Surely this order already prejudices the case—if SCOTUS will allow Rebecca Slaughter to be continued to be fired … then of course, the law must be wrong. Otherwise, why not put this obviously incorrect move on hold?
The Supreme Court is hellbent on losing their relevance every time they side with Trump they become more and more irrelevant they should all just resign and give Trump the Country!
This ruling along with the other Shadow Docket rulings, the Colorado and the Trump immunity rulings are all part of the Heritage Foundation/Federalist Society/Project 2025 coup d'é·tat.
We are in a very bad place. The majority of this court is hellbent on allowing a dictatorship. And I don't see how we will get out of it. It's all so very profoundly depressing.
I really like reading your analysis, but I think do yourself and your readers disservice when you refer to the six justices other than Jackson, Kagan, and Sotomoyor "conservative justices" -- they are not.
A genuine conservative judge is more like Former U.S. Court of Appeals Judge J. Michael Luttig.
I don’t understand this criticism because I did not say that.
The only time I referenced the word “conservative,” it was referencing the “conservative majority” over the past 15 years. And I think that is fine in describing a long-time project of the court.
So can we when we regain Congress majority as a people merrily make The Trump impeached in effect before we make it so? That's what they're approving is it not? Horse before Cart. Yes?
This country is slowly but inexorably rolling out all the oppressive instrumentalities of a dictatorship. While there are many displays of judicial courage by lower court federal judges, once these acts of bravery to defend our democratic ideals percolate up to the Supreme Court, Trump's admirers there routinely grind them down and toss them into the dumpster.
There is an old anecdote attributed to Chief Justice John Marshall that goes along the lines of "This is my decision. Justice Story will furnish the authorities." And so it is with "The Trump Justices" on the Supreme Court. They first decide upon the decision they want the Court to reach and then sick their law clerks on ferreting out cases that they twist and contort to give them the appearance of supporting their preconceived decisions.
Chris, concerning the Separation of Powers, is that not the SCOTUS amending the ACTUAL Constitution?
Congressional law, I’m guessing, would be asking the same.
Scalia made very clear that the SCOTUS interprets the Constitution and laws but does not make law or amendment the Constitution.
Perhaps that’s what you said? I feel the same with the immunity ruling as what was there to interpret?
I know Roberts hung his hat on the concurrence of Justice Jackson in Youngstown Tube & Sheet which misconstrues a Justice’s intent when that same Justice sat in judgment of truth to power in the Nuremberg Trials.
I believe it was CASA where ACB questioned whether the Court has jurisdiction or authority to do “a thing” I’m sorry, I can’t remember the exact thing, yet now they apparently feel they do?
I have a huge fear in all of this but I’ll keep it there for now.
Any insight would be appreciated…from anyone who has the ability as certainly don’t!!
Surely this order already prejudices the case—if SCOTUS will allow Rebecca Slaughter to be continued to be fired … then of course, the law must be wrong. Otherwise, why not put this obviously incorrect move on hold?
Thank you. The ruling is appalling and outrageous.
And precedence? Upon further consideration - and a survey of Dark Ages mores - egregious!
The Supreme Court is hellbent on losing their relevance every time they side with Trump they become more and more irrelevant they should all just resign and give Trump the Country!
There are still perks to be extorted from well-heeled interests, so such an action would be against their personal interests.
You mean the ones loyal to Project 2025? There are three wonderful judges there.
This ruling along with the other Shadow Docket rulings, the Colorado and the Trump immunity rulings are all part of the Heritage Foundation/Federalist Society/Project 2025 coup d'é·tat.
Our only hopes are the lower courts continue to uphold the Law as best they can (given the Extreme Court constraints), we take back Congress in 2026 and thereafter legislate constraints on both the Extreme Court and the Executive Branch. Support Adam Schiff’s Protecting Our Democracy Act https://www.schiff.senate.gov/news/press-releases/news-sen-schiff-reintroduces-his-landmark-proposal-to-protect-democracy-close-legal-loopholes-enabling-widespread-abuses-of-presidential-power/
We are in a very bad place. The majority of this court is hellbent on allowing a dictatorship. And I don't see how we will get out of it. It's all so very profoundly depressing.
Betrayal.
I really like reading your analysis, but I think do yourself and your readers disservice when you refer to the six justices other than Jackson, Kagan, and Sotomoyor "conservative justices" -- they are not.
A genuine conservative judge is more like Former U.S. Court of Appeals Judge J. Michael Luttig.
Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, radicals
I don’t understand this criticism because I did not say that.
The only time I referenced the word “conservative,” it was referencing the “conservative majority” over the past 15 years. And I think that is fine in describing a long-time project of the court.
So can we when we regain Congress majority as a people merrily make The Trump impeached in effect before we make it so? That's what they're approving is it not? Horse before Cart. Yes?
This country is slowly but inexorably rolling out all the oppressive instrumentalities of a dictatorship. While there are many displays of judicial courage by lower court federal judges, once these acts of bravery to defend our democratic ideals percolate up to the Supreme Court, Trump's admirers there routinely grind them down and toss them into the dumpster.
There is an old anecdote attributed to Chief Justice John Marshall that goes along the lines of "This is my decision. Justice Story will furnish the authorities." And so it is with "The Trump Justices" on the Supreme Court. They first decide upon the decision they want the Court to reach and then sick their law clerks on ferreting out cases that they twist and contort to give them the appearance of supporting their preconceived decisions.
This continues to be insane.
Is the court blessing the unitary theory of the presidency, on steroids because he also has absolute immunity, before even hearing the case?
Way past that. But their authority is the question!!
the whims of power where ordinary people will never get a part of the fair law and only receive cruelty and no bounds to being exploited
What law can we use to recall corrupt members of the Supreme Court? They are not above the law.
Chris, concerning the Separation of Powers, is that not the SCOTUS amending the ACTUAL Constitution?
Congressional law, I’m guessing, would be asking the same.
Scalia made very clear that the SCOTUS interprets the Constitution and laws but does not make law or amendment the Constitution.
Perhaps that’s what you said? I feel the same with the immunity ruling as what was there to interpret?
I know Roberts hung his hat on the concurrence of Justice Jackson in Youngstown Tube & Sheet which misconstrues a Justice’s intent when that same Justice sat in judgment of truth to power in the Nuremberg Trials.
I believe it was CASA where ACB questioned whether the Court has jurisdiction or authority to do “a thing” I’m sorry, I can’t remember the exact thing, yet now they apparently feel they do?
I have a huge fear in all of this but I’ll keep it there for now.
Any insight would be appreciated…from anyone who has the ability as certainly don’t!!
Thank you!!!