In partial dissent, Walker, Trump appointee, says EPA has no authority at all to regulate coal under section 111 of Clean Air Act
Timing of this ruling could not be better for incoming Biden administration as it should make it easier for them to reverse course b/c they can decline to appeal the ruling
However, Walker's opinion is a forecast of what the 6-3 conservative Supreme Court could well do if Biden tries to revive the Obama-era Clean Power Plan
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Of note to Supreme Court:
-Travel ban to be revoked
-Plan to exclude noncitizens from census to be revoked
-Path to citizenship for dreamers proposed as part of immigration bill
-Border wall construction halted
-Undoing Remain in Mexico asylum plan could take time
Border wall & remain in Mexico cases are scheduled for argument next month but as both were based on executive actions the administration could presumably make both of them go away quite easily
There are also appeals pending at the Supreme Court on the Trump "public charge" rule for immigrants that the Biden administration could presumably withdraw assuming the court doesn't quickly act on them (which it could have done already and hasn't)
Supreme Court has docketed one of the most recent Trump petitions seeking to overturn the election results in Wisconsin: supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?fi…
The motion to expedite asks the court to require the other side to respond by ... Dec 30. The court did not do this
The motion also asks the court to consider tossing out election results without hearing oral argument
Pro-Trump lawyer Lin Wood, who has an election-related petition pending at the Supreme Court, has been posting a lot of weird tweets about Chief Justice Roberts (which I’m not linking to) that among other things appear to reference a conspiracy about Roberts' children
(deleted old version to make clear whose children I was talking about)
Somehow I don't think spreading conspiracy theories about the Chief Justice is considered a useful tactic for those hoping their case will be heard by the Supreme Court
Trump administration says the Supreme Court should take up a case filed directly at the court by the state of Texas challenging a California law that bars state-funded travel to states deemed to be anti-LGBT
The California law "transgresses constitutional principles that are designed to bind the States together
in a single Union," the Trump administration says supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/2…
The California law aimed at combating discrimination does in fact discriminate, Trump DOJ says. Against commerce
Trump campaign says it is filing second Supreme Court petition, this time challenging the election result in Wisconsin. The other one is challenging the election result in Pennsylvania
Campaign says it is asking for the case to be decided by Jan 6
The Supreme Court has yet to act on the Pennsylvania petition, including the first step of asking the other side to respond
It seems highly unlikely the Supreme Court would at this point take up these cases or that it will act on them by Jan 6, or even Inauguration Day for that matter