All Eyes on SCOTUS Today

[IAMX 3,055]

Some of the issues that the media will be covering regarding SCOTUS today (since this is their last working day of their calendar year):

Two decisions on cases already before SCOTUS:

- Hernandez v. Mesa - Decision on whether people in Mexico can sue the US government for Fourth Amendment violations on the issue of shooting people on Mexican side of border throwing "dangerous" rocks at agents

- Trinity Lutheran Church of Colombia v. Comer - Decision on whether some state constitutional provisions that bar churches and faith based organizations from receiving any taxpayer money, including for secular programs like children's playgrounds, and if it violates first amendment.

 

Some decisions on whether or not to take some cases for next year (next SCOTUS year begins early this October, their year will end next June/July):

- Trump Travel Ban (Trump v. International Refugee Assistance Project)

- Second Amendment cases (United States v. Binderup, convicted felons owning guns, and Peruta v. California, whether the individual right to bear arms extends out in public)

- Religious liberty vs. LGBT case (Masterpiece Cake Shop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission - SCOTUS will decide if they will take the case of a Colorado baker who is appealing lower court rulings that said he wasn't allowed to refuse baking cakes that went against his religion)

- And lastly clarity on whether or not Justice Anthony Kennedy will retire

 

Quote

The nation’s highest court should decide two major cases on Monday.

 

The first is Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Comer, where the Court will decide whether Blaine Amendments — constitutional provisions in some states that bar churches and faith-based organizations from receiving any taxpayer money, including for secular programs like children’s playground programs — violate the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause.

Another case that will be addressed is Hernandez v. Mesa, in which U.S. agents shot a Mexican national in a group of assailants on the Mexican side of the border. Agents said the assailants were throwing dangerous rocks at the agents. The issue is whether the slain foreigner’s family can sue the federal agents for a Fourth Amendment violation.

 

 

Quote

A final word is also expected on whether the Court will take several major cases for next year.

 

The first is the Trump v. International Refugee Assistance Project, the constitutional challenge to Executive Order 13,780, President Donald Trump’s travel-restriction order. It is almost inevitable that the Court will at least take that case, possibly on an accelerated basis.

There are also two major Second Amendment cases, either one of which would be only the third such Supreme Court case in American history. The first is United States v. Binderup, concerning the constitutionality of the federal law making it a crime for convicted felons to own guns. The other is Peruta v. California, which explores whether the right to keep and bear arms extends beyond a person’s home to include places a person goes to in public.

Another is a case pitting religious liberty against LGBT issues. The Court will decide whether the take the case of a Colorado baker who declined to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex wedding.

 

Quote

But most consider the biggest question Monday to be whether there will be a Supreme Court retirement, which are often announced on the last day of the Court’s term. Specifically, the focus is on Justice Anthony Kennedy, who will turn 81 next month. It has long been expected that Justice Kennedy would retire if a Republican were elected president in 2016.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/25/scotus-d-day-travel-ban-guns-lgbt-and-possible-supreme-court-retirement/

 

 

 

I'm sure most eyes are on Anthony Kennedy. Another Trump SCOTUS nomination would send lefties into a frenzy.  

 

 

Edited June 26, 2017 by IAMX

[Dashinka 24,109]

Wouldn't it be a hoot if both Kennedy and Ginsberg announced retirements?  I doubt Ginsberg will, but who knows.

[IAMX 3,055]

1 minute ago, Bill & Katya said:

Wouldn't it be a hoot if both Kennedy and Ginsberg announced retirements?  I doubt Ginsberg will, but who knows.

If you want to see a Leftpocalypse, Kennedy, Ginsburg, and Breyer retire today. 

[Dashinka 24,109]

31 minutes ago, IAMX said:

If you want to see a Leftpocalypse, Kennedy, Ginsburg, and Breyer retire today. 

The world would run out of crack!

 

[Dashinka 24,109]

*Supreme Court Allows Implementation of Most of Trump Travel Ban 

*High Court Grants Trump Administration Stay of Lower Court Rulings Against President 

*Stay Allows Trump to Implement Most of Executive Order While Legal Cases Continue 

 

*Supreme Court Agrees to Review Trump Travel Ban 

*Court Says Ban Can’t Be Enforced For Now Against People With “Bona Fide” Relationship to U.S.

*Court Says Those with No U.S. Connection Are Subject to Ban

*High Court Intervention Sets Stage for Final Word on Legality of Trump Executive Order 

*Trump Order Seeks Temporary Ban on Travelers From Six Muslim-Majority Countries 

*Trump Says Order Needed for National Security 

*Challengers Say Order Is Discriminatory and Unjustified 

*Two Federal Appeals Courts Have Ruled Against President 

(More to Come)

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/supreme-court-allows-implementation-of-most-of-trump-travel-ban-1498487727

[IAMX 3,055]

Supreme Court Reinstates Trump Travel Ban from Muslim-Majority Countries

 

Trump travel ban: Supreme Court reinstates key parts of executive order

 

In a victory for the Trump administration, the Supreme Court on Monday lifted key components of an injunction against President Trump's proposed ban on travel from six majority-Muslim nations, reinstating much of the policy and promising to hear full arguments as early as this fall. 

The court's decision means the justices will now wade into the biggest legal controversy of the Trump administration -- the president's order temporarily restricting travel, which even Trump has termed a "travel ban." The court made clear that a limited version of the policy can be enforced for now.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/26/supreme-court-to-hear-trump-appeal-travel-ban-block.html

 

Lefties were told that the EO was perfectly legal.. they think the 9th can re-interpret the Constitution as they see fit. WRONG. Again.

 

If it were that much an issue, the injunction would have been kept. This shows unlike the 9th circuit, SCOTUS understands the Constitution.

 

"An American individual or entity that has a bona fide relationship with a particular person seeking to enter the country as a refugee can legitimately claim concrete hardship if that person is excluded,” the court wrote. “As to these individuals and entities, we do not disturb the injunction. But when it comes to refugees who lack any such connection to the United States, for the reasons we have set out, the balance tips in favor of the Government’s compelling need to provide for the Nation’s security.”

The justices decided to review the broader constitutional issues over executive authority on immigration with oral arguments to be held in the fall.

 

So next SCOTUS calendar year starting in the Fall of this year it will be taken up.

[IAMX 3,055]

Fake News lefist MSM is already going nuts. 

[IAMX 3,055]

Trinity Lutheran Church of Colombia v. Comer - Justices just ruled 7-2 in favor of the church

 

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled in favor of a Missouri church that sued the state after being denied taxpayer funds for a playground project because of a provision that prohibits state funding for religious entities. 

The ruling was 7-2. 

The case, one of the most closely watched of the term, pitted two provisions of the First Amendment against one another – freedom of religion and separation of church and state. 

The dispute involved Trinity Lutheran Church in Columbia, Mo., and the state of Missouri.

In 2012, the state launched an initiative to encourage schools to use recycled tires to produce softer playground surfaces. Trinity, which runs a preschool, was denied a state grant to participate in the program -- and lawyers for Trinity argued the state discriminated against the school based on religion.

Chief Justice John Roberts agreed.

“The exclusion of Trinity Lutheran from a public benefit for which it is otherwise qualified, solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution all the same, and cannot stand,” Roberts wrote.

During oral arguments in April, Justice Elana Kagan also questioned the church's exclusion.

"You're denying one set of actors from competing [for the grant money] because of religion," Kagan said. She called it a "clear burden on a constitutional right."

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/26/supreme-court-rules-for-missouri-church-in-dispute-over-public-funding-access.html

 

Great day for first amendment freedom and for national security.

[IAMX 3,055]

Not a good day for the 2nd amendment though..  SCOTUS decides not to hear either United States v. Binderup or Peruta v. California this coming court year. What's gonna result is a lot of lefty legislation that will try and take things further, SCOTUS finally hearing it, and smacking them all down.

Edited June 26, 2017 by IAMX

[Dashinka 24,109]

I see they are going to take the case of the baker and the same-sex wedding cake.

[IAMX 3,055]

20 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

I see they are going to take the case of the baker and the same-sex wedding cake.

Yep, they are confirmed to take up this case.. likely October. Should toe the line I hope in allowing the bakery to not be forced to provide their service in a way that violates their personal convictions. Give them cake, give them pieces/tools for the people ordering to do those parts, here, you do the part I don't want to do. Don't see the problem. Personally, for any gay friends of mine, I'd not go to a bakery in the first place where they injected discriminatory political beliefs into their business. Alas, the left try to use the courts to bully people into political subservience.

Edited June 26, 2017 by IAMX

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Trump 1  The 9th and some Island in the Pacific 0

There is a reason the 9th is almost always over turned 

[IAMX 3,055]

2 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Trump 1  The 9th and some Island in the Pacific 0

There is a reason the 9th is almost always over turned 

The fun part is watching the left try and wrap their minds around it.

[Dashinka 24,109]

5 minutes ago, IAMX said:

The fun part is watching the left try and wrap their minds around it.

And figure out how to spin it.

 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

I wonder if the MDL echo chamber  took a long weekend