Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, mr6666 said:

 

As I have posted before I believe a case can be made that the law is unenforceable because of its vagueness as to who can be sued and who can do the suing.  More importantly how can the woman getting the abortion be excluded as she is the very central aspect of the "crime."  If she had not actively, knowingly pursued an abortion nobody else could have committed a "crime."

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, mr6666 said:

:rolleyes:

Read an article about this.  When questioned about the Court's decisions on not placing an injunction on the TX anti-abortion law and supporting a lower court decision to force Pres. Biden to reinstate the Trump policy on Stay in Mexico, she said it would be "inappropriate" to comment on specific cases.   She is an extremist conservative Catholic Republican and her votes prove this.  She and the other 4 extremist conservative Catholic Republicans have made the court very partisan.  Just as everyone expected.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Accelerating tempo of self-praise by Supreme Court justices recently.
Quote Tweet
 
 
5VK9bvE1_normal.jpg
 
Ann Marimow
 
@amarimow
· Sep 16
NEW: Justice Thomas adds his voice in defense of the Supreme Court’s independence and warns of ‘destroying our institutions’ in a speech @NotreDame https://washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/justice-clarence-thomas/2021/09/16/d2ddc1ba-1714-11ec-a5e5-ceecb895922f_story.html?tid=ss_tw
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Supreme Court sides with police officers in two qualified immunity cases

".......Under existing precedent, an officer is not liable, even if he or she violates the Constitution, unless it was "clearly established" by prior cases that the conduct at issue was unconstitutional. Critics say that bar is too high and forces those claiming excessive force to search for a prior case with nearly identical facts.

....Last term, there were two instances where the court wiped away lower court opinions that had granted qualified immunity to government officials, leading some to believe the court was moving in a new direction to chip away at the doctrine.

But on Monday, the justices made clear that last term's cases were outliers, and that the traditional framework could stand.
"Monday's cases are further evidence that the Supreme Court is not going to reconsider the fundamentals of the doctrine and the justices are reaffirming the general idea that in most cases plaintiffs still need to find a nearly identical precedent to make their case," said Jay Schweikert, a research fellow the Cato Institute who studies the issue.
 
ns that until and unless Congress addresses qualified immunity, public officials can continue to violate people's rights with impunity"............
 
 
-_-
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Supreme Court appears skeptical of New York law limiting handguns in public

How they rule could affect the ability of state and local governments to impose a wide range of firearms regulations.
 
"..........

The court repeatedly ducked the issue of the Second Amendment's application in public after ruling in 2008 that it guarantees an individual right to keep a handgun at home for self-defense. A decision in the current case could affect the ability of state and local governments to impose a wide range of firearms regulations.

The two sides differed strongly during Wednesday's argument on the kinds of limitations that were historically allowed because the Supreme Court's landmark 2008 ruling said the Second Amendment does not prohibit long-standing, traditionally accepted regulations of firearms.

All states allow carrying a concealed gun in public, though 34 require a state-issued permit. New York and seven other states provide local officials with more discretion to deny requests for a permit, and they are most likely to be affected by the outcome of the case.......

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-hear-biggest-gun-rights-case-more-decade-n1282583?cid=sm_npd_ms_tw_ma

<_<

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...