BREAKING: Supreme Court takes a Second Amendment case challenging New York's restrictions on concealed public carry. supremecourt.gov/orders/courtor…
This case is likely to pave the way to the Supreme Court declaring a constitutional right to concealed public carry, overriding many state and local restrictions on the ability to bear concealed arms in public.
The Supreme Court sends a signal that it may let states intervene to defend Trump's "public charge" rule—which seeks to limit immigrants' access to public benefits—potentially throwing a wrench in the Biden administration's attempt to kill it through a court settlement.
The Supreme Court takes interest in a case involving Trump's Title X "gag rule" on abortion providers, asking the Biden administration—which is trying to rescind the rule—if it intends to keep enforcing it in the meantime. A bit of an ominous sign. supremecourt.gov/orders/courtor…
The Supreme Court grants two new cases in addition to the gun case: Houston Community College v. Wilson, which asks whether a governmental body can censure a member for protected speech, and U.S. v. Zubaydah, which may expand the scope of the state secrets privilege.
Alito, joined by Thomas, revives his quest to make SCOTUS take up original jurisdiction cases (specifically, legal disputes between states). This passage, highlighting both states' former status as independent nations, is certainly interesting! supremecourt.gov/orders/courtor…
In this specific case, Texas has challenged California's restrictions on state-sponsored travel to states with anti-LGBTQ laws—including, as Alito puts it, states with "laws or practices designed to protect religious liberty." 😉
Going back to the Second Amendment case the Supreme Court granted today, Democrats now have a clear choice between two concrete options: Allow SCOTUS to knock down state and local restrictions on concealed public carry in the midst of endless mass shootings, or expand the court.
Just last month, the conservative Judge Jay Bybee penned an extraordinary 127-page opinion canvassing the history of firearm laws and concluding that there is plainly no constitutional rights to public carry. Do not expect his view to prevail at SCOTUS. cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opin…
There has been more than one mass shooting per day in the U.S. in 2021 so far. Yet the Supreme Court seems to think this is a good time to expand concealed carry—which is associated with higher handgun homicide rates—and it's not hard to guess why! slate.com/news-and-polit…@Slate
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Note: The Supreme Court only takes a new class photo when a new justice joins OR every ten years, whichever comes first. This one was delayed because of COVID.
Also, this picture isn't the official portrait! The Supreme Court will reveal that at a later time. Great, fun background on this tradition from @adamliptak: nytimes.com/2018/12/10/us/…
Oops: When the Supreme Court heard oral arguments about juvenile life without parole in 2019, I wrote that there was a real chance Brett Kavanaugh might uphold Kennedy's legacy and preserve strict limits on JLWOP. I really, really wrong! slate.com/news-and-polit…
Sorry about that. I will say that in the intervening two years I have realized that Kavanaugh LOVES to assume a pose of moderation, reasonableness, compromise, and respect for precedent, then write opinions that abandon those principles while pretending to adhere to them.
My early optimism about Kavanaugh (here's another example) was fed by a belief that his words and tone at oral arguments would reflect the substance of his rulings. But I was very wrong. Kavanaugh performs moderation then implements Federalist Society law. slate.com/news-and-polit…
First opinion of the day is in Jones v. Mississippi. By a 6–3 vote with Kavanaugh writing, the court rules that a sentencer need NOT make a separate factual finding of permanent incorrigibility before sentencing a defendant under 18 to life without parole. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
Today's decision is a huge blow against the movement to end juvenile life without parole. As Sotomayor correctly notes in her dissent, the court "guts" precedents that had strictly limit JLWOP. This is a major defeat for JLWOP reform. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
Sotomayor's dissent is brutal. Kavanaugh claims to follow precedent limiting juvenile life without parole, but Sotomayor writes: "The Court is fooling no one. Because I cannot countenance the Court’s abandonment of Miller and Montgomery, I dissent." supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
The Supreme Court once again takes no action in Dobbs, the challenge to Mississippi's 15-week abortion ban. Order list here: supremecourt.gov/orders/courtor…
SCOTUS takes up just one new case, a very interesting dispute over Confrontation Clause, Hemphill v. New York. We'll finally learn where Kavanaugh and Barrett stand on the Confrontation Clause, which often divides conservative justices. scotusblog.com/case-files/cas…
Justice Sotomayor, alone, dissents from the Supreme Court's refusal to take up a case with these appalling facts. supremecourt.gov/orders/courtor…
By a 9–7 vote, the 6th Circuit lifts an injunction that had blocked an Ohio statute prohibiting doctors from terminating a pregnancy because of Down Syndrome. The decision effectively defies Roe by upholding a total ban on certain abortions pre-viability. opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/2…
The dissenters have thoughts on the conservatives' opinions:
•"self-devouring and logically untenable"
•"perverse and deplorable"
•"overly simplified and grossly inaccurate"
•"simply analytically unsustainable"
•"enormous and terrible ramifications"
Several conservative judges accused women of participating in eugenics when they terminate a pregnancy due to Due Syndrome. In addition to being profoundly offensive (please do not compare abortion to the Holocaust), this claim badly botches history. theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…
The Supreme Court uses an unsigned shadow docket opinion on Friday night to confirm that it has altered 3+ decades of precedent. This is not a plausible reading of Smith or Church of Lukumi. It’s a new rule—most-favored nation status for religion. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett have used the shadow docket to establish a new First Amendment rule: Whenever the government grants an accommodation to secular activities or establishments, it MUST give that same accommodation to churches and religious activity.
Anyway, these COVID orders strongly suggest that the Supreme Court will side with the anti-gay foster care agency in Fulton v. Philadelphia and force the city to fund it. The extreme sensitivity to alleged religious discrimination on display here does not bode well for Philly.