By Zachary B. Wolf
...Next up (click here) could be a complete re-imagining of American democracy, where, if a legal theory based on the word “legislature” is adopted by the Supreme Court, state lawmakers could, in theory, have new power to ignore voters and pick presidents.
The conservative-majority court has agreed to hear a North Carolina case that pits the state’s GOP-controlled legislature against state courts that threw out congressional maps they said were gerrymandered....
...Next up (click here) could be a complete re-imagining of American democracy, where, if a legal theory based on the word “legislature” is adopted by the Supreme Court, state lawmakers could, in theory, have new power to ignore voters and pick presidents.
The conservative-majority court has agreed to hear a North Carolina case that pits the state’s GOP-controlled legislature against state courts that threw out congressional maps they said were gerrymandered....
...The congressional map drawn by North Carolina’s GOP-controlled legislature to benefit Republicans was thrown out by the state Supreme Court earlier this year. While the state is politically split, the legislature’s map would likely have resulted in Republicans picking up two congressional seats. The state courts ultimately adopted a more even map drawn by experts that could result in Democrats gaining a seat in North Carolina. Republican lawmakers in the Tar Heel State want the US Supreme Court to allow them to ignore the state court and use the GOP-friendly map for future elections after this year’s midterms....
The Supreme Court is no longer a court where Americans can find equity. It is destroying the entire idea of having a country protected from what is basically evil.
No one with a conscience can turn away from environmental protections and protections of women's health. That is all about the vulnerability of life. None of what is being conducted on the USA Supreme Court is about life or about conscience, it is about politics.
By Josh Gerstein
As the shock waves (click here) spread Friday from the Supreme Court’s momentous decision striking down Roe v. Wade, one notable casualty of the ruling became evident: Chief Justice John Roberts.
After nearly seven months of deliberations, Roberts found precisely zero takers among his fellow justices for his incrementalist approach that would have avoided overruling Roe for now, but allowed Mississippi to impose a near ban on abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy....
As the shock waves (click here) spread Friday from the Supreme Court’s momentous decision striking down Roe v. Wade, one notable casualty of the ruling became evident: Chief Justice John Roberts.
After nearly seven months of deliberations, Roberts found precisely zero takers among his fellow justices for his incrementalist approach that would have avoided overruling Roe for now, but allowed Mississippi to impose a near ban on abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy....
Why did Robert's peers turn against the ideology of his incrementalism? Because they want it now. Besides, in reality, incrementalism is just as toxic and anti-American as the politics the six justices stand on to defeat the right to an abortion. Incrementalism is clever, but, it is setting the stage for the same destruction of our USA Constitution.
The destruction of the definition of the legislative body of the federal government IS destroying the USA Constitution. The president was never meant to be king. The legislature was set up to carry out the will of the people. The elect the legislature for that purpose. While the head of our government, the Executive Branch with a President as the final decision maker is about the moral content of the people of the country. But, the legislature is where the people have their best opportunity to be heard and have those words acted on.
I refer from time to time to "The New Source Review." It is an EPA delegated authority that is to take in all reports from the people to improve air quality and eliminate danger. The New Source Review is the epitome of the power of the legislature. It reaches out to the people regardless of their race, creed or age and asks if everything is okay? When the legislature becomes a meaningless body of government, the people are giving up their voice.
...“The Act itself (click here) thus provides a means to seek limits on emissions of carbon dioxide from domestic power plants—the same relief the plaintiffs seek by invoking federal common law,’ Ginsburg wrote in American Electric Power.
“We see no room for a parallel track.’...
Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency decision occurred in 2007. I personally added carbon dioxide to the list of gases the USA EPA was to regulate in 2003, the year Bush invaded Iraq. It was that year when Bush came to the Rose Garden, two weeks after my testimony in Raleigh, North Carolina under the LAW of the New Source Review and submission of a 21 page document which included stating the USA military's use of dolphins was wrong, immoral and illegal according to the ESA (Endangered Species Act).
Then after the death of Justice Ginberg, all those achievements of Americans like me were wiped out by the Robert's Court. I know how it feels to have a Supreme Court that is Anti-American, because they are anti-me.
Yes, besides women's rights which will disappear if Ginni Thomas has her way, there is an entire understanding of how morality lies in the hands of all the people we elect, as well as the justices that sit in the Supreme Court. Please, make no mistake. This election has morality on the ballot and it is not the Republicans that value it.
Today, Justice Thomas voted again for his party. And now he wants to be backed up by his peers. Or, perhaps, his judgement is clouded entirely because Justice Scalia is no longer able to carry him through. Not sure. But, regardless, Thomas has proven himself corrupted and a partisan hack when he once before SHIELDED his spouse from being exposed.
The prosecutors are chasing treason for God sake. What is to question?
By Adam Liptak
Washington - Justice Clarence Thomas (click here) on Monday temporarily shielded Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, from having to answer questions from a special grand jury in Georgia investigating efforts to overturn former President Donald J. Trump’s election loss in the state.
Justice Thomas’s brief order was an “administrative stay,” meant to give the court some breathing room to weigh the senator’s emergency application asking the Supreme Court to bar the grand jury from questioning him.
On Saturday, Justice Thomas, who oversees the appeals court whose ruling is at issue, ordered prosecutors to respond to the application by Thursday. Such a request for a response is almost always a sign that the full court will weigh in on the matter.
Prosecutors appear to be particularly interested in any efforts Mr. Graham may have made to urge officials in Georgia, including its secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, to address allegations of voting irregularities before Congress was to vote in January 2021 to certify that President Biden was the legitimate winner of the presidential election....
