The Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected a request to reinstate the Biden administration’s latest student loan forgiveness plan.
Read MoreTag: SCOTUS
Julie Kelly Commentary: A Lifeline for Jack Smith in the J6 Case Against Donald Trump
Following humiliating losses at the Supreme Court and the shocking dismissal of the so-called classified documents case in Florida, Special Counsel Jack Smith appeared down for the count in his floundering attempt to ever get Donald Trump behind bars, let alone before Election Day.
Read MoreNew York Requests That the Supreme Court Dismiss Missouri’s Lawsuit Over Trump ‘Lawfare’
New York District Attorney Letitia James on Wednesday urged the Supreme Court to block a lawsuit from Missouri that is attempting to stop former President Donald Trump’s sentencing in his hush money case.
Read MoreAlaska Natives File Lawsuit Challenging Federal Overreach in Wake of SCOTUS ‘Chevron’ Ruling
Alaska Natives are fighting back against the Biden administration’s decision to shut down oil and gas development in northern Alaska, which they say is vital to the prosperity and well being of their communities.
The Voice of the Arctic Iñupiat (VOICE), a nonprofit advocacy group for Native-American communities living on the state’s North Slope, filed a lawsuit Monday against the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and Interior Secretary Deb Haaland over the final BLM’s final rule blocking 13 million acres in their region to oil and gas development.
Read MoreHouse Democrat Plans to File a Constitutional Amendment to Invalidate Supreme Court Ruling
Democratic New York Rep. Joe Morelle announced Monday that he will file a constitutional amendment that will virtually invalidate the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on presidential immunity.
Read MoreTrump Moves to Reverse Verdict in New York Case After Historic Supreme Court Ruling
Former President Donald Trump’s lawyers moved quickly Monday night to take advantage of the Supreme Court ruling that he enjoyed immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts, sending a letter notifying the judge in his New York hush money case that they intend to ask to set aside the verdict reached by a jury last month, according to multiple sources.
Read MoreSupreme Court Rules Trump Has Absolute Immunity for Some Official Acts, But Not Unofficial Ones
The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that former President Donald Trump is immune from federal prosecution for official acts he took while in office in split 6-3 ruling. However, the court ruled that there is no immunity for unofficial acts.
Read MoreCommentary: SCOTUS Rulings, Biden-Trump Debate Shake Up Political Landscape
What a week it’s been! We started off with Justice Amy Souter Barrett writing the SCOTUS ruling in Murthy v. Missouri. At issue was whether it was okay for the federal government (the FBI and related elements of the American Stasi) to pressure social media and data-hoovering companies (Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc.) to suppress opinions they didn’t like about things like COVID, the 2020 election, and the Jan 6 jamboree at the Capitol.
Read MoreMean Speech Not Protected at Public Universities, Appeals Courts Rule
Faculty at public universities in nine states may have fewer speech protections than they assume following federal appeals court rulings against professors on the political right and left who were punished for perceived lack of collegiality – strong words short of harassment.
But a private university has egg on its face after taking seven months to allegedly clear a professor of wrongdoing for telling anti-Israel campus protesters they are “ignorant” and “Hamas are murderers,” despite having immediate access to both viral video and its own surveillance.
Read MoreSupreme Court Makes It Harder to Charge Jan. 6 Rioters with Obstruction, Same Charge Trump Faces
A Supreme Court ruling on Friday limits the scope of obstruction charges against Jan. 6, 2021 rioters, which is the same charge former President Trump faces in his 2020 election interference case.
Read MoreSupreme Court Overturns Chevron Decision, Curtailing Federal Agencies’ Power
The Supreme Court on Friday overturned a landmark decision that gave federal agencies broad regulatory power.
Read MoreSupreme Court to Take Up State Bans on Gender-Affirming Care for Minors
The Supreme Court on Monday agreeing Monday to hear an appeal from the Biden administration seeking to block state bans on gender-affirming care.
Read MoreConservatives Hope Supreme Court’s Initial Ruling on Texas Immigration Law Inspires Other States
A preliminary Supreme Court ruling that allowed Texas to begin enforcing a state law empowering local police to arrest and deport illegal aliens if the federal government doesn’t should inspire other states to follow suit, prominent conservatives tell Just the News.
Read MoreSupreme Court Rules: Trump Can Remain on Ballot
The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that former President Donald Trump can remain on the 2024 presidential ballot in a decision that comes one day before the Colorado Republican primary after the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that the top Republican contender is ineligible.
Read MoreSupreme Court to Hear Arguments on Trump Criminal Immunity Claims
The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to hear arguments over former President Donald Trump’s immunity claims in special counsel Jack Smith’s D.C. election case.
Read MoreSupreme Court Justice Roberts Urges ‘Caution,’ Predicts AI Will ‘Significantly’ Impact Legal Field
U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts is urging the cautious use of artificial intelligence, and he predicts it will “significantly” impact the legal field.
Read MoreCommentary: Is SCOTUS Poised to Overturn Key J6 Felony Count?
An order published by the Supreme Court on December 13 represented a moment hundreds of January 6 defendants and their loved ones had been waiting for: the highest court granted a writ of certiorari petition in the case of Fischer v. USA.
In a nutshell, after more than two years of litigation before federal judges in Washington, SCOTUS will review the Department of Justice’s use of 1512(c)(2), obstruction of an official proceeding, in January 6 cases. A “splintered” 2-1 appellate court ruling issued in April just barely endorsed the DOJ’s unprecedented interpretation of the statute, passed in 2002 as part of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in the aftermath of the Enron/Arthur Anderson accounting scandal.
Read MoreLiberal ‘Dark Money’ Groups Gave Millions to SCOTUS Watchdogs Targeting Alito, Thomas, Docs Show
Nonprofit organizations managed by the liberal “dark money” consulting firm Arabella Advisors gave millions of dollars to “nonpartisan” Supreme Court watchdogs, new documents show, after a campaign was launched earlier this year targeting conservative Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito for not fully disclosing their finances.
Former Clinton appointee Eric Kessler founded Arabella Advisors in 2005, and its subsidiaries include the Sixteen Thirty Fund, the Hopewell Fund, the New Venture Fund, the Windward Fund and the North Fund.
Read MoreCorporate America Slowly Backs Away from ‘Diversity’ Language in Wake of Supreme Court Decision
American businesses have been moving away from using diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) language in the workplace after the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action in June, according to Bloomberg Law.
Read MoreMontana AG Asks SCOTUS to Take Up Case Challenging State Agency That Encouraged Social Media Censorship
Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen asked the Supreme Court Friday to hear a case that challenges a state agency’s efforts to police election-related “misinformation” on Twitter.
A group of nine attorneys general led by Knudsen filed an amicus brief Friday urging the Supreme Court to hear O’Handley v. Weber, a lawsuit challenging the California Secretary of State’s Office of Election Cybersecurity’s practice of flagging “false or misleading” election information for removal by Twitter. The states call the agency’s actions an “anathema” to the First Amendment and argue they reflect similar conduct occurring at the federal level.
Read MoreSupreme Court Will Take on Red Flag Law
The Supreme Court will hear a case this coming term challenging a federal “Red Flag” law that prohibits individuals subject to domestic violence restraining orders from possessing firearms, which is expected to shape the future of Second Amendment law.
Zackey Rahimi, the individual at the center of the case, was involved in five shootings between December 2020 and January 2021, in one instance firing shots into the air after his friend’s credit card was declined at a Whataburger, according to court documents. When police obtained a warrant to search his home, they found him in possession of a firearm, a violation of a civil protective order entered against him in February 2020 for allegedly assaulting his ex-girlfriend.
Read MoreCensorship Case Involving State Collusion with Social Media Companies Could Be Heard by the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court could hear a case questioning a California agency’s coordination with Twitter to censor election-related “misinformation.”
O’Handley v. Weber, which concerns the California Secretary of State’s Office of Election Cybersecurity’s work with Twitter to monitor “false or misleading” election information, was appealed to the Supreme Court on June 8. The case raises questions similar to those posed in the free speech lawsuit Missouri v. Biden, now being appealed in the Fifth Circuit: Can the government lawfully induce private actors to censor protected speech?
Read MoreCatholic Counselor Asks SCOTUS to Reverse Decision Allowing States to Limit Speech Outside Abortion Clinics
A Catholic sidewalk counselor petitioned the Supreme Court Friday to reverse a prior ruling that permits states to enforce laws targeting pro-life counseling outside abortion clinics.
In response to the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade in June 2020, Westchester County, New York passed a law creating a 100-foot “buffer zone” outside abortion clinics where it is illegal to approach another person to engage in “oral protest, education, or counseling” without consent. The law is similar to one the Supreme Court upheld in its 2000 Hill v. Colorado decision, which sidewalk counselor Debra Vitagliano, backed by Becket Law, now asks the justices to overrule.
Read MoreCommentary: SCOTUS Affirmative Action Decision Ignores Elephant in the Room
Growing up in the Jim Crow South, my parents grew up dreaming of a world where they didn’t have to use “colored-only” restrooms, sit in the back of the bus, attend segregated schools, and could sit in restaurants together with other Americans – regardless of their race, creed, or nationality.
They dreamed of equality for all. Yet, almost 70 years after the Supreme Court struck down “separate but equal,” the recent decision to strike down affirmative action makes it clear that many black progressives like Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson – who benefited from the Brown v. Board of Education decision – still view the issues of race and equality through rose-colored glasses.
Read MoreSCOTUS to Take Up Second Amendment Case Next Term
After issuing a string of conservative rulings this week to close out the term, the Supreme Court will hear a key Second Amendment case later this year to determine whether a federal ban on gun possession affecting those under domestic violence restraining orders is constitutional.
At issue is a dispute involving Zackey Rahimi, whom Texas placed under a restraining order due to a violent altercation with his girlfriend, The Hill reported. He subsequently faced federal charges of possessing a firearm while under the order. He had challenged the constitutionality of the ban but pleaded guilty after losing the case.
Read MoreVivek Ramaswamy Reacts to SCOTUS Ruling on Biden Administration’s Student Loan Forgiveness Program
GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy released a video statement Friday after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the Biden administration’s proposal to unilaterally cancel hundreds of billions in student loan debt.
Read MoreWhite House Quietly Prepares Back Up Plan If SCOTUS Strikes Down Student Loan Giveaway: Report
The Biden administration is quietly preparing for the possibility that the Supreme Court will strike down its controversial student loan forgiveness plan later in June, according to a Wall Street Journal report.
The White House’s public position is that it expects the court to uphold the debt cancellation package, but several administration officials have conveyed private doubts about its prospects of survival upon review, according to the report. Behind the scenes, administration officials are exploring various legal and communications strategies to pursue in the event that the Supreme Court eventually overturns the signature Biden policy, according to the report.
Read MoreKari Lake Announces Ballot Chasing Operation in Arizona, Plans to Go to SCOTUS with Election Case
Former GOP Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake announces the launch of a ballot chasing operation in Arizona. “We are officially launching the largest, most extensive ballot chasing operation in our state’s history and frankly, possibly in American history,” Lake said during a press conference. “The courts just ruled that this corrupt election will stand. The courts just ruled that our elections can run lawlessly. The courts have ruled that anything goes. Well, we can play by those same rules.”
Read MoreLeft-Wing SCOTUS Justice Took $3 Million from Book Publisher, Didn’t Recuse Herself from Cases
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, a left-wing justice nominated by Barack Obama, repeatedly refused to recuse herself from cases involving the publishing company that paid her millions to publish her own books.
According to the Daily Wire, Sotomayor was paid $3.1 million by Penguin Random House over the course of two years; in 2010, she was paid $1.2 million by Knopf Doubleday Group, part of Random House’s conglomerate, and then received two separate advance payments in 2012, which amounted to $1.9 million when combined. These payments have made Penguin Random House her single largest source of income.
Read MoreCounseling Ban Promotes Gender Identity as Religion, Censors Science, Diverse Critics Tell SCOTUS
First Amendment speech protections may be circumscribed for therapists and medical professionals in the American West, critics warn, unless the Supreme Court scrutinizes a Washington law prohibiting any “regime that seeks to change” a minor’s sexual orientation or gender identity.
Christian doctors, pro-life pregnancy centers, pediatricians, gender-critical feminists and a dozen states led by Idaho filed friend-of-the-court briefs last week urging the justices to review the so-called conversion law, warning it prevents providers from sharing research on the harms of hormonal and surgical procedures for gender-confused minors.
Read MoreSupreme Court Declines to Hear Energy Companies’ Appeals to Climate Damage Lawsuits
The Supreme Court declined Monday to hear local governments’ climate damage lawsuits against energy companies on Monday.
The companies, who localities want to hold financially accountable for burning fossil fuels they allege damaged the climate, appealed their cases to the Supreme Court, asking it to weigh in on whether the claims should be heard in state or federal courts. The Court’s decision benefits the environmental activists behind the lawsuits, who prefer the matter to play out in state courts, where judges may be more inclined to rule in their favor, experts previously told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
Read MoreSCOTUS Justice Alito Halts Limits on Abortion Pill Access, Blocking Lower Court Rulings
Supreme Court Associate Justice Samuel Alito on Friday blocked lower court rulings that curtailed access to mifepristone while the court weighs a request from the Biden administration to defend the drug in court. The administration hopes to defend the drug’s approval in court in the face of a legal challenge from anti-abortion groups that had brought the initial suit, Reuters reported. Alito’s order asks both sides to submit arguments by Tuesday on whether the limits from the appeals court should take effect, pending litigation, the Associated Press reported.
Read MoreREVIEW: New Book ‘Rise to Greatness’ Explores How a Kid from Queens Became One of History’s Most Influential Supreme Court Justices
Antonin Scalia was a budding textualist long before he transformed the Supreme Court, and the nation, with his unique legal approach, a new biography of his early life reveals.
In the 1950s, the future Supreme Court Justice spent his mornings on the New York subway, commuting with his rifle to Xavier High School, a hybrid Jesuit-run Catholic school and military academy in Manhattan. His teacher’s response one day to a student’s sarcastic comment about “Hamlet” became a moment Scalia would never forget — and would refer to for the rest of his life as the Shakespeare Principle: “Mistah, when you read Shakespeah, Shakespeah’s not on trial; you ah,” Father Thomas Matthews said.
Read More33 Attorneys General Urging Supreme Court to Uphold Whistleblower Law
Connecticut Attorney General William Tong is leading 33 states attorneys general in urging the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a pair of lower court rulings that could have broad implications for whistleblowers, and the government’s ability to go after public fraud.
In a 15-page legal brief, Tong and the other AGs are calling on justices to uphold a pair of federal whistleblower lawsuits accusing pharmacy operators of over billing government health insurance programs for prescription drugs.
Read MoreCatholic Churches Have Suffered 118 Attacks Since SCOTUS Dobbs Leak
A recent report found that Catholic churches have suffered 118 attacks since the leak of the Supreme Court draft majority opinion on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Center in May 2022. Churches and pregnancy centers across the United States came under attack after the opinion was leaked to Politico, indicating that the Supreme Court intended to overturn Roe v. Wade. CatholicVote (CV) updated its tracker Sunday that keeps track of assaults on Catholic Churches and found that 118 churches had reported attacks since May 2022.
Read MoreDenied: Supreme Court Will Not Hear 2020 Election Case; Petitioner Seeks Reconsideration
The Supreme Court announced Monday it will not hear a 2020 election lawsuit against former Vice President Mike Pence, President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, 291 House members, and 94 senators.
The lawsuit alleges the defendants violated their oaths of office by refusing to investigate evidence of fraud in the 2020 election before accepting the electoral votes on Jan. 6, 2021, allowing for Biden and Harris to be “fraudulently” inaugurated.
Read MoreSCOTUS to Vote on Hearing 2020 Election Case Against Biden, Harris, Pence, Senators, Congressmen
The Supreme Court is set to consider hearing a 2020 election case regarding actions taken on Jan. 6, 2021 by former Vice President Mike Pence, President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, 291 House members, and 94 senators.
The lawsuit, filed by Raland J. Brunson, alleges the defendants violated their oaths of office by refusing to investigate evidence of fraud in the 2020 election before accepting the electoral votes on Jan. 6, 2021, allowing for Biden and Harris to be “fraudulently” inaugurated.
Read MoreNearly 30 Pro-Abortion Attacks Against Churches Have Occurred Since SCOTUS Overturned Roe v. Wade, Report Shows
Dozens of U.S. churches have been targets of pro-abortion “hostility” since the Supreme Court overturned the landmark Roe v. Wade ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a Family Research Council (FRC) report found.
On June 24, the Supreme Court overturned the ruling, causing an uproar among pro-abortion supporters. Nearly 30 attacks on churches were reported after the Dobbs decision that had explicit pro-abortion rhetoric, according to the report.
Read MoreCommentary: Moore v. Harper Terrifies Democrats for Good Reason
The U.S. Supreme Court finally heard oral arguments in Moore v. Harper last week. The case involves a mundane constitutional issue concerning the definition of “legislature” as used in the elections clause. Yet it has produced panic among Democrats and a torrent of portentous predictions about the death of democracy from various leftist law professors. In the Washington Post, for example, Harvard University’s Noah Feldman expressed alarm that the court took up the “insane” case at all.
Is Moore v. Harper really insane? Of course not. The case arose early this year when the North Carolina Supreme Court struck down a redistricting map produced by the state Legislature, then replaced it with a redistricting scheme of its own. The North Carolina General Assembly petitioned SCOTUS for relief on the grounds that this action violated Article I, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution.
Read MoreVermont Backs Down on Religion-Free School Choice after SCOTUS Knocks Down Maine Policy
Vermont families that want to send their children to religious schools will no longer be excluded from the state’s tuition benefit program, as a result of legal settlements in two cases brought by the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF).
The plaintiffs who were denied funding under the Town Tuition Program, which provides tuition for students who live in areas without local public schools, will get reimbursement for money spent out of pocket on tuition. Other families denied funding can apply as well.
Read MoreCommentary: The Systemic Racism of the Teachers Unions
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that could reverse the 2003 Grutter v. Bollinger decision, in which SCOTUS asserted that the use of an applicant’s race as a factor in an admissions policy of a public educational institution does not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The current case specifically cites the use of race in the admissions process at Harvard and the University of North Carolina. The plaintiffs, Students for Fair Admissions, maintain that Harvard violates Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, “which bars entities that receive federal funding from discriminating based on race, because Asian American applicants are less likely to be admitted than similarly qualified white, Black, or Hispanic applicants.”
Read MoreSupreme Court Denies Arizona GOP Chair’s Bid to Block Jan. 6 Panel from Reviewing Phone Records
The Supreme Court on Monday denied Arizona Republican Party Chairwoman Kelli Ward’s request to keep her cellphone records from the Democrat-led House Jan. 6 panel.
The court vacated the temporary order that Justice Elana Kagan put in place, pausing the phone records from being shared while the court weighed Ward’s request.
Read MoreSCOTUS Considers Upending Legal Shield for Administrative State
Federal agencies can “trap” businesses and individuals for years in proceedings before administrative law judges (ALJs) who work for the agencies, rarely rule against them and can’t be removed by the president, constituting “here-and-now constitutional injuries,” according to lawyers for these targets.
Nonlethal weapons supplier Axon Enterprises and certified public accountant Michelle Cochran want the right to challenge the constitutionality of Federal Trade Commission and Securities & Exchange Commission ALJs in real courts, before the expense and emotional drag compels them to settle regardless of their guilt or the legitimacy of the proceedings.
Read MoreCommentary: Cake Maker Jack Phillips Is STILL in Court
The endless travails of the Colorado Christian baker Jack Phillips are a measure of America’s pathetic descent into coercive secularism. Phillips has spent at least a decade in court, beating back the ludicrous claims of ACLU-style militants who can’t rest until everyone has been dragooned into the LGBTQ revolution. Phillips was at first persecuted for declining trolling customer demands that he design cakes for gay nuptials. He survived that assault, but now faces fallout from the transgender lobby’s mau-mauing of his business. In 2017, a man pretending to be a woman sued him for not designing birthday cakes in honor of “gender transitions” — an obvious nuisance suit that the state of Colorado and activist judges have humored. Phillips is back in court fighting it.
Read MoreIndividuals Call for Assassination of Justice Clarence Thomas after Roe v. Wade Ruling
Individuals have been calling on social media for the assassination of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas after he issued a separate concurring opinion on Friday in a ruling that struck down Roe v. Wade. Abortion activists have also published his home address, and others have called to burn down the Supreme Court.
The U.S. Supreme Court overturned two landmark abortion cases, Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, returning the legality of abortion to the states. Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the majority and Justice Thomas wrote a solo concurring opinion in which he argued that the Supreme Court should also reconsider rulings on contraception, same-sex relationships and marriage.
Read MoreAG Garland Pointedly Refuses to Say If He Would Prosecute Protesters Outside Justices’ Homes
Attorney General Merrick Garland is pointedly refusing to say if he’s open to prosecuting protesters who demonstrate outside of Supreme Court justices’ homes, which a growing number of office-holders are urging him to do.
Republican Governors Larry Hogan of Maryland and Glenn Youngkin of Virginia and members of Congress want Garland to uphold federal law that prohibits actions to intimidate judges at their private residences.
Read MoreBiden Tells Alito He Can Ignore Stare Decisis, Overturn Roe in 2006 Exchange – If He Has the Votes
Neil W. McCabe, the national political editor of The Star News Network, reports on how during the 2006 confirmation hearings for then-Judge Samuel Alito, then-Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr., suggested to Alito that he would be in his rights to engineer the overturn of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, regardless of concerns for precedence–if he had the votes.
Read MoreNewt Gingrich Commentary: Roe v. Wade Is Inevitably Going Away
The current uproar over the leaked draft from the U.S. Supreme Court deliberations over abortion – and the rage of the pro-abortion Left over the likelihood that the conservative justices (three of whom were nominated by President Donald Trump) will now repeal Roe v. Wade – is in some ways a lot of noise about the inevitable.
Roe v. Wade was a 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion across the whole country and made America one of the most extreme abortion systems in the entire world. Importantly, it was a court decision by appointed judges – not legislation made by elected legislators. It was inevitably going to be overturned sooner or later.
Read MoreSCOTUS Authenticates Leaked Document, Orders Investigation
A message from the Public Information Office of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) says a report in German-owned Politico containing a leaked draft of the Court’s opinion to overturn Roe v. Wade is authentic.
“Yesterday, a news organization published an opinion in a pending case,” said the statement from the Court. “Justices circulate draft opinions internally as a routine and essential part of the Court’s confidential deliberative work. Although the document described in yesterday’s reports is authentic, it does not represent a decision by the Court or the final position on the issues of the case.”
Read MoreGerman-Owned Politico Publishes Purported Leaked Draft Decision Suggesting Supreme Court Vote to Overturn Roe v. Wade
A draft of the majority opinion from Justice Samuel Alito leaked to Politico suggests the Supreme Court voted to strike down Roe v. Wade, the landmark abortion rights decision.
The reported 98-page opinion of at least five justices offers a sharp rebuke of Roe and Casey v. Planned Parenthood, both of which protected abortion rights.
Read More