Fundraising for 2020/2021: Currently at $1580. Fundraising has begun, see the global post for options. Paypal Donation Links US dollars CDN Dollars

SCOTUS Watch

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
malchior
Posts: 12207
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by malchior »

I don't think anything has been announced on the final 5 cases. I saw a pundit indicate that this still isn't in weird territory from a timeline perspective between when the case is argued and an opinion is released. It was just later than usual overall. An explanation offered was that they had taken on a large case load and remote work seemed to draw out the calendar.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 35101
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo »

malchior wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:02 pm
I don't think anything has been announced on the final 5 cases. I saw a pundit indicate that this still isn't in weird territory from a timeline perspective between when the case is argued and an opinion is released. It was just later than usual overall. An explanation offered was that they had taken on a large case load and remote work seemed to draw out the calendar.
Yeah, I'm just trying to get a sense of when they are going to release the next batch of opinions. Presumably not today, at least.

malchior
Posts: 12207
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by malchior »

El Guapo wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:04 pm
malchior wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:02 pm
I don't think anything has been announced on the final 5 cases. I saw a pundit indicate that this still isn't in weird territory from a timeline perspective between when the case is argued and an opinion is released. It was just later than usual overall. An explanation offered was that they had taken on a large case load and remote work seemed to draw out the calendar.
Yeah, I'm just trying to get a sense of when they are going to release the next batch of opinions. Presumably not today, at least.
The experts seem to be saying they announce next day schedule/drop opinions in the morning so don't expect anything tomorrow at this point. It could be Thursday, etc.

malchior
Posts: 12207
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by malchior »

malchior wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:08 pm
El Guapo wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:04 pm
malchior wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:02 pm
I don't think anything has been announced on the final 5 cases. I saw a pundit indicate that this still isn't in weird territory from a timeline perspective between when the case is argued and an opinion is released. It was just later than usual overall. An explanation offered was that they had taken on a large case load and remote work seemed to draw out the calendar.
Yeah, I'm just trying to get a sense of when they are going to release the next batch of opinions. Presumably not today, at least.
The experts seem to be saying they announce next day schedule/drop opinions in the morning so don't expect anything tomorrow at this point. It could be Thursday, etc.
LOL. As is apropos, they just announced that opinions will be released tomorrow at 10 AM.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 35101
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo »

malchior wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 1:11 pm
malchior wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:08 pm
El Guapo wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:04 pm
malchior wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:02 pm
I don't think anything has been announced on the final 5 cases. I saw a pundit indicate that this still isn't in weird territory from a timeline perspective between when the case is argued and an opinion is released. It was just later than usual overall. An explanation offered was that they had taken on a large case load and remote work seemed to draw out the calendar.
Yeah, I'm just trying to get a sense of when they are going to release the next batch of opinions. Presumably not today, at least.
The experts seem to be saying they announce next day schedule/drop opinions in the morning so don't expect anything tomorrow at this point. It could be Thursday, etc.
LOL. As is apropos, they just announced that opinions will be released tomorrow at 10 AM.
I will start bracing myself immediately.

User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 20009
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Pyperkub »

El Guapo wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 1:24 pm
malchior wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 1:11 pm
malchior wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:08 pm
El Guapo wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:04 pm
malchior wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:02 pm
I don't think anything has been announced on the final 5 cases. I saw a pundit indicate that this still isn't in weird territory from a timeline perspective between when the case is argued and an opinion is released. It was just later than usual overall. An explanation offered was that they had taken on a large case load and remote work seemed to draw out the calendar.
Yeah, I'm just trying to get a sense of when they are going to release the next batch of opinions. Presumably not today, at least.
The experts seem to be saying they announce next day schedule/drop opinions in the morning so don't expect anything tomorrow at this point. It could be Thursday, etc.
LOL. As is apropos, they just announced that opinions will be released tomorrow at 10 AM.
I will start bracing myself immediately.
It feels like the supremes are timing Mazars to be announced on Friday, just before the Congressional break.
There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 35101
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo »

Pyperkub wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 2:06 pm
El Guapo wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 1:24 pm
malchior wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 1:11 pm
malchior wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:08 pm
El Guapo wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:04 pm
malchior wrote:
Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:02 pm
I don't think anything has been announced on the final 5 cases. I saw a pundit indicate that this still isn't in weird territory from a timeline perspective between when the case is argued and an opinion is released. It was just later than usual overall. An explanation offered was that they had taken on a large case load and remote work seemed to draw out the calendar.
Yeah, I'm just trying to get a sense of when they are going to release the next batch of opinions. Presumably not today, at least.
The experts seem to be saying they announce next day schedule/drop opinions in the morning so don't expect anything tomorrow at this point. It could be Thursday, etc.
LOL. As is apropos, they just announced that opinions will be released tomorrow at 10 AM.
I will start bracing myself immediately.
It feels like the supremes are timing Mazars to be announced on Friday, just before the Congressional break.
Begs the question a bit of who gets to decide when a decision is released. I assume that would be Roberts' unilateral call, but I'm not sure.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 35101
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo »





Everything else is getting released tomorrow. Setting up for quite the climax.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 35101
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo »

Given the decision breakdown it seems very likely that Roberts wrote Mazars. Which isn't surprising (hard to see how he wouldn't be in the majority, one way or the other), and given the institutional importance it's not surprising that he would assign it to himself. Unfortunately doesn't tell us too much about the outcome, I think.

We'll see whether we still have a kind of functioning governmental system tomorrow!

malchior
Posts: 12207
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by malchior »

Yup - I've been waiting for this one patiently but can't get the dread out even if I think Roberts punts on it somehow to after the election.

User avatar
stessier
Posts: 25871
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 12:30 pm
Location: SC

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by stessier »

I think today's decisions reinforce just how much we need to decouple healthcare from our jobs.
I require a reminder as to why raining arcane destruction is not an appropriate response to all of life's indignities. - Vaarsuvius
Global Steam Wishmaslist Tracking
Running____2014: 1300.55 miles____2015: 2036.13 miles____2016: 1012.75 miles____2017: 1105.82 miles____2018: 1318.91 miles__2019: 2000.00 miles

User avatar
stessier
Posts: 25871
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 12:30 pm
Location: SC

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by stessier »

Scotusblog said that SCOTUS announced tomorrow was the last day for opinions.
I require a reminder as to why raining arcane destruction is not an appropriate response to all of life's indignities. - Vaarsuvius
Global Steam Wishmaslist Tracking
Running____2014: 1300.55 miles____2015: 2036.13 miles____2016: 1012.75 miles____2017: 1105.82 miles____2018: 1318.91 miles__2019: 2000.00 miles

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 35101
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo »

stessier wrote:
Wed Jul 08, 2020 1:25 pm
Scotusblog said that SCOTUS announced tomorrow was the last day for opinions.
This is phrased kind of ominously when our democracy is in the balance.

User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 20009
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Pyperkub »

stessier wrote:I think today's decisions reinforce just how much we need to decouple healthcare from our jobs.
Yeah, given that ACA only mandated coverage, which individuals could decide not to take advantage of, these are rulings which again favor corporate/theocratic entity rights over the individual.
There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.

malchior
Posts: 12207
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by malchior »

Today is the day. When I didn't know with absolute certainty the ruling would drop I was pretty relaxed about it. Now I've got an alarm set because this is one of the more important rulings in years and I've got that pit in my stomach. In potentially good news though, the morning started with Trump having an absolute meltdown about harassment and prosecutor misconduct. I have a belief he got tipped by someone to the ruling and is freaking out completely. We'll see what happen today but it's the worst timeline and hope is but an echo.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 35101
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo »

I'm trying to think of signs that the tax cases will come out the right way. Like, maybe they waited until the last day because they are going to rule against Trump but wanted to delay it to increase the odds that the stuff winds up coming out after the election?

I dunno. I should just expect the worst and hope to be pleasantly surprised.

User avatar
Octavious
Posts: 17207
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:50 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Octavious »

Ya I'm pretty sure he got tipped off. We shall see.
Capitalism tries for a delicate balance: It attempts to work things out so that everyone gets just enough stuff to keep them from getting violent and trying to take other people’s stuff.

Shameless plug for my website: www.nettphoto.com

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 35101
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo »

malchior wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 8:58 am
Today is the day. When I didn't know with absolute certainty the ruling would drop I was pretty relaxed about it. Now I've got an alarm set because this is one of the more important rulings in years and I've got that pit in my stomach. In potentially good news though, the morning started with Trump having an absolute meltdown about harassment and prosecutor misconduct. I have a belief he got tipped by someone to the ruling and is freaking out completely. We'll see what happen today but it's the worst timeline and hope is but an echo.
I dunno. Seems like an angry morning rant is pretty normal for him. Also his legal exposure is so significant that he could've received a lot of different news re: prosecutor interest in him.

User avatar
pr0ner
Posts: 15547
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, VA
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by pr0ner »

First opinion of the day is McGirt vs Oklahoma, where Gorsuch joined the liberal justices siding with the Native American tribes that the land remains "Indian country". Gorsuch writes, "Today we are asked whether the land these treaties promised remains an Indian reservation for purposes of federal criminal law. Because Congress has not said otherwise, we hold the government to its word."

The SCOTUSblog summation: "#SCOTUS rules 5-4 that Oklahoma did not have jurisdiction to prosecute a major crime involving an Indian within the historical boundaries of the Creek Indian reservation in eastern Oklahoma."
Hodor.

malchior
Posts: 12207
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by malchior »

Interesting breakdown in the McGirt vs. Oklahoma which essentially sides with the Native Tribe. *Gorsuch* wrote the opinion and was joined by the liberals. Early reports are that he included a call out to the fact that we've broken a lot of past promises here. I wonder if we should expect right-wing howling about purity of justices.

User avatar
Holman
Posts: 23527
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Approximately Wissahickon

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Holman »

7-2 against Trump in the Vance case!

SCOTUSblog: "Article II and the Supremacy Clause do not categorically preclude, or require a heightened standard for, the issuance of a state criminal subpoena to a sitting President."
Last edited by Holman on Thu Jul 09, 2020 10:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.

User avatar
pr0ner
Posts: 15547
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, VA
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by pr0ner »

Trump loses in Trump v. Vance, in a 7-2 decision.
Hodor.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 35101
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo »

Great! Though Vance was the one I was less worried about. But still good! And 7-2, which is nice.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 35101
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo »

malchior wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 10:10 am
Interesting breakdown in the McGirt vs. Oklahoma which essentially sides with the Native Tribe. *Gorsuch* wrote the opinion and was joined by the liberals. Early reports are that he included a call out to the fact that we've broken a lot of past promises here. I wonder if we should expect right-wing howling about purity of justices.
Apparently Gorsuch has a long track record of siding with native tribes.

User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 29298
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana
Contact:
Blackhawk’s avatar
Loading…

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Blackhawk »

Poor Trump. Twitter aneurysm incoming.
________________________________________
A last hope

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 35101
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo »

Re: Vance:
End of majority says issue here was limited to absolute immunity and heightened need, and 2d Circuit ordered case returned to District Court for other possible issues. So SCOTUS remands and presumably the case still goes back to 2d Circuit and then District Court.
Probably another reason the court felt fine going against Trump here. It's not the end of the road for Vance's subpoena, so this can be strung out past Nov. still.

User avatar
pr0ner
Posts: 15547
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, VA
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by pr0ner »

Someone on SCOTUSblog indicated that Alito's dissent references Mazars, hinting that SCOTUS will not rule in favor of Trump there, either.
Hodor.

User avatar
Scraper
Posts: 1707
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:59 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Scraper »

I predict a 5-4 ruling on the tax case. There is no doubt Thomas, Alito, and Kavenaugh will side with whatever the Potus wants. They almost always do. That leaves Gorsuch and Roberts as the deciding votes.
FTE

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 35101
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo »

pr0ner wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 10:19 am
Someone on SCOTUSblog indicated that Alito's dissent references Mazars, hinting that SCOTUS will not rule in favor of Trump there, either.
Seeing that too. Though a lot depends on the details, even if that's right.

User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 29298
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana
Contact:
Blackhawk’s avatar
Loading…

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Blackhawk »

It's time...
________________________________________
A last hope

User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 29298
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana
Contact:
Blackhawk’s avatar
Loading…

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Blackhawk »

7-2 on Mazars!
________________________________________
A last hope

User avatar
pr0ner
Posts: 15547
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, VA
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by pr0ner »

7-2 ruling in Mazars "against" Trump.
Hodor.

User avatar
Holman
Posts: 23527
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Approximately Wissahickon

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Holman »

I feel something almost like hope!
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.

malchior
Posts: 12207
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by malchior »

Whew. Not Hungary. Trump is going to melt down. Fucking burn you POS. As expected it remands the case back so Congress doesn't get it immediately.
Last edited by malchior on Thu Jul 09, 2020 10:24 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 29298
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana
Contact:
Blackhawk’s avatar
Loading…

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by Blackhawk »

Kavanaugh went against Trump.
________________________________________
A last hope

User avatar
pr0ner
Posts: 15547
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, VA
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by pr0ner »

From SCOTUSblog: "More of a win for the president, it appears. The question presented, Roberts writes, is whether the subpoeas issued exceed the authority of the House under the Constitution."
Hodor.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 35101
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo »

Looks like David Frum nailed his predictions on the results here. Vance firmly against Trump. Mazars rejects Trump's heightened standards argument but basically tells the court to slightly tweak the language on Congressional subpoenas, so that SCOTUS can preserve rule of law while saving Trump from this stuff coming out before the election.

malchior
Posts: 12207
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by malchior »

El Guapo wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 10:25 am
Looks like David Frum nailed his predictions on the results here. Vance firmly against Trump. Mazars rejects Trump's heightened standards argument but basically tells the court to slightly tweak the language on Congressional subpoenas, so that SCOTUS can preserve rule of law while saving Trump from this stuff coming out before the election.
Yup - Roberts definitely threaded the needle with precision here as expected. Rejecting the new standards was very important though. I take that as a major victory. We now know that the judiciary isn't severely compromised.

Edit: What does disappoint me is that the court system is exposed as this creaking mechanism that essentially future autocrats can still attack. Trump wins long-term because his records release were delayed for the entirety of his entire term. It is a crack in the system that has certainly been exposed.
Last edited by malchior on Thu Jul 09, 2020 10:32 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
pr0ner
Posts: 15547
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, VA
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by pr0ner »

This seems apt:

Hodor.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 35101
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: SCOTUS Watch

Post by El Guapo »

malchior wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 10:28 am
El Guapo wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 10:25 am
Looks like David Frum nailed his predictions on the results here. Vance firmly against Trump. Mazars rejects Trump's heightened standards argument but basically tells the court to slightly tweak the language on Congressional subpoenas, so that SCOTUS can preserve rule of law while saving Trump from this stuff coming out before the election.
Yup - Roberts definitely threaded the needle with precision here as expected. Rejecting the new standards was very important though. I take that as a major victory. We now know that the judiciary isn't severely compromised.
Yeah, and I hate to complain when we've dodged the "end of the world" type result, BUT still. This is the footnote language from Vance that people were referencing before:



Alito is pointing out - "yeah, you've set up a new standard, and you're saying that the president has arguments under this standard, but be real - you've written this so that the president will lose under your standard." Which is true. So it's still kind of f'ing disgusting that Roberts is playing games seemingly just to protect Trump during the current election.

Post Reply