Thread by @mjs_DC

The Supreme Court's FIRST opinion of the day is Lange v. California. In an opinion by Kagan, the court holds that pursuit of a fleeing misdemeanor suspect does not categorically justify a warrantless entry into the home.

There will be more decisions. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…

Yikes, though: KAVANAUGH joins the portion of Thomas' concurrence sharply criticizing the exclusionary rule and asserting that it never applies to evidence illegally obtained in "cases of fleeing suspects." supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…

The vote breakdown in Lange is pretty interesting, but both Kagan and Kavanaugh question whether Roberts' Fourth Amendment analysis is actually different, in practice, from the majority's. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…

The Supreme Court's SECOND decision of the day is in Collins v. Yellen. In an opinion by Alito, the court invalidates a law that prohibits the president from removing the director of the FHFA. But it's messy.

There will be more decision(s).
supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…

The current director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, Mark A. Calabria, is a Trump holdover who is actively subverting the agency's mission by attempting to deregulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Thanks to today's decision, Biden can now fire him. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…

If Biden is serious about removing Trump holdovers in the executive branch who are sabotaging their own agencies and fighting the president's agenda—and he seems to be!—then Mark Calabria will be out of a job by the end of today.

Crucially, the Supreme Court *refused* to give the plaintiffs their preferred remedy, which would've cost billions of dollars and thrown the housing market into turmoil. That's a very good thing. vox.com/22106497/supre…

Kagan accepts Seila Law as stare decisis and agrees to follow it here. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…

The Supreme Court's third decision of the day is in the case of the cursing cheerleader. In an opinion by Breyer, the court holds that schools "may have" an interest in regulating off-campus speech, those don't overcome the cheerleader's free speech rights.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…

Breyer refuses to censor the snap in question! Good for him. Only Thomas dissents.

There will be more opinion(s).
supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…

Breyer kind of creates a test for measuring public schools' interest in regulating off-campus speech, though it strikes me as fairly mushy. Love the Voltaire trivia, though. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…

The Supreme Court's fourth and FINAL decision of the day is in Cedar Point Nursery. In an opinion by Roberts, the court holds that a state law ensuring union access to agricultural workplaces constitutes a per se taking. This is a very extreme decision! supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…

Cedar Point is a major union-busting case with devastating ramifications for labor rights. The conservatives hold that guaranteed union access isn't a regulatory taking (which allows flexibility) but rather a "per se" taking, calling it a "physical invasion" of property.

In short, the Supreme Court's conservative supermajority just undid one of César Chávez's greatest accomplishments. This is an incredibly dark day for organized labor. A complete and total blowout against unions.

https://twitter.com/nikobowie/status/1327403762609238016

Because today's union-busting decision is fairly complicated:

(1) it won't get as much coverage as it deserves, and
(2) conservative white men will be OUT IN FORCE policing others' criticism of the ruling as overly emotional, biased, confused, and incomplete. (Ignore them!)

Incredibly, Roberts continually claims precedent requires this result in Cedar Point when the Supreme Court considered a challenge to *this California law* in 1976—and dismissed it "for want of a substantial federal question." nytimes.com/2021/03/20/opi…