What's new
By:
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.

SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

Status
Not open for further replies.
By my count, 9 or 10 major ones left.

https://www.scotusblog.com/statistics/
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/terms/ot2019/

* - are relatively minor/technical issue cases

October:
Sexual orientation/gender identity discrimination

November:
DACA

January:
Public funds for religious schools

February:
Appalachian Trail vs. pipeline*
Due Process for asylum seekers*
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau constitutionality
SEC disgorgement*
Abortion

May (everything - no decisions out yet):
Trademarks* (does adding .com to a generic word make it trademarkable)
1st amendment* (Does 1st Amendment prohibit Congress from conditioning funding on having an explicit policy opposing sex trafficking and prostitution)
Robocalls*
Tribal jurisdiction* (interesting only because a win for the defendant would likely mean the majority of Oklahoma is technically part of an Indian reservation)
Obamacare birth control v. religion, redux
Anti-discrimination laws v. religion, redux
Trump subpoenas (congress)
Trump subpoenas (State of NY)
Electoral College - faithless electors
 
Last edited:
October:
Sexual orientation/gender identity discrimination - Roberts and Ginsburg are likely to be writing these; could be Roberts writing both if both are no. If they split the baby, Ginsburg probably writes the transgender one saying it is covered, and Roberts writes the sexual orientation one saying it's not. Kavanaugh also doesn't have an October opinion, but I presume he had the one that was dismissed.

November:
DACA - Almost assuredly Roberts, since he's the only one without a November opinion

January:
Public funds for religious schools - Likely Breyer, since he's the only one without a January opinion.

February:
Appalachian Trail vs. pipeline*
Due Process for asylum seekers*
SEC disgorgement*
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau constitutionality - Thomas or Alito if they strike it down, Breyer or Sotomayor if its upheld. The 3 who don't write this one each get one of the minor ones.
Abortion - almost assuredly Roberts

May
Too early to tell since nothing is out yet.
 
Last edited:
Today and THursday this week, will be 3-4 more in the coming weeks.

LGBT opinion is out. Court upholds the law.
 
Held: An employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or transgender violates Title VII. Pp. 4–33.
 
"GORSUCH, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and GINSBURG, BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ., joined. ALITO, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which THOMAS, J., joined. KAVANAUGH, J., filed a dissenting opinion"​
 
unofan said:
Today and THursday this week, will be 3-4 more in the coming weeks.

LGBT opinion is out. Court upholds the law.
Click to expand...

"GORSUCH, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and GINSBURG, BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ., joined. ALITO, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which THOMAS, J., joined. KAVANAUGH, J., filed a dissenting opinion"

It might be a strong rebuke since the good guys did not files concurrences. Interesting the sh-t birds were split.
 
Someone else posted this one: "Today, we must decide whether an employer can fire someone simply for being homosexual or transgender. The answer is clear. An employer who fires an individual for being homosexual or transgender fires that person for traits or actions it would not have questioned in members of a different sex. Sex plays a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids."​
 
And Supreme Court's website is farked, so it could be awhile til we know if anything else is coming today.
 
unofan said:
"GORSUCH, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and GINSBURG, BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ., joined. ALITO, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which THOMAS, J., joined. KAVANAUGH, J., filed a dissenting opinion"​
Click to expand...

Kavanuts is the new Scalia. I reject your dissent and file my own, more sophomoric one!
 
Apparently the majority opinion is 30 pages, most of the 172 pages is an appendix to Alito's dissent.
 
FadeToBlack&Gold said:
Kavanuts is the new Scalia. I reject your dissent and file my own, more sophomoric one!
Click to expand...

Scalia actually wrote an opinion allowing same-sex harassment suits to go forward under federal law back in the day, so just saying...

Kavanaugh apparently goes separation of powers in his dissent, and ends with:
"Notwithstanding my concern about the Court’s transgression of the Constitution’s separation of powers, it is appropriate to acknowledge the important victory achieved today by gay and lesbian Americans. Millions of gay and lesbian Americans have worked hard for many decades to achieve equal treatment in fact and in law. They have exhibited extraordinary vision, tenacity, and grit—battling often steep odds in the legislative and judicial arenas, not to mention in their daily lives. They have advanced powerful policy arguments and can take pride in today’s result. Under the Constitution’s separation of powers, however, I believe that it was Congress’s role, not this Court’s, to amend Title VII. I therefore must respectfully dissent from the Court's judgement"

My download's at 90%, so hopefully I'll get to pull more quotes shortly.​
 
unofan said:
Scalia actually wrote an opinion allowing same-sex harassment suits to go forward under federal law back in the day, so just saying...

Kavanaugh apparently goes separation of powers in his dissent, and ends with:
"Notwithstanding my concern about the Court’s transgression of the Constitution’s separation of powers, it is appropriate to acknowledge the important victory achieved today by gay and lesbian Americans. Millions of gay andlesbian Americans have worked hard for many decades toachieve equal treatment in fact and in law. They have exhibited extraordinary vision, tenacity, and grit—battling often steep odds in the legislative and judicial arenas, not tomention in their daily lives. They have advanced powerfulpolicy arguments and can take pride in today’s result. Under the Constitution’s separation of powers, however, I believe that it was Congress’s role, not this Court’s, to amendTitle VII. I therefore must respectfully dissent from the Court's judgement"

My download's at 90%, so hopefully I'll get to pull more quotes shortly.​
Click to expand...

Hopefully, that means he's a Separation of Powers "hawk" on future rulings.

Narrator: "He won't be."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top