Free Republic 1st Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $86,508
Woo hoo!! And we're now over 98%!! Less than $1.5k to go!! Thank you all very much!!

Keyword: scotus

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Supreme Court upholds new Pa. congressional district map, rejecting Republican challenge

    03/19/2018 1:07:07 PM PDT · by napscoordinator · 97 replies
    Philadelphia Daily Inquirer ^ | 19 March 2018 | by Jonathan Lai & Liz Navratil
    The new congressional map imposed by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will be used in the 2018 elections, after courts rejected two challenges Monday. First, a panel of federal judges Monday dismissed a lawsuit challenging the new map imposed by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, saying the Republican lawmakers who brought the challenge did not have standing — “We hold that the federal Elections Clause violations that the Plaintiffs allege are not the Plaintiffs’ to assert” — and that the case is not appropriate for the court to take up at this time. “In short, the Plaintiffs invite us to opine on...
  • Possible Justice Kennedy retirement would give Trump opportunity to tilt Supreme Court to right

    03/12/2018 9:51:09 PM PDT · by Innovative · 73 replies
    Fox News ^ | March 12, 2018 | Brooke Singman
    Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy might retire from the bench as early as this summer, a GOP senator said, and if true, President Trump would be able to nominate a justice who could tilt the nation’s highest court well to the right for the foreseeable future. "I believe that we're going to have another Supreme Court justice this year," Heller said. "I think that Kennedy is going to retire some time early summer. That being the case, Republicans are going to have another opportunity to put another Supreme Court justice in place, which I am hoping will get our base...
  • GOP Senator: It Looks Like We'll Have a SCOTUS Vacancy This Year

    03/12/2018 8:08:26 AM PDT · by Signalman · 13 replies
    TownHall ^ | 3/12/2018 | Guy Benson
    A holdover from last week, which is just too juicy to pass by without comment. This is intriguing stuff from Nevada's Dean Heller, the incumbent Senate Republican who Democrats are most bullish about replacing this November -- in a state Trump lost by nearly three points to Hillary Clinton last cycle. Many observers are framing this comment as a mere prediction, but is it? Here's what he told a legal group in Las Vegas on Friday: “Kennedy is going to retire around sometime early summer,” Heller predicted in Las Vegas last week, according to audio of an event he spoke...
  • GOP senator: Justice Kennedy is going to retire this summer

    03/09/2018 5:56:32 AM PST · by KavMan · 69 replies
    Sen. Dean Heller (R-Nev.) said in a speech last week he believes Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy will retire this summer, according to audio of the speech obtained by Politico. “Kennedy is going to retire around sometime early summer,” Heller said in the speech, according to Politico. “Which I’m hoping will get our base a little motivated because right now they’re not very motivated. But I think a new Supreme Court justice will get them motivated.” Heller is facing a tough GOP primary ahead of the 2018 midterms as Las Vegas businessman Danny Tarkanian challenges Heller for the Republican nomination.
  • Irony: Obama DOJ’s Immigration Suit Against AZ Laid Foundation For Trump’s Suit Against CA

    03/08/2018 1:28:40 PM PST · by Cheerio · 11 replies
    Western Journalism ^ | March 7, 2018 | Randy DeSoto
    President Donald Trump’s Justice Department filed a suit against the state of California on Tuesday modeled after one brought against Arizona by former President Barack Obama’s DOJ, which affirmed the federal government’s authority to set immigration policy. In 2010, then Attorney General Eric Holder sued Arizona over state law S.B. 1070, which — in accordance with federal law — required any aliens in the United States to have proper identification at all times, and empowered state law enforcement officers to attempt to determine immigration status during “lawful stop, detention or arrest” for other suspected crimes. Additionally, it barred state and...
  • White House wades into SCOTUS online sales tax case

    03/06/2018 2:50:44 PM PST · by Kaslin · 58 replies
    Hot ^ | March 6, 2018 | JAZZ SHAW
    In fairly short order, the Supreme Court is going to begin hearing arguments in the case of South Dakota v. Wayfair Inc. This case is being closely watched around the country because of the potential impact it will have on consumers as well as retailers, both traditional and online. The state of South Dakota is asking the Supremes to overrule their 1992 decision in Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, which held that states could not force online retailers to collect sales tax in other states where the company didn’t have a physical presence.Now the White House has weighed in on...
  • Justice Post Blindfold

    03/04/2018 8:06:57 AM PST · by Kaslin · 6 replies ^ | March 4, 2018 | Paul Jacob
    While the Supreme Court heard oral argument, last week, in Janus v. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), the court of public opinion focused not so much on the constitutionality of the law in question, i.e. justice, but instead on the partisan impact of the decision, i.e. politics. The case concerns Mark Janus, a child-care specialist for the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services, who refuses to join the union. Nonetheless, by state law, Janus is forced to pay “agency fees” to AFSCME. Those agency fees are 78 percent of what a union member pays in...
  • Public-Sector Unions Deserve To Be Destroyed

    03/02/2018 1:31:18 PM PST · by Kaslin · 17 replies ^ | March 2, 2018 | David Harsanyi
    How does a public-sector union work? Easy. First, the state creates a monopoly. The monopoly forces taxpayers to fund those workers, whether they do a good job or not. The union then coerces workers to pay dues regardless of whether or not they want to. Then the union uses those dues to help fund political advocacy that perpetuates their monopoly and the union's influence. So, in other words: racketeering. Among many significant problems with this arrangement, the most obvious is that it's an assault on freedom of association. If there is another organization in American life that has a license...
  • Janus v. AFSCME: Perhaps This Time The Court Will Take The First Amendment Seriously

    03/02/2018 5:59:22 AM PST · by reaganaut1 · 6 replies
    Forbes ^ | March 2, 2018 | George Leef
    On February 26, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Janus v. AFSCME. The issue in the case is whether public unions can compel workers who have declined to become members to pay them an “agency fee” that supposedly covers the union’s activities other than political action. Mark Janus is a public employee in Illinois and under state law, he must pay “his” union, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees a fee that is 78 percent of the full membership dues. That is the amount that the union says is the “fair share” of workers who decline...
  • Supreme Court questions state law banning political apparel at ballot box

    02/28/2018 10:59:30 AM PST · by jazusamo · 28 replies
    The Washington Times ^ | February 28, 2018 | Alex Swoyer
    The Supreme Court took a dim view Wednesday of Minnesota’s law banning voters from wearing political apparel to vote on Election Day, with liberal justices questioning where to draw the line and conservatives wondering who got to decide what is political in the first place. Minnesota said it has a legitimate state interest in ensuring decorum inside polling places and integrity during the election process. But Andrew Cilek, a Minnesota voter, contends the law is overly broad and almost prevented him from voting in the 2010 election because he wore a “Tea Party Patriots” T-shirt and a button asking poll...
  • Labor Thuggery at the Supreme Court

    02/27/2018 11:54:38 PM PST · by lowbuck · 16 replies
    Townhall ^ | 28 February 2018 | Betsy McCaughey
    Organized labor took off the gloves Monday, warning the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court that freeing public employees from mandatory union dues would lead to strikes and union violence. It was ugly. The Court heard oral arguments challenging laws in 22 states and the District of Columbia that force public employees to pay unions to represent them, even if they disagree with the union's demands and politics. Mark Janus, a child support specialist and public employee in Illinois, claims his First Amendment free speech rights are being violated when he is forced to pay money to a union --...
  • Supreme Court OKs Broad Immigrant Detention Powers

    02/27/2018 7:02:27 PM PST · by bitt · 42 replies
    Daily Caller ^ | 2/27/2018 | Kevin Daley
    Immigrants detained for removal proceedings may be held indefinitely and are not entitled to a bail hearing, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday. The ruling means that immigrant detainees, who are sometimes held for months and years on end, have no recourse to challenge their confinement. Justice Samuel Alito delivered the opinion for the court, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy. Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch joined most of Alito’s opinion, though they also wrote to say they do not believe the court had jurisdiction to hear the case.
  • Supreme Court rules immigrants can be detained indefinitely

    02/27/2018 11:01:58 AM PST · by jazusamo · 33 replies
    The Hill ^ | February 27, 2018 | John Bowden
    Immigrants can be held by U.S. immigration officials indefinitely without receiving bond hearings, even if they have permanent legal status or are seeking asylum, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday. In a 5-3 ruling Tuesday, with Justice Elena Kagan recusing, the court ruled that immigrants do not have the right to periodic bond hearings. The ruling is a defeat for immigration advocates, who argued that immigrants should not be held for more than six months at a time without such a hearing. The Supreme Court ruling follows a Trump administration appeal of a ruling by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals...
  • Union Members Voice Concern For Supreme Court Case At Pittsburgh March(VIDEO)

    02/26/2018 5:19:49 PM PST · by mdittmar · 7 replies
    KDKA-TV ^ | February 26, 2018 | KDKA-TV
    PITTSBURGH (KDKA) — Hundreds of local union members rallied in downtown Pittsburgh on Monday, then marched through city streets to voice their concern over a case being heard by the U.S. Supreme Court that they believe is funded by big business and could threaten unions.
  • To Preserve Gun Rights, We Must Replace the Second Amendment

    02/26/2018 2:30:54 PM PST · by Mafe · 49 replies ^ | Feb 26, 2018 | Justin Haskins
    As the Parkland, Fla., school shooting revealed yet again, when it comes to firearms, the differences between Americans has become too monumental to overcome. On one end of the political spectrum are left-wing politicians and pundits calling for the elimination of the Second Amendment and severe restrictions on virtually every kind of gun. On the other end are Americans who believe the best way to stop mass shootings is to have even more weapons available to the public, and for everyday citizens, including teachers, to be better armed so that they are capable of defending themselves and others from murderers...
  • When Does DACA Expire? The Supreme Court Just Gave Dreamers More Time

    02/26/2018 1:28:56 PM PST · by Innovative · 35 replies
    Time Mag. ^ | Feb. 26, 2018 | Maya Rhodan
    President Donald Trump set a deadline of March 5 for Congress to address the fate of hundreds of thousands of people brought to the U.S. illegally as children, but the Supreme Court just gave everyone more time. On Monday, the nation’s highest court decided not hear arguments in a California case that upended the Trump-imposed deadline, meaning the nearly 700,000 recipients of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program can continue to renew their applications while the case works its way through the legal system. White House spokesman Raj Shah said Monday that the program is “clearly unlawful”...
  • Supreme Court divided, Gorsuch mum in case that could deal blow to unions

    02/26/2018 9:16:44 AM PST · by jazusamo · 41 replies
    Fox News ^ | February 26, 2018 | Bill Mears, AP
    The Supreme Court was sharply divided Monday during high-profile arguments in a case that could deal a blow to public-sector employee unions across the country – and the justice seen as a key vote was not showing his hand. At issue are so-called “fair share” fees that nonmembers pay unions to help cover the costs of contract negotiations. Justices split on the issue 4-4 when it came up two years ago – but with Justice Neil Gorsuch now filling the vacancy left by the late Antonin Scalia, all eyes were on him Monday morning in Washington. Gorsuch, however, said nothing...
  • Breaking: Supreme Court refuses to hear Trump challenge on DACA

    02/26/2018 6:40:20 AM PST · by GIdget2004 · 198 replies
    The Hill ^ | 02/26/2018 | Lydia Wheeler and Rafael Bernal
    The Supreme Court on Monday delivered a blow to the Trump administration by refusing to hear the government's challenge to a lower court ruling that has temporarily blocked the administration from winding down the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. The Department of Justice’s request was rare in that it asked the Supreme Court to jump ahead of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in reviewing the case. The court typically will only bypass an appellate court when there’s an emergency involving foreign affairs, a serious separation of powers concerns or when it has already agreed to hear...
  • As Unions Sound Alarm on SCOTUS Labor Case, Here's What Wisconsin's Experience Shows

    02/26/2018 12:31:02 AM PST · by lowbuck · 12 replies
    Townhall ^ | 26 February 2018 | Chris Rochester
    The Supreme Court hears arguments Monday in the case of Mark Janus, a child support specialist from Illinois, who is suing AFSCME because he has no interest in financially supporting the union’s political activities. Since Janus is not a member of the union, he doesn’t pay the same amount in dues as union members. But thanks to a Supreme Court decision in 1977, he is forced to pay the union “agency fees,” feeding the coffers of an organization he wants nothing to do with. The high court will determine whether these agency fees are unconstitutional. Since freedom of association is...
  • The Supreme Court Has a Chance to Correct Itself on Unions

    02/25/2018 4:18:15 AM PST · by lowbuck · 17 replies
    NRO ^ | 25 February | George Will
    In Janus v. AFSCME, it could decisively affirm that workers have a right not to compel speech they disagree with. Overturning mistaken decisions is an occasional duty of the Supreme Court, whose noblest achievement was the protracted, piecemeal repudiation, with Brown v. Board of Education (1954) and subsequent decisions, of its 1896 ruling that segregated “separate but equal” public facilities were constitutional. This Monday, the court will hear oral arguments that probably will presage another overdue correction. The issue is: Are Mark Janus’s First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and association (which entails the freedom not to associate) violated...