All things SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the US)

[EgonSpengler]

Reuters, 28 June 2022 - "U.S. Supreme Court takes aim at separation of church and state"

The conservative-majority U.S. Supreme Court has chipped away at the wall separating church and state in a series of new rulings, eroding American legal traditions intended to prevent government officials from promoting any particular faith.

In three decisions in the past eight weeks, the court has ruled against government officials whose policies and actions were taken to avoid violating the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment prohibition on governmental endorsement of religion - known as the "establishment clause."

Cornell Law School professor Michael Dorf said the court's majority appears skeptical of government decision-making premised on secularism.

"They regard secularism, which for centuries has been the liberal world's understanding of what it means to be neutral, as itself a form of discrimination against religion," Dorf said of the conservative justices.

It was President Thomas Jefferson who famously said in an 1802 letter that the establishment clause should represent a "wall of separation" between church and state. The provision prevents the government from establishing a state religion and prohibits it from favoring one faith over another.

In the three recent rulings, the court decided that government actions intended to maintain a separation of church and state had instead infringed separate rights to free speech or the free exercise of religion also protected by the First Amendment.

But, as liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in the Maine case, such an approach "leads us to a place where separation of church and state becomes a constitutional violation."

I don't even really have anything to add. Just watching the chickens coming home to roost, I guess.

 

[IglooDame]

I hope some Muslims, Wiccans, Hindus join him on a regular basis.

My exwife/roommate and I got into a rare bit of abrasion yesterday talking about this case. She is okay with a Muslim coach doing the same thing, but got a bit upset when I suggested a Satanist or an Atheist coach also do it. Wicca didn't occur to me, natch.

 

[JollyRoger]

I hope some Muslims, Wiccans, Hindus join him on a regular basis.

 

[Samson]

SCOTUS further erodes tribal sovereignty

The US Supreme Court has ruled that Oklahoma can prosecute non-Native Americans for crimes committed on tribal land when the victim is Native American.​

It seems to me this comes back to originalism only when it supports their view. There is no claim that those who originally signed these deals did not believe that they gave the Indians sovereignty over this land. The argument seems to be built purely on practicality: "That is because, with exceptions not invoked here, Indian tribes lack criminal jurisdiction to prosecute crimes committed by non-Indians such as Castro-Huerta, even when non-Indians commit crimes against Indians in Indian country." said Kavanaugh. So they are saying that because the Indians do not have laws for this sort of thing, they do not get sovereignty. But is that not exactly what giving them sovereignty over the land was all about?

 

[Arakhor]

It seems to me this comes back to originalism only when it supports their view.

Well, of course. Trump's judges were elected to be ideologues and to "legislate from the bench". Why are you surprised that they're not even pretending not to any more?

 

[Broken_Erika]

Supreme Court limits Biden's power to cut emissions

The US Environmental Protection Agency has lost its power to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at the federal level.

The landmark ruling by the US Supreme Court represents a major setback to President Joe Biden's climate plans.

His measures to address carbon dioxide pollution will now be limited.

The case against the EPA was bought by West Virginia on behalf of 18 other mostly Republican-led states and some of the nation's largest coal companies.

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62000742

 

[JollyRoger]

Certain right wingers have been having nocturnal emissions over this sort of ruling for years.

 

[Samson]

Supreme Court limits Biden's power to cut emissions

The US Environmental Protection Agency has lost its power to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at the federal level.

The landmark ruling by the US Supreme Court represents a major setback to President Joe Biden's climate plans.

His measures to address carbon dioxide pollution will now be limited.

The case against the EPA was bought by West Virginia on behalf of 18 other mostly Republican-led states and some of the nation's largest coal companies.

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62000742

How on earth can growing pot for yourself influence "interstate commerce", but producing globally significant pollutants not?

 

[Lexicus]

Certain right wingers have been having nocturnal emissions over this sort of ruling for years.

This isn't quite what they want, though, their dream is for the Court to wholly invalidate Congressional delegation to executive agencies, period.

 

[Arakhor]

As the Guardian puts it:

 

[Azem.Ocram]

The Supreme Court Justices elected by Presidents who lost the popular vote have put me in a situation where I'm seriously considering to emigrate. I qualify for Mexican citizenship and can use that as a spring board for Spain/EU citizenship.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Just in:

Biden can end Trump’s ‘Remain in Mexico’ program, supreme court rules

https://www.theguardian.com/law/202...gration-biden-trump-remain-in-mexico-decision

Ruling by 5-4 allows administration to terminate policy that forced
asylum seekers to return to Mexico while claims are considered

Chief Justice John Roberts handed down the ruling, which was joined by his
fellow conservative justice Brett Kavanaugh and the three liberals on the court.
The remaining four conservative justices dissented.

 

[EgonSpengler]

The Supreme Court Justices elected by Presidents who lost the popular vote[...]

And people still defend the Electoral College system by claiming it prevents a "tyranny of the majority." By which they mean it enables a tyranny of the minority, instead.

 

[El_Machinae]

The Supreme Court Justices elected by Presidents who lost the popular vote have put me in a situation where I'm seriously considering to emigrate. I qualify for Mexican citizenship and can use that as a spring board for Spain/EU citizenship.

Justices for whom the rules were literally changed.

With these lifespans, it's really hard to see what achievable steps are available to return the legitimacy of the court.

Removing them by proving (beyond a reasonable doubt) that they committed perjury during their Confirmation hearings might work, especially because they squeaked through on a technicality.

Stacking the number of judges with highly bipartisan choices would probably help with legitimacy.

There are tit-for-tat responses available too, but they'd just delay the crisis by eroding more legitimacy. It's might-makes-right at that point, so just stop pretending.

I'm 100% serious about arming if the courts won't protect against gerrymandering.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Justices for whom the rules were literally changed.

With these lifespans, it's really hard to see what achievable steps are available to return the legitimacy of the court.

Removing them by proving (beyond a reasonable doubt) that they committed perjury during their Confirmation hearings might work, especially because they squeaked through on a technicality.

Stacking the number of judges with highly bipartisan choices would probably help with legitimacy.

There are tit-for-tat responses available too, but they'd just delay the crisis by eroding more legitimacy. It's might-makes-right at that point, so just stop pretending.

I'm 100% serious about arming if the courts won't protect against gerrymandering.

I would assume that expanding the Court is politically impossible. I thought about whether Biden could expand the Court to 10 and appoint Merrick Garland, as a kind of theoretical compromise position. The problem is that, at this point, you have to have a cannon aimed at the GOP's head to even get them to compromise. But if you had a cannon aimed at their heads, you could probably do a lot more than appointing Garland. I presume charging anyone with lying to Congress or setting term limits for Justices would be much the same, that the GOP would simply stall and obstruct, so that you'd have to have a supermajority to so much as order lunch without any Republican support.

 

[El_Machinae]

The more I think about it, the more I think that Texas secession creates a lot of solution opportunities

 

[Samson]

I would assume that expanding the Court is politically impossible.

Why? It seems to me that there are so many cases that are so clearly against the public will that running on an explicit platform of packing the court would win a lot of votes.

 

[Birdjaguar]

The more I think about it, the more I think that Texas secession creates a lot of solution opportunities

Unless Beto O'Rourke can turn TX blue.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

With these lifespans, it's really hard to see what achievable steps are available to return the legitimacy of the court.

which specific reasoning given is less legitimate than, say, scotus setups of the past 20-30 years?

to illustrate, compare roe and 2nd amendment rulings to those that uphold civil forfeiture. which decisions were more or less legitimate, and why?

Stacking the number of judges with highly bipartisan choices would probably help with legitimacy.

???
that's like saying that knifing yourself in the leg will help with the bleeding.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Why? It seems to me that there are so many cases that are so clearly against the public will that running on an explicit platform of packing the court would win a lot of votes.

Win a lot of votes from whom? The people who are enjoying having the Court and, soon enough, Congress, aren't going to budge. If Biden is going to nominate new Justices, he'd have to do it before November for them to be confirmed by the Senate. If not, voters would have to return both the White House and the Senate to the Democrats in 2024.