Free Republic

JUST IN - U.S. Supreme Court has voted to strike down Roe vs. Wade, an initial draft majority opinion by Justice Alito shows.

Saying it “stands firmly” in support of legalized abortion, a Washington, D.C. restaurant has canceled a pro-life group’s booking for its annual “March for Life Breakfast.”The group, Democrats for Life of America, scheduled the event at the K Street location of Busboys and Poets, a restaurant-bookstore chain, to coincide with the 49th annual March for Life on Jan. 21. “When our team learned the fundraising nature of the event in question, the decision was made to cancel it and refund all deposits to the event organizer,” a spokeswoman for Busboys and Poets told CNA. The chain “stands firmly on the...

The U.S. Supreme Court just left in place New York’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for healthcare workers that allows for no religious exemptions. On Monday, the nation’s highest court rejected, by a 6-3 vote, a request by 20 anonymous doctors and nurses, nearly all of whom are Catholic, to grant an injunction against the arguably unlawful mandate. Only Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch voted to grant the injunction. Typical of emergency injunction cases, none of the judges in the majority provided an explanation for their vote, but Gorsuch, joined by Alito, took them to task in a 14-page...

For the first time in a generation, there are six conservative justices on the Supreme Court. In time, this sextet will incrementally push the Court to the right. Yet, three of them are already sounding an alarm. Twice this term, Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch warned that Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett lack backbone. In an excessive force case, the conservative trio wrote that the two newest Justices were "unwilling to...bear[] the criticism that" denying the prisoner's appeal "would inevitably elicit." And in a religious liberty case, the Thomas-3 charged that Kavanaugh and Barrett lacked...

The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday the U.S. government has the right to indefinitely detain some immigrants, the Associated Press reported. Over the dissent of three liberal justices, the court held 6-3 that immigrants are not entitled to a hearing about whether they should be released while the government evaluates their claims... ...Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the court's majority opinion that "those aliens are not entitled to a bond hearing." The case stems from an immigration officer's determination that the immigrants had a "reasonable fear" for their safety if returned to their countries, setting in motion an evaluation process that...

Justice Samuel Alito has drawn attention for his fiery criticism of Supreme Court rulings, with some court watchers especially struck by the degree of barely concealed hostility he directed at fellow conservative justices. Alito voiced opposition last week as the court, now with six conservative justices and three liberals, handed a narrow win to a Catholic charity and spared ObamaCare from a GOP challenge. The two decisions signaled the court may not be moving as far or as fast to the right as some expected. “My guess is that he's frustrated with what appear to be political compromises to reach...

A suit brought by 18 states challenging the constitutionality of Obamacare was dismissed in the US Supreme Court by a vote of 7-2. The decision was written by Justice Stephen Breyer who decreed that “these states lack standing to challenge this law.” Justices John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Clarence Thomas concurred. Justices Samuel Alito and Paul Gorsuch dissented. The states had argued that since the tax penalty for not purchasing Obamacare was repealed during the Trump Administration the basis for the prior Supreme Court decision upholding the law was eliminated. Breyer rejected this...

NEW ELECTION EMERGENCY APPLICATION TO JUSTICE ALITO: Can A Clerk Overrule The Supreme Court?Posted in Uncategorized on December 31, 2020 by naturalborncitizen But first a recap of previous failed legal maneuvers concerning the election…Somebody please tell President Trump’s election lawyers there’s a federal statute – 3 U.S.C. § 1 – which requires all elections for Presidential Electors to be completed on Election Day. Then tell his lawyers – and the lawyers for Texas who failed to cite it properly – that 3 U.S.C. § 2 only applies when 3 U.S.C. § 1 is violated. Texas failed to mention 3 U.S.C....

In October, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court took it upon itself to hold that mail-in ballots could arrive after Election Day if they were mailed on November 3 and, almost as if to ensure fraud, that those mail-in ballots without postmarks would be presumed to have been timely. An eight-justice U.S. Supreme Court refused to consider the matter. After the election, though, Justice Alito ordered Pennsylvania segregate mail-in ballots, indicating further review. Republicans duly filed a request for review, and, on Tuesday, Pennsylvania filed its unimpressive opposition brief.Pennsylvania's opening argument is that there's no way the Supreme Court should decide whether...

ASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has rejected Republicans' last-gasp bid to reverse Pennsylvania's certification of President-elect Joe Biden's victory in the electoral battleground.The court without comment Tuesday refused to call into question the certification process in Pennsylvania.

BREAKING: Supreme Court denies request to stop certification of Pennsylvania vote, with no noted dissents.

On Sunday, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito moved up the deadline for officials in Pennsylvania to submit their responses to a lawsuit filed by U.S. Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.), in a bid to overturn the state’s election certification and toss out mail-in ballots. Alito, who oversees matters before the Third Circuit, which includes Pennsylvania, had originally called for response arguments from state officials to be filed by 4 p.m. on Wednesday, Dec. 9, but he changed that yesterday morning to Tuesday by 9 a.m., Law&Crime reported, adding the change is “crucial.” As noted by Kelly in his 50-page lawsuit...

<p>I’ve written twice thus far on the setting by Justice Alito of a deadline for the Pennsylvania state defendants to file their response to the Emergency Application for Injunctive relief filed by GOP Congressman Mike Kelly and other Plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs are seeking Supreme Court review of the dismissal of their complaint by the Penn. Supreme Court seeking to declare all “no excuse” mailed in ballots for the November 3 election to be invalid based on the claim that the Pennsylvania statute adopting that voting scheme violated a provision of the Pennsylvania State Constitution.</p>

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito asked officials in Pennsylvania to file briefs by Tuesday at 9 a.m. in response to a lawsuit filed by Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.) in a bid to overturn the state’s election results. Tuesday, notably, is the “safe harbor” deadline that requires controversies surrounding elections to be ended so states can choose their electors before the Dec. 14 meeting of the Electoral College. Alito initially called for response arguments by 4 p.m. Wednesday, Dec. 9, before it was changed. The Tuesday, Dec. 8 deadline could be a signal that the Supreme Court takes up Kelly’s case,...

Yesterday GOP Congressman Mike Kelly, GOP congressional candidate Sean Parnell, and five others filed an Emergency Application for a Writ of Injunction with Justice Samuel Alito of the Supreme Court, seeking to prevent Pennsylvania officials from taking any remaining steps to certify the election result or name Electors for Joe Biden to the Electoral College.This is a very interesting development and will give us a strong indication as to the willingness of the Supreme Court to enter into the election litigation brawl.Justice Alito has been the most outspoken member of the Court with regard to the election process in Pennsylvania,...

On Nov. 10, in Spell v. Edwards, a Louisiana federal district court dismissed a suit by megachurch pastor Tony Spell challenging the state's COVID-19 limits on worship services. Plaintiff filed an Emergency Application for an Injunction Pending Appeal with Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, contending: This case presents a threshold question that other applicants did not present to this Court in prior religious liberty challenges: Whether the First Amendment places the decision of whether to assemble solely within the jurisdiction of the Church and not the State.

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito has rejected a request from a Louisiana pastor who’d sought emergency relief from criminal charges he faces for the apparent crime of holding large church services in contravention of the state’s coronavirus rules. ... As the months passed, Spell wound up accruing three additional charges, making for a total of nine. Now fast-forward to last week, when he filed a motion with Justice Alito requesting an injunction against the charges he faces. ... For reasons that remain unclear, Alito outright rejected the request — meaning it won’t receive a full hearing in the Supreme Court...

New York's dictatorial governor, Andrew Cuomo, may have met his match. The Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn is asking the Supreme Court of the United States to strike down Cuomo's Oct. 6 executive order shutting down "houses of worship " in areas of Brooklyn and Queens, while allowing "essential" businesses, like pet stores, groceries and big-box stores to stay open. Cuomo insists he's battling COVID-19. The Diocese says Cuomo's making a value judgment that going to Target is "essential" but taking communion isn't. Truth is, for devout communicants who are already suffering social isolation during the pandemic, finding the church...

During a speech before the Federalist Society on Thursday, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito stated that “in certain quarters, religious liberty is fast becoming a disfavored right.” And is viewed by some as “not a cherished freedom, it’s often just an excuse for bigotry and it can’t be tolerated, even when there is no evidence that anybody has been harmed.” Alito began by cautioning that, aside from specific references to any Supreme Court cases, he isn’t commenting on the legality of coronavirus restrictions and isn’t making any statements as to whether the restrictions constitute good policy.He stated that coronavirus has...

Alito's request called for a response by Sat, 11/7, 2 pm