SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

User avatar
BlendedUnicorn
Hardening Democrat
Posts: 11866
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:13 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by BlendedUnicorn » Mon May 11, 2020 7:28 pm

Nony wrote:
Mon May 11, 2020 6:51 pm
Yeah, I'm not the biggest Gorsuch fan but I do think sitting on the Tenth Circuit makes him much better informed about Indian Country stuff, which people in the northeast just generally have NO frame of reference for (unless they have personal connections or make a real effort to inform themselves, of course).

I also really like the point a couple of tweets down that the justices asked about race a bunch of times, and Indian Country isn't about race, it's about a political relationship with the U.S.
I guess this is just how all sides argued the case (and have to argue it given the justices on the court) but it was just really striking how everyone just kind of accepted the premise that the whole question of tribal sovereignty was hyper focused on the exact way a bunch of racist white dudes specifically intended to disenfranchise Creek Nation.

User avatar
ymmv
pregnant with a better version of myself
Posts: 17570
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 12:24 am
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by ymmv » Tue May 12, 2020 9:06 pm

x-post
ymmv wrote:
Tue May 12, 2020 9:06 pm
Aimee Stephens died ☹️

User avatar
BlendedUnicorn
Hardening Democrat
Posts: 11866
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:13 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by BlendedUnicorn » Thu May 14, 2020 10:00 pm

Going to go ahead and say Sineneng-Smith is the worst unanimous decision I can think of. Appellate court wasn't trying to send someone to jail for violating an unconstitutional statute and SCOTUS is going to say no because the defendant was represented by shitty counsel?

e. and just l o fucking l at SCOTUS acting like party presentation is some sort of binding restraint

User avatar
Nony
Posts: 7192
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:34 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by Nony » Thu May 14, 2020 10:37 pm

You think judges, not parties, deciding what the issues should be is really going to help defendants in the long run?

User avatar
BlendedUnicorn
Hardening Democrat
Posts: 11866
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:13 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by BlendedUnicorn » Sun May 17, 2020 8:08 pm

Nony wrote:
Thu May 14, 2020 10:37 pm
You think judges, not parties, deciding what the issues should be is really going to help defendants in the long run?
I think there’s a pretty obvious concern that the quality of defense lawyers is far more uneven than the quality of prosecutors and that forcing judges to only consider the arguments put forward by the parties systematically favors the government (and, in practice, judges considering rule 29 motions seem to be more than free to look beyond the government’s framing of the case to uphold convictions).

And I think this concern is heightened if bad defense lawyering means enforcement of an unconstitutional statute, which appears to be the case here. I think the court could have easily crafted a narrow holding here that gave judges space to consider constitutional issues without giving them free reign to raise legal arguments.

User avatar
Nebby
Posts: 9089
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:24 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by Nebby » Tue May 26, 2020 2:28 pm

ymmv wrote:
Tue May 12, 2020 9:06 pm
x-post
ymmv wrote:
Tue May 12, 2020 9:06 pm
Aimee Stephens died ☹️
I was worried about how this could potentially sideline a decision, but that was cured today (still possible it's a bad decision on the merits...)

User avatar
Nebby
Posts: 9089
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:24 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by Nebby » Mon Jun 01, 2020 10:26 am


User avatar
Nebby
Posts: 9089
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:24 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by Nebby » Mon Jun 15, 2020 10:05 am


User avatar
BlendedUnicorn
Hardening Democrat
Posts: 11866
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:13 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by BlendedUnicorn » Mon Jun 15, 2020 10:28 am

If you put a gun to my head and said which Trump appointee will not only join but author a landmark decision finding that Title VII protections apply to LGBT people I don't think I would have picked Gorsuch.

User avatar
Nony
Posts: 7192
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:34 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by Nony » Mon Jun 15, 2020 11:12 am

😂 I'm not sure I would have, either, but I'm so glad he did.

User avatar
dcc617
Posts: 1225
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 8:04 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by dcc617 » Mon Jun 15, 2020 11:32 am

It's not a narrow decision either.
From the ordinary public meaning of the statute’s language at the time of the law’s adoption, a straightforward rule emerges: An employer violates Title VII when it intentionally fires an individual employee based in part on sex. It doesn’t matter if other factors besides the plaintiff ’s sex contributed to the decision. And it doesn’t matter if the employer treated women as a group the same when compared to men as a group. If the employer intentionally relies in part on an individual employee’s sex when deciding to discharge the employee—put differently, if changing the employee’s sex would have yielded a different choice by the employer—a statutory violation has occurred. Title VII’s message is “simple but momentous”: An individual employee’s sex is “not relevant to the selection, evaluation, or compensation of employees.” Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U. S. 228, 239 (1989) (plurality opinion).

The statute’s message for our cases is equally simple and momentous: An individual’s homosexuality or transgender status is not relevant to employment decisions. That’s because it is impossible to discriminate against a person for being homosexual or transgender without discriminating against that individual based on sex.

User avatar
ymmv
pregnant with a better version of myself
Posts: 17570
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 12:24 am
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by ymmv » Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:26 pm

Actually stunned.

User avatar
Kümmel
Posts: 892
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 9:07 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by Kümmel » Mon Jun 15, 2020 2:30 pm

Kavanaugh's separate dissent is a joke-- "I agree with Alito but won't join that opinion because his homophobia is a little more overt than I want to be associated with"

User avatar
Kümmel
Posts: 892
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 9:07 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by Kümmel » Mon Jun 15, 2020 2:43 pm

god I fucking hate Kavanaugh
It also rewrites history. Seneca Falls was not Stonewall. The women’s rights movement was not (and is not) the gay rights movement, although many people obviously support or participate in both. So to think that sexual orientation discrimination is just a form of sex discrimination is not just a mistake of language and psychology, but also a mistake of history and sociology.

User avatar
dcc617
Posts: 1225
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 8:04 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by dcc617 » Thu Jun 25, 2020 7:52 pm

The asylum case today is pretty bad. The opinion is originalism at its worst.

User avatar
Nebby
Posts: 9089
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:24 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by Nebby » Mon Jun 29, 2020 10:21 am

Big


User avatar
Nebby
Posts: 9089
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:24 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by Nebby » Mon Jun 29, 2020 10:21 am


User avatar
BlendedUnicorn
Hardening Democrat
Posts: 11866
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:13 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by BlendedUnicorn » Mon Jun 29, 2020 9:50 pm

Nebby wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 10:21 am
Big

Just lol @ 4 justices shaking their dicks at stare decisis.

User avatar
dcc617
Posts: 1225
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 8:04 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by dcc617 » Mon Jul 06, 2020 12:49 pm

I have 4 theories about why the Trump tax return decision is taking so long:

1) Roberts wants them to be unanimous/8-1 and is trying to come up with a decision that can be signed on by everyone.

2) Roberts is trying to write a decision where Trump wins and is struggling because there's no legal argument for Trump.

3) Roberts is going to decide against Trump but is set on dragging out the process so that the returns won't be available before the election.

4) Trump has told Roberts that he doesn't care what the decision is, he's not going to let the returns be released.

User avatar
BlendedUnicorn
Hardening Democrat
Posts: 11866
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:13 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by BlendedUnicorn » Mon Jul 06, 2020 1:35 pm

dcc617 wrote:
Mon Jul 06, 2020 12:49 pm
I have 4 theories about why the Trump tax return decision is taking so long:

1) Roberts wants them to be unanimous/8-1 and is trying to come up with a decision that can be signed on by everyone.

2) Roberts is trying to write a decision where Trump wins and is struggling because there's no legal argument for Trump.

3) Roberts is going to decide against Trump but is set on dragging out the process so that the returns won't be available before the election.

4) Trump has told Roberts that he doesn't care what the decision is, he's not going to let the returns be released.
Re: 4, they're third party subpoenas, he can't not let them do shit.

User avatar
beep
Posts: 3094
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:05 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by beep » Mon Jul 06, 2020 1:41 pm

re: 1) my clerkship was just a lowly CoA, but i'd be surprised if voting *after* drafting ops was the norm on scotus. i'm sure votes change from time to time, but if there's an 8-1 or 9-0, i'd imagine the contours of that decision were decided at conference first.

re: 2): cmon lol.

User avatar
Nony
Posts: 7192
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:34 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by Nony » Mon Jul 06, 2020 1:50 pm

BlendedUnicorn wrote:
Mon Jul 06, 2020 1:35 pm
dcc617 wrote:
Mon Jul 06, 2020 12:49 pm
I have 4 theories about why the Trump tax return decision is taking so long:

1) Roberts wants them to be unanimous/8-1 and is trying to come up with a decision that can be signed on by everyone.

2) Roberts is trying to write a decision where Trump wins and is struggling because there's no legal argument for Trump.

3) Roberts is going to decide against Trump but is set on dragging out the process so that the returns won't be available before the election.

4) Trump has told Roberts that he doesn't care what the decision is, he's not going to let the returns be released.
Re: 4, they're third party subpoenas, he can't not let them do shit.
Also, this is probably going to sound naive, but I can't really see Roberts, like, taking a call from Trump about the case.

(Plus, oral arguments were in May. Is early July really "taking so long"? In 2017 the average was 91.something days between argument and the opinion being issued.)

User avatar
dcc617
Posts: 1225
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 8:04 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by dcc617 » Mon Jul 06, 2020 1:51 pm

Well y'all aren't any fun.

User avatar
dcc617
Posts: 1225
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 8:04 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by dcc617 » Mon Jul 06, 2020 1:58 pm

And either way the decision is going to be a huge clusterfuck.

User avatar
BlendedUnicorn
Hardening Democrat
Posts: 11866
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:13 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by BlendedUnicorn » Mon Jul 06, 2020 1:59 pm

honestly it would be great if the court found some way to send it back for reconsideration or something like that. Trump's running into a landslide defeat and there's no way his tax returns contain overt evidence of law breaking -- more likely it's tax lawyer nerd porn that will amount to a lot of boundary pushing and gray area that means almost nothing out of context. Getting them released would be a distraction.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests