What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Looking ahead, arguments are done and all that's left is waiting for the opinions. The court has about 2/3rds of the opinions done, and probably another 15 or so will be easy ones from the March and April sittings that just haven't had enough time to get done yet.

That leaves about 9 or 10 that are bigger cases or otherwise seem to be taking awhile.

The only one left from November involves a citizenship question regarding differences in treatment between fathers and mothers when conveying citizenship to their foreign born children. Ginsberg is likely writing it, since she is the only one without an opinion in November.

The two left from December include one on alien detentions and then the North Carolina redistricting challenge under the VRA. Roberts presumably has the voting case, and Alito likely has the other one, though Kagan also doesn't have an opinion from that month.

Too many left to predict authors from other months. Among the bigger cases are the Missouri church playground funding, qualified immunity challenges regarding post 9/11 detentions of Muslims, the disparagement provision of the Lanham Acct regarding trademarks (which would directly affect the Redskins trademark case), whether social media restrictions on sex offenders is constitutional (doubtful), and whether the fourth amendment applies when a Mexican kid is killed on Mexican soil by a us border agent after playing in the border area.
 
Last edited:
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Kind of shocked by this one.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/15/...-carolina.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0

With Gorsuch now on it looks like an easy 5-4 win for conservatives. The Supreme's actually went liberal by not taking up the case.

It looks like Roberts told NC to figure out who is in charge of the state government to bring the case to the Supremes. It was brought by the old Republican governor, the new Dem asked it to be dismissed, and the state legislature wanted it appealed.
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Kind of shocked by this one.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/15/...-carolina.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0

With Gorsuch now on it looks like an easy 5-4 win for conservatives. The Supreme's actually went liberal by not taking up the case.

I dont think Gorsuch would have voted with the conservatives on that one FWIW.
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Don't forget. All reports had him closer to Thomas than Scalia.

Yes I know and I have no evidence to back it up but he doesnt strike me as the type that would go for the law as written. He may be in bed with Big Business but he doesnt seem like he is on the side of restricting people's right to vote based on their color/socio-economic class. (nor do I think Roberts would either)

I dont think the SC will ever touch a case like that for a ton of reasons.
 
Yes I know and I have no evidence to back it up but he doesnt strike me as the type that would go for the law as written. He may be in bed with Big Business but he doesnt seem like he is on the side of restricting people's right to vote based on their color/socio-economic class. (nor do I think Roberts would either)

I dont think the SC will ever touch a case like that for a ton of reasons.

Roberts wrote the decision gutting the Voting Rights Act, leading to one of Ginsburg's best lines ever about closing an umbrella in the rain because you're dry and therefore it must not be needed.
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

That is right...I completely forgot that.
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

That is a great line.
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

I think you put those in the wrong thread...
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

I think you put those in the wrong thread...

Put what?






















;)
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

SCOTUS will not hear North Carolina's Voter ID appeal.

Protections against disenfranchisement from election hacking remain.
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Deciding vote was....Clarence Thomas??? :eek:

Good for them. Gerrymandering unfortunately has to be curbed and if that costs Dems a few seats in Illinois or Mass or wherever so be it (CA is an independent commission I believe). Next big case is the Wisconsin one.
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Deciding vote was....Clarence Thomas??? :eek:

He's done that on at least one other race issue. Conservatives do seem to be theoretically capable of empathy as long as they are sufficiently like the injured party. c.f. Sandra Dee saves Roe.
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Maryland still stands.

Isn't that because Maryland is gerrymandered by partisanship and not along racial boundaries? Or is it more that Maryland didn't make changes? I have no idea since I didn't really follow gerrymandering new until the last year or two.
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Isn't that because Maryland is gerrymandered by partisanship and not along racial boundaries?

Yes, the Court doesn't want to become a political arbitrator. But partisan gerrymandering like MD is also destructive of democracy and we need a way to ban it too.
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...ikes_a_blow_against_racial_redistricting.html

Interesting write up of the racial gerrymandering case and what it tells us about a potential decision in the political gerrymandering case. It focuses on Kennedy joining Alito's dissent in full, which seemed to point to a defeat for those hoping to end partisan gerrymandering.
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...ikes_a_blow_against_racial_redistricting.html

Interesting write up of the racial gerrymandering case and what it tells us about a potential decision in the political gerrymandering case. It focuses on Kennedy joining Alito's dissent in full, which seemed to point to a defeat for those hoping to end partisan gerrymandering.

My understanding with Kennedy is that he needs a quantifiable way to determine unlawful redistricting for partisan purposes. That's the Wisconsin case which focuses on the concept of wasted voters. That particular case was brought up with him in mind. In the meantime he'll continue to be a wildcard - voting with the minority in this case but once again being the deciding vote to preserve the legality of independent commissions drawing the lines instead of the legislature.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top