Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

LIVE: Opinions of the [U.S. Supreme] Court - 2019 (9 Jul 2020 rulings)
Supreme Court of the U.S. ^ | July 9 | SCOTUS

Posted on 07/09/2020 7:10:05 AM PDT by PghBaldy

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last
First released is McGirt v. OK

5-4, with Gorsuch writing the opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-9526_9okb.pdf

1 posted on 07/09/2020 7:10:05 AM PDT by PghBaldy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: PghBaldy

I guess blacks ain’t going to be getting their “40 acres and a mule” in Oklahoma.


2 posted on 07/09/2020 7:14:33 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("We're human beings ... we're not f#%&ing animals." -- Dennis Rodman, 6/1/2020)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PghBaldy

Trump v. Vance

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/19-635_o7jq.pdf

Last page of ruling abainst Trump:

4 TRUMP v. VANCE
ALITO, J., dissenting
the most exceptional cases.’” Id., at 692. There is no question that a criminal prosecution holds far greater potential
for distracting a President and diminishing his ability to
carry out his responsibilities than does the average civil
suit.
* * *
The subpoena at issue here is unprecedented. Never before has a local prosecutor subpoenaed the records of a sitting President. The Court’s decision threatens to impair
the functioning of the Presidency and provides no real protection against the use of the subpoena power by the Nation’s 2,300+ local prosecutors. Respect for the structure of
Government created by the Constitution demands greater
protection for an institution that is vital to the Nation’s
safety and well-being.
I therefore respectfully dissent.


3 posted on 07/09/2020 7:15:10 AM PDT by PghBaldy (12/14 - 930am -rampage begins... 12/15 - 1030am - Obama's advance team scouts photo-op locations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PghBaldy
"In a footnote, Roberts notes that the "daylight between our opinion" and the Thomas "dissent" is "not as great as that label might suggest." "We agree that Presidents are neither absolutely immune from state criminal subpoenas nor insulated by a heightened need standard." Here's some key language: "We agree that Presidents may challenge specific subpoenas as impeding their Article II functions." "And although we affirm while Justice Thomas would vacate, we agree that this case will be remanded to the District Court."" https://www.scotusblog.com/ Clinton v. Jones was wrongly decided years ago, IMO. I have always thought it so.
4 posted on 07/09/2020 7:20:57 AM PDT by PghBaldy (12/14 - 930am -rampage begins... 12/15 - 1030am - Obama's advance team scouts photo-op locations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PghBaldy

Re: 3:

7-2.

I think it was a close call. The future peril is that now local prosecutors will use this care as the wedge to subpoena future President’s. The future is litigious as far as the eye can see!


5 posted on 07/09/2020 7:22:17 AM PDT by Fury (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

CONGRESS BLOCKED......AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA


6 posted on 07/09/2020 7:26:22 AM PDT by basalt (w.h.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: PghBaldy

we agree that this case will be remanded to the District Court.


So, reading elsewhere that this case will go back and eventually end up in front of the SCOTUS again? Is there any chance at all these are released before the election?


7 posted on 07/09/2020 7:28:07 AM PDT by NImerc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: All

Roberts courts punts again, two useless decisions.
The 7-2 is troubling. Now a politician who dislikes you can get your records without proof of a crime and fabricate one.


8 posted on 07/09/2020 7:30:31 AM PDT by newnhdad (Our new motto: USA, it was fun while it lasted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: PghBaldy

The real enemy of America is not the man sitting in the White House. Its true enemies are the people that sit on our courts, the control freaks who populate our federal government, and the idiots in Congress and the media. All these entities are destroying the country just to get one man! It’s beyond shame that so many Americans can’t see what’s in store for all of us if they vote for Biden and his ilk.


9 posted on 07/09/2020 7:33:08 AM PDT by dowcaet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: PghBaldy

Roberts dissent eviscerates the majority ruling pretty unequivocally.


10 posted on 07/09/2020 7:34:32 AM PDT by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PghBaldy

19-715 Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP

Another Trump case: 7-2 against Trump; case continues with lower courts

THOMAS, J., and ALITO, J., filed dissenting opinions.

“DONALD J. TRUMP, ET AL., PETITIONERS
19–715 v.
MAZARS USA, LLP, ET AL.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
DONALD J. TRUMP, ET AL., PETITIONERS
19–760 v.
DEUTSCHE BANK AG, ET AL.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
[July 9, 2020]
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS delivered the opinion of the
Court.
Over the course of five days in April 2019, three committees of the U. S. House of Representatives issued four subpoenas seeking information about the finances of President
Donald J. Trump, his children, and affiliated businesses.
We have held that the House has authority under the Constitution to issue subpoenas to assist it in carrying out its
legislative responsibilities. The House asserts that the financial information sought here—encompassing a decade’s
worth of transactions by the President and his family—will
help guide legislative reform in areas ranging from money
laundering and terrorism to foreign involvement in U. S. “

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/19-715_febh.pdf


11 posted on 07/09/2020 7:35:29 AM PDT by PghBaldy (12/14 - 930am -rampage begins... 12/15 - 1030am - Obama's advance team scouts photo-op locations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PghBaldy

Its going back to the lower court and Trump team can make further arguments.


12 posted on 07/09/2020 7:41:10 AM PDT by KeyLargo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PghBaldy

Lol, the supreme Court proves again that it is a completely broken institution. No one would have agreed to the constitution if this was thought to be the rule. How do i know that. Commonwealth sense logic. Not the type of people and not the type of era to accept giving their privacy uo.


13 posted on 07/09/2020 7:42:13 AM PDT by wiseprince
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: PghBaldy

Let the leaking of grand jury proceedings begin!


14 posted on 07/09/2020 7:42:20 AM PDT by Eleutheria5 ("SHUT UP!" he explained.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: lepton

“Roberts dissent eviscerates the majority ruling pretty unequivocally.”

Roberts voted with the majority, not against the majority.
Only Thomas and Alito dissented.


15 posted on 07/09/2020 7:46:39 AM PDT by FR_addict
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: PghBaldy
NO Justice(s) retirements announcements

...Disposition of items considered at conference yesterday will be reflected on an Order List that will be released at 2 p.m. today...

https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/press/pressreleases/pr_07-09-20

16 posted on 07/09/2020 7:49:10 AM PDT by PghBaldy (12/14 - 930am -rampage begins... 12/15 - 1030am - Obama's advance team scouts photo-op locations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PghBaldy; ransomnote; LucyT; Swordmaker
SO with McGirt, did anyone mention that McGirt was convicted of raping a 4-year-old?

He was challenging his conviction on the grounds that the Indian Tribe should've had jurisdiction.

So the Supreme Court just gave away half of a US State to protect a pedophile?

17 posted on 07/09/2020 8:03:26 AM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change with out notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FR_addict

“Roberts dissent eviscerates the majority ruling pretty unequivocally.”

Roberts voted with the majority, not against the majority.
Only Thomas and Alito dissented.


Different ruling. I was referring to the Oklahoma case the poster linked.


18 posted on 07/09/2020 8:09:35 AM PDT by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: basalt

Can hardly wait for Pelosi, Scummie, Schitt and Tubby Naddy to perform for the media.


19 posted on 07/09/2020 8:41:39 AM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: PghBaldy
From the President's attorney:

We are pleased that in the decisions issued today, the Supreme Court has temporarily blocked both Congress and New York prosecutors from obtaining the President’s financial records. We will now proceed to raise additional Constitutional and legal issues in the lower courts.

https://twitter.com/JaySekulow/status/1281242394323755008
20 posted on 07/09/2020 9:07:21 AM PDT by rxsid (HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN? - Leo Donofrio (2009))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson