Post

More from @JCNSeverino

Carrie Severino

@JCNSeverino

Aug 28

🚨 Remember radical Rachael Rollins? The disgraced Biden-nominated U.S. attorney for the District of Massachusetts who was only confirmed because Vice President Kamala cast the tie-breaking vote after the Senate deadlocked.

This was Rollins in 2021 berating and threatening to arrest local reporters for attempting to interview her outside her home about a misconduct allegation.

Rollins was infamously forced to resign after an investigation by the Biden-Harris Department of Justice into her misconduct found that she "falsely testified under oath" about leaking "sensitive DOJ" information to the press to help a Democrat win their primary campaign.

Senate Republicans like @TedCruz, @LeaderMcConnell, and @TomCottonAR fought hard against Rollins’ nomination because she was a soft-on-crime district attorney who was backed by other Soros-connected DAs and defund the police advocates.

Read 4 tweets

Carrie Severino

@JCNSeverino

Jul 1

🧵In United States v. Trump the Court crafted a sensible line regarding immunity that balances the historical presumption that presidents are subject to some potential liability for their actions with the president’s need to be able to exercise executive power under Article II without courts second-guessing his judgment.

The Court noted the threat to a President’s ability to do his job boldly if he were immediately faced with a bevy of lawsuits upon leaving office—something that until recently was almost unheard-of but may be part of the new normal in our current environment of lawfare and polarization.

Going forward, courts determining whether an action is covered by immunity will begin by assessing the President’s authority to take that action. Courts cannot consider a president's motives when making this assessment.

Today's decision says that such a “highly intrusive” inquiry would risk exposing even the most obvious instances of official conduct to judicial examination on the mere allegation of improper purpose.

Read 5 tweets

Carrie Severino

@JCNSeverino

Jun 28

🧵Good riddance to Chevron deference, which put a two-ton judicial thumb on the scale of government bureaucrats against the little guy.

This is a big victory for the rule of law.

In these cases, the National Marine Fisheries Service claimed without statutory authorization the right to force fishing boats to pay government monitor salaries of up to 20% of their revenues.

This is a Court that cares about the separate but coequal branches of government doing what they are supposed to do.

Congress, for its part, needs to do more of its job, articulating what the rules are itself instead of abdicating in favor of unelected bureaucrats who are not given that power under the Constitution.

Read 7 tweets

Carrie Severino

@JCNSeverino

Jun 21

Today in Rahimi, the Court did just what we expected.

It applied its Second Amendment test looking to historical firearm regulation benchmarks in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022) rather than the justices’ own policy preferences in deciding this case.

Thread 🧵

The question is whether Congress exceeded its constitutional authority when it enacted a prohibition on the possession of firearms by people who are subject to domestic violence restraining orders barring them from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child.

The circumstances of this case are particularly odd, because Rahimi was a clearly reckless man who had on five occasions been involved in shootings.

He shot at individuals and/or cars, including a constable’s vehicle. Yet he was not a convicted felon.

Read 10 tweets

Carrie Severino

@JCNSeverino

Jan 18

🧵Thread:

Notre Dame Law School’s @DerektMuller conducted a comprehensive survey of the ideological leanings of the biggest law firms’ pro bono work at the Supreme Court as a way of gaining insight into the firms’ own ideological leanings.

The findings published expose just how deep the left-wing bias really is inside prestigious law firms.

journals.law.harvard.edu/jlpp/ideologic…

Muller looked at pro bono amicus briefs submitted in Supreme Court merits docket cases.

Over the four years between October 2018 and June 2022, Muller counted 851 amicus briefs (of the 3,280 filed in total) that were likely submitted pro bono by firms among the top 100 measured by gross revenue (the “Am Law 100”).

Overall, 64% of those briefs were aligned with the liberal position versus 31% with the conservative position, while the balance were in support of neither party.

Read 9 tweets

Carrie Severino

@JCNSeverino

Jan 12

Chief Justice John Roberts will soon appoint a new director of the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts—the chief administrative officer of the federal courts (AO).

Recently the AO has inappropriately engaged in the Left's DEI practices so it’s imperative the next person chosen for the role refocuses on doing the actual job.

🧵Thread

supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/pre…

The AO came under fire last year when it was reported by @DailyCaller that it launched several DEI-focused initiatives in recent years, including launching its “Model Intern Diversity Program” in 2018 and even hiring a DEI officer in 2020.

dailycaller.com/2023/03/16/fed…

As is typically the case with DEI, only immutable characteristics matter.

Merit and diversity of thought are not major considerations under DEI-hiring practices.

And of course, the AO’s annual report selectively highlighted the stories of only Democrat-appointed judges.

uscourts.gov/statistics-rep…

Read 6 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

Carrie Severino

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @JCNSeverino

Carrie Severino

Carrie Severino

Carrie Severino

Carrie Severino

Carrie Severino

Carrie Severino

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!