Posted on 06/23/2023 7:38:14 AM PDT by CFW
The Supreme Court issued opinions this morning at 10:00 a.m. There were eighteen cases remaining to be decided in the ten days remaining before the end of this term. You can go to this link to see this terms cases:
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/terms/ot2022/
(The cases in which the description begins with "holding" means it has already been decided. The cases which description begins with "issue" means the opinion on the case has not yet been released).
Today, the Court issued opinions on the following cases:
United States v. Hansen, United States v. Texas, Coinbase, Inc. v. Bielski, and Samia v. United States.
United States v. Hansen, the decision was by Justice Barrett and it was a 7-2 decision.
The case was a challenge to the constitutionality of a federal law that prohibits "encouraging or inducing" illegal immigration. The Ninth Circuit held that it was too broad but the Court today reverses.
(Excerpt) Read more at scotusblog.com ...
US v. Texas, the decision is by Kavanaugh and the vote is 8-1.
This is a challenge to the Biden administration’s immigration-enforcement policy. The court holds that the states challenging the policy do not have standing to challenge the policy.
Here is the court’s opinion.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-58_i425.pdf
Definitely keeping my eye out on the Affirmative Action case.
If any of the decisions FAVOR the left...we will be hearing about it for weeks to come!
Next is Coinbase v. Bielski, again from Justice Kavanaugh.
It is 5-4. Justice Jackson dissents, joined by Sotomayor and Kagan in full and by Thomas in part.
Decision here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-105_5536.pdf
The question in this case is whether, when a district court denies a motion to compel arbitration, it must put its pretrial and trial proceedings on hold while the appeal of that decision (to which the losing party has a statutory right) is ongoing. The answer is yes.
“The court holds that the states challenging the policy do not have standing to challenge the policy.”
Well then I’m sure that biden wont mind if a few hundred busloads of illegals are dropped off in delaware.
Go old communist supreme court. I bet they don’t realize that the time is coming real soon when there won’t be any constitution, and therefore there won’t be any need for a supreme court.
States don’t have standing? So exactly who the hell would. A private citizen doesn’t. So basically the supreme idiots said nobody can challenge Biden‘s policy. Literally nobody in America has standing to take him to court over it. Glad we run the Supreme Court. /s
Standing. This comes up too often. Maybe the court could share some guidance on who has standing. Over the past 15+ years it seems increasingly that no one has standing, making this more of a cop-out then meaningful claim.
Perhaps Congress, given oversight of departments etc?
“The case was a challenge to the constitutionality of a federal law that prohibits “encouraging or inducing” illegal immigration.”
For people who think there’s “No difference between the parties” consider what this case was about. It was about the right of human traffickers to bring people into this country ILLEGALLY, and the Democrats were all-in on this.
Keep that in mind when you sit out the next election because the Republican on the ticket was not ‘pure’ enough for you.
The final decision of the day is by Justice Thomas. It is Samia v. United States.
It is 6-3. Kagan dissents, joined by Sotomayor and Jackson. Jackson also has a separate dissent.
The Sixth Amendment’s confrontation clause guarantees a defendant in a criminal case the right to be “confronted with the witnesses against” him. The question in this case was whether Adam Samia’s Sixth Amendment right was violated in a murder-for-hire case by the introduction of a co-defendant’s confession that identified Samia as the person who pulled the trigger, but which replaced Samia’s name with neutral terms such as the “other person.”
The answer is that the Confrontation Clause does not bar the admission of the confession in these circumstances.
The link to the court’s opinion is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-196_p8k0.pdf
On a side note, Ginni Thomas was in Court today which got the left all excited hoping Thomas was going to announce his retirement. They were sorely disappointed.
The Court may announce opinions on Tuesday, June 27, according to SCOTUS website.
Yeah...
That pesky constitution thingies gets in the way of your personal opinions once again...
Lack of standing is what enables the court to stand off fifty suits by California to reinstitute Abortion On Demand with LawFare tactics.
Excellent!
Well put!
A comment from a writer at scotusblog:
“With today’s announcements, it would seem that Justices Thomas, Kavanaugh, Barrett and Jackson are close to/completely finished with their assigned opinions, having written 6, 7, 6 and 6 respectively.”
With some of the most important cases yet to be decided, if that is true that makes it more likely that the remaining decisions will be written by Roberts, Alito, Kagan, Sotomayor, or Gorsuch.
303 Creative (1st Amendment case) remains to be decided as well as the affirmative action issues in regards to college admissions, and the student loans forgiveness case.
If your choice is sitting at home or voting for the GOP candidate who may not be your first choice (or even second or third), think about the Supreme Court and how your decision can effect who will be seated on the nation’s highest Court.
There needs to be a way for the Supreme Court to have to say who DOES have standing. I’m sick of this crap.
I’m lazy. I admit it.
Have they made a decision on the NC case involving who is allowed to make election laws? IE…per the constitution, the state legislature makes the rules, not the SOSs, courts, Governors, nor Paul Elias
The court holds that the states challenging the policy do not have standing to challenge the policy.
Congress alone.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.