Supreme Court - It could real interesting this week.

The Supreme Court has ruled that the Justice Department overstepped by charging hundreds of people who rioted at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, with obstruction in a decision that could force prosecutors to reopen at least some of those cases.

The high court’s decision means that special counsel Jack Smith is likely to continue to pursue the same charge against former President Donald Trump.


www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/supreme-court-january-6-ruling-06-28-24/index.html

It’s really scary that TFG could be able to seat two more justices if re-elected

IF he wins it won't matter much. He will be allowed to do what ever he thinks about doing...

Something I'm finding interesting is that the newest justices seem most likely to go with the other side. Justice Brown Jackson has twice this month sided with the conservatives. Amy Coney Barrett dissented with the liberals in this last decision. I'm actually happy to see them going their own way even though I disagree with this most recent decision.

Chris Hayes talked about it all on his show tonight. Also Gorsuch addressed the SEC as Security Exchange wrongly.

Im happy to see this as well. It gives me a smidge of hope.

Aside from the immunity decision, this one might have the biggest impact this year. Alito and Thomas are just getting started overruling precedent, dismantling the federal government and giving power to the judiciary.



rule by judicial order

Barbra Streisand @barbrastreisand
The Supreme Court overruled 40 years of precedent and overturned the Chevron decision. It makes judges and the Supreme Court the regulators of laws passed by Congress rather than the scientific expertise at federal agencies. This is not democracy but rule by judicial order. The only beneficiaries are big business and polluters.

ACB and Kavanaugh have sided with the liberal justices on a few cases. However, they are the smaller ones, more narrow decisions with less of an impact. On all of the big decisions overturning years of precedent like Dobbs, affirmative action and today's decision on limiting the power of federal agencies, the conservatives were united.  The conservative justices were also united on the decision upholding the ban on homeless camps, the one striking down the ban on bump stocks and the decision to uphold South Carolina's racially gerrymandered maps.

Don't forget ground coffee and MORE baby formula. Again.

Also the FDA needs an overhaul.

They knew about the issues with the formula plant that makes ds' medical formula. It wasn't until the whistleblower and babies dying that they cared.

Great opinion on how this latest decision will be transformative. Also a great explanation why this decision is undemocratic despite what conservatives are claiming.

Gift article- no paywall

www.nytimes.com/2024/06/29/opinion/supreme-court-chevron-loper.html?unlocked_article_code=1.3U0.xyWC.s-01R1n_5jh-&smid=url-share

But like Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Loper Bright has the potential to fundamentally transform major aspects of the health, safety and well-being of most Americans. That’s especially true when it is viewed alongside some of the other major cases about agency power the court has handed down in recent terms — and indeed in recent days — that have stripped agencies of power and shifted that power directly to federal courts.

An error in one of this week’s opinions provided a stark illustration of the costs of the court’s lack of expertise: On Thursday, in the case dealing with the Environmental Protection Agency — Ohio v. E.P.A. — the released version of the majority opinion made five references to “nitrous oxide,” commonly referred to as laughing gas, rather than the “nitrogen oxide” compounds at issue. The error was quickly fixed, but no agency official working on the regulation of this compound would have made such an error — and in many ways that is Chevron’s whole point.

But the court has it precisely backward. A key premise of Chevron is that it is far more democratic for agencies than for courts to construe ambiguous provisions in the statutes Congress enacts. In the words of Chevron itself, reprised by Justice Elena Kagan’s dissent in Loper Bright, “While agencies are not directly accountable to the people, the Chief Executive is.” Agencies are best situated to resolve “the competing interests which Congress itself either inadvertently did not resolve,” or intentionally left to be resolved by the relevant agency. As the Chevron court continued, “federal judges — who have no constituency — have a duty to respect legitimate policy choices made by those who do.”

Bold mine!!
Do you believe this one lindas ? You made no comments on the second article posted. You only questioned the first which was corrected AFTER I posted about it, but before you apparently read it.

The conservatives already did by delaying the decision as long as they have. Thomas and Alito accepted bribes and refused to recuse themselves from this case. Chances are, they will just kick it back to the lower courts to delay longer

So far social media decisions..

Still awaiting immunity..
Being read right now...

The court ruled - Trump does have immunity for official acts and not for unofficial acts.