The Briefing Room
General Category => National/Breaking News => SCOTUS News => Topic started by: Bigun on June 30, 2022, 01:13:56 pm
-
Today, June 30, 2022 SCOTUS Opinions
Opinions released today will be reported here ASAP after their release.
Both cases remaining are potential blockbusters. We'll see if the turn out to be such.
-
Are they supposed to be released today, or Friday? So far, nothing on the Court's website.
-
West Va. v. EPA is out! Opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf
-
West Virginia is first. It is by the Chief. Kagan dissents, joined by Breyer and Sotomayor.
-
West Va. v. EPA is out! Opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf
6-3 (liberals in the dissent).
-
6-3 (liberals in the dissent).
Held (in relevant part): "Congress did not grant EPA in Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act the authority to devise emissions caps based on the generation shifting approach the Agency took in the Clean Power Plan. Pp. 16–31."
-
Here's the opinion:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf
"Congress did not give the EPA the power to devise emissions caps based on the generation shifting approach the Agency took in the (Obama era) Clean Power Plan."
-
The major questions doctrine is the idea that if Congress wants to give an administrative agency the power to make “decisions of vast economic and political significance,” it must say so clearly.
-
The EPA's view of its authority, Roberts writes, "was not only unprecedented; it also effected a 'fundamental revision of the statute, changing it from [one sort of] scheme of . . . regulation' into an entirely different knd."
-
:bkmk:
-
The supreme court sharply curtails the authority of the EPA to regulate greenhouse-gas
-
Biden Vs Texas
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-954_7l48.pdf
The Court holds that the Biden administration's decision to terminate the Migrant Protection Protocol, also known as the Remain in Mexico policy, did not violate federal immigration law, and the October memorandum was a final agency action.
Roberts strikes again!
-
Biden Vs Texas
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-954_7l48.pdf
Roberts strikes again!
And Kav, I hear.
-
JUSTICE GORSUCH, with whom JUSTICE ALITO joins, concurring.
To resolve today’s case the Court invokes the major questions doctrine. Under that doctrine’s terms, administrative
agencies must be able to point to “‘clear congressional authorization’” when they claim the power to make decisions
of vast “‘economic and political significance.’” Ante, at 17,
That means ALL of them!
-
And Kav, I hear.
Yep! **nononono*
-
Executive regulatory agencies and authorities are limited to only the authorities granted to them by enabling Congressional legislative laws.
Now, Congress needs to grow up and fulfill its Constitutional responsibilities.
-
As an overall matter, this court session has been a disaster for the Biden administration IMHO.
-
The supreme court sharply curtails the authority of the EPA to regulate greenhouse-gas
The 6-3 decision overruled a lower court decision that gave the federal agency virtually unlimited regulatory powers through the Clean Air Act.
Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts ruled that “it is not plausible that Congress gave EPA the authority to adopt on its own such a regulatory scheme.”
“A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body,” he added.
Kagan wrote the descent. guessing the other two who joined her were the unwise latino and bryer.
-
As an overall matter, this court session has been a disaster for the Biden administration IMHO.
Joe butt must be sore as hell from all the reaming it took these last weeks.
-
Biden Vs Texas
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-954_7l48.pdf
Roberts strikes again!
Once again Roberts showing he's as much in favor of open borders as any Marxist democrat.
-
I wish we didn't lose the Remain in Mexico order, but that's minor compared to the damage done to the bureaucratic superstructure of the EPA. That's gonna open a whole bunch of cans of worms when other bureaucracies start getting sued for making up their own rules.
-
https://twitter.com/JonathanTurley/status/1542509588204769280
-
I wish we didn't lose the Remain in Mexico order, but that's minor compared to the damage done to the bureaucratic superstructure of the EPA. That's gonna open a whole bunch of cans of worms when other bureaucracies start getting sued for making up their own rules.
:yowsa: I fully concur! Yet it still pisses me off that Trump was not allowed to set Obama policies aside but Biden gets to set aside Trump policies.
-
Once again Roberts showing he's as much in favor of open borders as any Marxist democrat.
Don't get me started on that $#%^&*$%$#!
-
Executive regulatory agencies and authorities are limited to only the authorities granted to them by enabling Congressional legislative laws.
Now, Congress needs to grow up and fulfill its Constitutional responsibilities.
Bigger! Much bigger!
-
West Va. v. EPA is out! Opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf
(https://i1.wp.com/justmaths.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/celebration-gif.gif?fit=500%2C226&ssl=1)
Time to freakin' Celebrate!!!!!!!!
I don't think many Briefers understand how wonderful a SCOTUS move this is. I dealt with EPA, state, and local agencies for over 30 years. Many considered themselves the Environmental Gestapo. Many did interpretive decisions and dealings on the fly. Want to know why so much of our industry moved off shore? Yep, you guessed it.
-
(https://i1.wp.com/justmaths.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/celebration-gif.gif?fit=500%2C226&ssl=1)
Time to freakin' Celebrate!!!!!!!!
I don't think many Briefers understand how wonderful a SCOTUS move this is. I dealt with EPA, state, and local agencies for over 30 years. Many considered themselves the Environmental Gestapo. Many did interpretive decisions and dealings on the fly. Want to know why so much of our industry moved off shore? Yep, you guessed it.
:yowsa: pointing-up
999beer
-
:yowsa: I fully concur! Yet it still pisses me off that Trump was not allowed to set Obama policies aside but Biden gets to set aside Trump policies.
That’s because the Left believes they are the default for everything. And anyone that pushes back against them are illegitimate.
They also believe that any EO and legislature they sign and pass are Holy Writ never to be questioned or reversed.
-
That’s because the Left believes they are the default for everything. And anyone that pushes back against them are illegitimate.
They also believe that any EO and legislature they sign and pass are Holy Writ never to be questioned or reversed.
Yeah! But the freekin Supreme Court should not agree with them!
-
That means ALL of them!
Yes, Bigun, and they are right. Not as a matter of policy, but as a matter of law. We fought very hard to get a court that would interpret laws, not make them. Do not turn like the Left and expect the courts to enforce your policy preferences if the Legislative branch has not made them into law.
If Trump had the power to establish the remain in Mexico policy without Congressional action, Biden has the power to rescind it without Congressional action.
I agree with you, remain in Mexico was a good policy, but the courts making law and policy, rather than interpreting laws and adjudicating conflicts between laws and between laws and the Constitution, is what gave us Roe, Casey, and Obergefell.
-
Top Biden Officials Reveal Plans To Continue Pushing Climate Agenda If Supreme Court Blocks EPA
Jack McEvoy
Contributor
June 29, 2022 7:12 PM ET
Font Size:
Leading Biden officials outlined their methods to keep pushing the administration’s climate agenda if the Supreme Court limits the powers of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on Wednesday.
The Supreme Court is likely to weaken the Biden administration’s efforts to limit carbon dioxide emissions in West Virginia v. EPA, with several of the justices having probed the extent of EPA’s authority in oral arguments. President Joe Biden’s senior officials remain confident in their ability to advance the administration’s aggressive environmental agenda by using the Clean Air Act and other government powers.
more
https://dailycaller.com/2022/06/29/michael-regan-epa-gina-mccarthy-scotus/
-
Government has limits. Those limits are defined by the US Constitution and laws passed by Congress and signed by the President.
There has been Executive overreach for the past 22 years, and, now the limited government pedulum is swinging the other way.
Executive Orders and Legal Precedents are no substitute for laws.
-
Republicans held 55 senate seats when Roberts was nominated. They could have confirmed just about anyone. Samuel Alito was among those passed over.
Thanks Dumbya.
-
Yes, Bigun, and they are right. Not as a matter of policy, but as a matter of law. We fought very hard to get a court that would interpret laws, not make them. Do not turn like the Left and expect the courts to enforce your policy preferences if the Legislative branch has not made them into law.
If Trump had the power to establish the remain in Mexico policy without Congressional action, Biden has the power to rescind it without Congressional action.
I agree with you, remain in Mexico was a good policy, but the courts making law and policy, rather than interpreting laws and adjudicating conflicts between laws and between laws and the Constitution, is what gave us Roe, Casey, and Obergefell.
And the Republican president we elect will now be able to undo all these senseless Biden policies!
-
The Supreme Court sharply curtails the authority of the EPA to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions that cause climate change. In a 6-3 ruling, the court sides with conservative states and fossil-fuel companies in adopting a narrow reading of the Clean Air Act.— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 30, 2022
Here is the opinion from John Roberts in West Virginia v. EPA: https://t.co/ret7VxSSpj. The three liberal justices dissent.— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 30, 2022
-
SCOTUSlog
@SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court ALLOWS the Biden administration to terminate the controversial Trump-era asylum policy known as "remain in Mexico." Red states argued that Biden was obliged to keep the policy, but SCOTUS says in a 5-4 ruling that the administration can end it.
Here is the opinion from John Roberts https://mobile.twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1542511827627585536
-
SCOTUSlog
@SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court ALLOWS the Biden administration to terminate the controversial Trump-era asylum policy known as "remain in Mexico." Red states argued that Biden was obliged to keep the policy, but SCOTUS says in a 5-4 ruling that the administration can end it.
Didn't take long for Roberts to return to Squish status.
-
SCOTUSlog
@SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court ALLOWS the Biden administration to terminate the controversial Trump-era asylum policy known as "remain in Mexico." Red states argued that Biden was obliged to keep the policy, but SCOTUS says in a 5-4 ruling that the administration can end it.
Here is the opinion from John Roberts https://mobile.twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1542511827627585536
Biden and his regime are going to wish the Supremes had ruled otherwise. This decision will feed the red wave and put a great big erasure on Trump's pencil happy77
-
SCOTUSlog
@SCOTUSblog
Just in: In an election case out of North Carolina, SCOTUS agrees to review the "independent state legislature" theory next term. Under that theory, state legislatures have broad power to set rules for federal elections, even if state courts say those rules are unconstitutional.
10:52 AM · Jun 30, 2022·Twitter Web App
-
SCOTUSlog
@SCOTUSblog
The North Carolina election case is Moore v. Harper. SCOTUS also adds two other new cases to its docket for next term: Percoco v. U.S. (a case about honest-services fraud brought by a former Andrew Cuomo aide) and Ciminelli v. U.S. (a case about federal wire fraud).
10:57 AM · Jun 30, 2022·Twitter Web App
-
SCOTUSlog
@SCOTUSblog
In addition to those three grants, SCOTUS declines review in a challenge to New York's vaccine mandate for health care workers.
Here is today's full order list: https://supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/063022zor_5he6.pdf
10:59 AM · Jun 30, 2022 Twitter Web App
-
SCOTUSlog
@SCOTUSblog
Just in: In an election case out of North Carolina, SCOTUS agrees to review the "independent state legislature" theory next term. Under that theory, state legislatures have broad power to set rules for federal elections, even if state courts say those rules are unconstitutional.
10:52 AM · Jun 30, 2022·Twitter Web App
Greg Price
@greg_price11
BREAKING: The Supreme Court is taking up an election integrity case involving the "independent state legislature theory." The ruling could curtail the power of state courts to say that election rules set by the legislature are unconstitutional, such as what happened in PA.
10:54 AM · Jun 30, 2022·Twitter Web App
-
:facepalm2:
Greg Price
@greg_price11
Justice Elena Kagan wrote in her dissent on the EPA case "The Court appoints itself—instead of Congress or the expert agency—the decision maker on climate policy. I cannot think of many things more frightening."
Ummm, it specifically returns the decision making to Congress.
10:37 AM · Jun 30, 2022·Twitter Web App
-
SCOTUSlog
@SCOTUSblog
The North Carolina election case is Moore v. Harper. SCOTUS also adds two other new cases to its docket for next term: Percoco v. U.S. (a case about honest-services fraud brought by a former Andrew Cuomo aide) and Ciminelli v. U.S. (a case about federal wire fraud).
10:57 AM · Jun 30, 2022·Twitter Web App
This one is of great import @Right_in_Virginia
Let's see what the constitution says on the matter.
Article II
Section 1
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct..
Don't see anything about courts in that.
Article I
Section 4.
The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators.
Still not finding anything about courts. Perhaps someone can direct me to that.
-
Biden v. Texas: Remain in Mexico May End,
But Main Issue Is Unresolved (https://us4.campaign-archive.com/?u=11002b90be7384b380b467605&id=1520b48014)
Washington, D.C. (June 30, 2022) - The Supreme Court's decision in the Remain in Mexico case leaves the main question unresolved.
The Court finds that the Biden administration may end the program (formerly known as the Migrant Protection Protocols, or MPP) and the lower court's injunction against it is invalid. The case now goes back to the circuit court to decide whether the program was terminated properly.
More important: The lower court also has to decide whether federal law's detention mandate for illegal border-crossers is really a mandate and whether DHS is violating the law by releasing most illegal aliens instead of detaining them...
Excerpt: Rest at headline link.
-
Bigun observed:
"As an overall matter, this court session has been a disaster for the Biden administration IMHO."
You are correct, of course.
But... the "Constitutional tilt" of the current Court is to be credited to two persons:
- Mitch McConnell, who prevented Garland from gaining a seat
and (OF COURSE)
- Mr. Trump, who picked the right nominees.
To steal a line from an old song regarding Mr. Trump's vision on this:
"... his truth is marching on."
Let's hope it holds up during the next few Court terms, as well.
There's much more yet to be done.
-
https://twitter.com/jsolomonReports/status/1542642414187331585
-
https://twitter.com/jsolomonReports/status/1542642414187331585
Man I am feeling a good wind blowing lately.
-
SCOTUSlog
@SCOTUSblog
Just in: In an election case out of North Carolina, SCOTUS agrees to review the "independent state legislature" theory next term. Under that theory, state legislatures have broad power to set rules for federal elections, even if state courts say those rules are unconstitutional.
10:52 AM · Jun 30, 2022·Twitter Web App
Isn't this close to the Texas case that was thrown out in 2020?
-
Didn't take long for Roberts to return to Squish status.
I heard this weekend that this case isn't over yet.
It goes back to the Texas court that made the initial ruling for the judge to decide on the three issues the SCOTUS didn't rule on...then most likely back to the 5th Court of Appeals...then back to the SCOTUS around 2023 in time for the next Presidential election.
Remain in place might...might be gone temporarily...but IMO it will be back thanks to a court injunction.
-
This one is of great import @Right_in_Virginia
Let's see what the constitution says on the matter.
Article II
Section 1
Don't see anything about courts in that.
Article I
Section 4.
Still not finding anything about courts. Perhaps someone can direct me to that.
The only ones that can set rules regarding elections are the state legislatures.
Not judges...not courts of appeal...not governors.
The legislature. Period.
-
I heard this weekend that this case isn't over yet.
It goes back to the Texas court that made the initial ruling for the judge to decide on the three issues the SCOTUS didn't rule on...then most likely back to the 5th Court of Appeals...then back to the SCOTUS around 2023 in time for the next Presidential election.
Remain in place might...might be gone temporarily...but IMO it will be back thanks to a court injunction.
@txradioguy
To reiterate: we need not and do not resolve the parties’ arguments regarding whether section 1225(b)(2)(A) must be read in light of traditional principles of law enforcement
discretion, and whether the Government is lawfully exercising its parole authorities pursuant to sections 1182(d)(5)
and 1226(a).
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-954_7l48.pdf
Pg. 23