45 PM PST · by CFW · 50 replies
    Breitbart ^ | 2/10/24 | EZRA DULIS
    The lead attorney representing Colorado before the Supreme Court Thursday, arguing to remove Donald Trump from this year’s presidential ballots, admitted under questioning that his rationale could be applied to preemptively invalidate the outcome of an election. As Breitbart News senior legal contributor Ken Klukowski explained after the oral arguments, CO’s lawyer Jared Murray was ill-prepared for myriad objections to the state’s legal case, even from liberal justices like Ketanji Brown Jackson. One moment highlighted by Klukowski reveals the “danger” of Murray’s reasoning — that even a few days before a national election, a state legislature could bar a candidate...
  • Supreme Court: Justice Jackson 'Surprised' by Trump Lawyer's Approach

    02/09/2024 3:45:02 AM PST · by where's_the_Outrage? · 32 replies
    Newsweak ^ | Feb 8, 2024 | Sean O'Driscoll
    Supreme Court justice, Ketanji Brown Jackson, has said that a constitutional ban on insurrectionists taking office was created for state appointments, not the presidency, yet this has not been raised by Trump's lawyer in his ballot ban challenge. During oral arguments on Colorado's ban on Trump's inclusion on the state ballot, she told the former president's lawyer, Jonathan Mitchell, that she was surprised that the historical record was not a major pillar of his arguments for keeping Trump on the Colorado ballot. Brown Jackson, a Biden appointee, said that the historic record shows that the ban on insurrectionists under Section...
  • Be Prepared for a Unanimous Supreme Court Ruling in Trump’s Favor (Daily Beast not happy)

    02/08/2024 6:46:10 PM PST · by cotton1706 · 35 replies
    Daily Beast ^ | 2/8/24 | Shan Wu
    The only question left after today’s Supreme Court arguments over whether former President Donald Trump can be disqualified is how many different justices will write concurring opinions in what is likely to be a 9-0 decision in favor of Trump. Asked to review the decision by the Colorado Supreme Court that found Trump is disqualified under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, and removed him from that state’s presidential primary ballot, the questions by conservative and liberal justices alike showed that the high court has lost its way.
  • Democrat Lawyer Admits At Supreme Court That Only One Party Can Be Allowed To Rig Elections

    02/08/2024 2:00:57 PM PST · by Tench_Coxe · 17 replies
    There was never a purer demonstration of how traitorous Democrats are about “defending democracy,” or whatever corny phrase they like to use, than what just happened at the Supreme Court.At the very end of oral arguments in the Colorado case determining whether the state had the right to remove former President Donald Trump’s name from the 2024 ballot, Justice Samuel Alito asked the state’s solicitor general, Shannon Stevenson, what’s going to happen if other states “retaliate” by, say, removing Joe Biden from theirs. Elected officials in at least six states have suggested it as a course of action. (snip) In...
  • Colorado Lawyer Flails As Clarence Thomas Calmly Destroys His Trump Disqualification Argument

    02/08/2024 11:08:47 AM PST · by CFW · 73 replies
    The Federalist ^ | 2/8/24 | BY: SHAWN FLEETWOOD
    By merely asking for examples, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas calmly destroyed respondents’ argument for disqualifying former President Donald Trump from Colorado’s 2024 presidential primary ballot. The moment came on Thursday morning, during oral arguments on Trump’s appeal to overturn the Colorado Supreme Court’s Dec. 19 decision to keep him off the Centennial State’s 2024 primary ballot. Colorado’s highest court claimed in its ruling that the former president can be “disqualified” from holding office under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which stipulates that “[n]o person” who has previously sworn an oath as an officer of the United States...
  • Announcement of opinions for Thursday, Feb. 8 (complete)

    02/08/2024 9:34:20 AM PST · by CFW · 5 replies
    Scotusblog ^ | 2/8/24 | staff
    Department of Agriculture Rural Development Rural Housing Service v. Kirtz: The court unanimously held that a consumer can sue a federal agency for violating the terms of the Fair Credit Reporting Act of 1970. Holding: A consumer may sue a federal agency under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681n and 1681o for defying the terms of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Judgment: Affirmed, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Gorsuch on February 8, 2024. Facts of the case In 1970, Congress enacted the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) to regulate credit reporting and protect consumer privacy. The Act was amended in 1996...
  • Supreme Court justices indicate they’ll keep Trump on 2024 ballot in landmark case

    02/08/2024 9:26:57 AM PST · by conservative98 · 122 replies
    NY Post ^ | Feb. 8, 2024, 12:08 p.m. ET | Ryan King
    WASHINGTON — A clear majority of the Supreme Court’s nine justices signaled Thursday that they would overturn a Colorado ruling barring former President Donald Trump from the state’s Republican presidential primary ballot. The former president, 77, and his lawyers were appealing the Dec. 19 decision by Colorado’s Supreme Court that found Trump ineligible for the March 5 Republican contest by virtue of violating the Constitution’s so-called “Insurrection Clause” during the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot. Trump’s team argued separately that Congress — not the states — was tasked with enforcing the clause, that the provision did not apply to the...
  • Listen Live: Supreme Court hears case on 'insurrection,' Trump eligible to be president again

    02/08/2024 6:55:13 AM PST · by CFW · 457 replies
    Just the News ^ | 2/8/24 | staff
    The Supreme Court will hear arguments Thursday morning on whether former President Trump is eligible to be on the 2024 presidential ballot. Listen Live
  • Open Borders and Closed Courts: How the Supreme Court Laid the Seeds for the Immigration Crisis

    02/06/2024 7:34:08 PM PST · by chickenlips · 29 replies
    Jonathan Turley ^ | Feb. 5, 2024 | Jonathan Turley
    Below is my column in The Hill on the worsening situation at the Southern border and how the Supreme Court laid the seeds for this crisis over a decade ago. The courts have left few options for either the states or Congress in compelling the enforcement of federal law. Here is the column: The upcoming impeachment vote on Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has caused a deep rift even among his critics, including some Republican members of Congress. Many view Mayorkas as an unmitigated disaster as Homeland secretary. The massive numbers of migrants crossing the border has become a growing...
  • Coming to a City Near You: Why All of America Could See a San Francisco-Style Homeless Crisis

    02/05/2024 9:10:30 PM PST · by SeekAndFind · 21 replies
    Epoch Times ^ | 02/05/2024 | Michael Washburn
    The homeless crisis in America is set to come to a head with a Supreme Court ruling as early as this spring, in the case of Johnson v. City of Grants Pass, Oregon.The Supreme Court could—depending on what it decides—force changes in city ordinances and homeless policies across the country.The decision is one of the most anticipated in years for San Francisco and other cities facing legal challenges from homeless people and advocacy groups.At the heart of the case is the challenge by three homeless people to ordinances in the Oregon town of Grants Pass that prohibit homeless people “from...