As expected, the nominee is Judge Amy Coney Barrett. More than any nomination in history, this is a celebration of conservative feminists. It comes close to the day of the confirmation of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. thehill.com/opinion/judici…
...While they reached very different conclusions on constitutional interpretations, Justice Ginsburg and Judge Barrett have striking similarities. Both graduated at the top of their law school classes. Both went into teaching at leading law schools. Both joined the bench ...
...with deeply rooted views of the law and its role in society. Both also publicly discussed the importance of their faith to their careers and their convictions.
Barrett's nomination is an important moment in another respect. I have long criticized the near monopoly held by Harvard, Yale, and Columbia in modern nominations. A graduate of Notre Dame, Barrett brings a long needed educational diversity to the court. jonathanturley.org/2010/05/12/sup…
This will likely prove the single most consequential and transformative nomination in the modern history of the Supreme Court. A long line of cases dangle on a 5-4 majority. The common denominator in those cases was Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
..The hyperbole is now approaching hysteria. Speaker Pelosi has declared that a vote for this nominee is a vote to kill the ACA. That is simply untrue. The ACA turns on severability, an issue that cuts across ideological lines. Kavanaugh just issued a pro-severance decision...
...The individual mandate (which was eliminated years ago) is most likely to be severed from the rest of the ACA. Indeed, it is not clear that Barrett would take an opposing view on severability. The most likely count, even without Ginsburg's vote, would be to preserve . . .
... the rest of the ACA. Yet, Democratic leaders are declaring the imminent death of the ACA and Hillary Clinton is bizarrely claiming a "diabolical" anti-ACA plot behind this nomination. Many web sites seem like a communal primal scream session disconnected to the actual case.
Sen. Hirono just refused to say whether Barrett is "qualified." She stated that she will vote on how Barrett is expected to vote. However, she said that she will refuse to meet with her.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Abrego Garcia is reportedly on his way back to the United States. Some of us argued from the outset that this was the best course. The basis for his removal is overwhelming and, once this process is completed, he is likely to find himself on another flight back to El Salvador...
...However, this may be a case of being careful what you ask for. Abrego Garcia will be brought back to face criminal charges in allegedly trafficking narcotics, guns, and people...
...A grand jury has issued the charges against Abrego Garcia. It offers the Administration a way to end the dispute over his removal while reframing this case as now a criminal prosecution.
We have our first opinion today. It is unanimous and authored by Justice Jackson in the reverse discrimination case of Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services. ...supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf…
...Significant ruling that a member of a majority group does not have the added burden of showing "background circumstances." Remand for further consideration...
..."We hold that this additional “background circumstances” requirement is not consistent with Title VII’s text or our case law construing the statute."
Project Veritas may have just sealed the fate of David Hogg with the DNC, if the new videotape is verified. With the vote scheduled for June, Hogg allegedly stated that Jill Biden's Chief of Staff Anthony Bernal effectively ran the White House...
...I cannot imagine that the comments will go over well with the DNC, particularly the Biden allies. It will also fuel growing demands in both the House and the Senate for an investigation into the alleged cover-up of Biden's alleged incapacity.
...The greatest risk of these investigations will be tripping the wire on false statements as former Biden aides are pulled into interviews and testimony. With a supportive administration, such charges now come with a far more credible threat of prosecution for defense counsel.
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani of Massachusetts has enjoined President Trump's effort to end the "parole" status of hundreds of thousands of immigrants by President Biden. The case can now be appealed, but there is one interesting positive element for the Administration...
...The Court certified a national class action as the basis for the injunction. That is precisely what the Trump Administration argued was the proper way to proceed in these cases. The liberal justices suggested that it is too cumbersome and slow a process...
...Chief Justice Roberts noted that such certification can occur on an expedited basis. Here, the court showed that it can be done as the basis for a national injunction. That is in contrast to individual district judges imposing such universal or national injunctions in cases involving a handful of litigants.
In what will add even greater controversy to an already controversial case, U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman, 85, had been assigned to preside over the trial of Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan. Adelman has a history of injudicious and biased political commentary...
...Judge Adelman attacked Chief Justice Roberts as lying in his confirmation hearing and described Trump as "an autocrat" who is "disinclined to buck the wealthy individuals and corporations who control his party."...
...He was previously reversed and rebuked in a voter ID case after largely ignoring controlling precedent. For many conservatives, they may see little difference between the two judges in the case in terms of their demeanor and detachment.
The Supreme Court delivered a win for the Administration today by lifting the injunction on the move to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) protections for hundreds of thousands of people allowed into the country by Biden from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela...
...A California district judge had blocked the move and the Ninth Circuit refused to lift the injunction. It will now go back to the Ninth Circuit for the resolution of the merits. Only Justice Jackson dissented in the order today... documentcloud.org/documents/2594…
...Notably, while the statute states that this special status could be assigned on a “case-by-case” basis, the Biden Administration unlawfully adopted a wholesale policy granting temporary parole to hundreds of thousands of individuals from four countries — Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela (“CHNV”) ...