Probably the State of Texas is doing a job exclusive to the Federal Gov.
SCOTUS Issues
- Thread starter GURPS
- Start date
Probably the State of Texas is doing a job exclusive to the Federal Gov.
Supreme Court Rules 5-4 That State Authorities Cannot Protect American Citizens from Illegal Border Entry
January 22, 2024 | Sundance | 847 CommentsThe White House applauded the order, which was handed down after a federal appeals court last month had forced federal agents to stop cutting the concertina wire.
“Texas’ political stunts, like placing razor wire near the border, simply make it harder and more dangerous for frontline personnel to do their jobs,” White House spokesperson Angelo Fernández Hernández said.
[clip]
In court papers, the administration said the wire impedes Border Patrol agents from reaching migrants as they cross the river and that, in any case, federal immigration law trumps Texas’ own efforts to stem the flow of migrants into the country.
Texas officials have argued that federal agents cut the wire to help groups crossing illegally through the river before taking them in for processing.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor sided with the administration. Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Clarence Thomas voted with Texas.
Last edited:
That's why I thought the ruling would have been greater than 5-4.
Why not just shout across the river, there's a crossing a few miles down, use that so you don't drown.
Toxick
Splat
Toxick
Splat
The short version is, in an uninformative, three-sentence, 5-4 order, the Supreme Court struck a Texas federal court injunction banning Biden’s Border Patrol from removing Texas’s carefully-installed anti-immigrant razor wire except in medical emergencies.
The Supreme Court’s order did not explain its reasoning. But, in their briefs to the Court, both sides — Texas and Biden’s Border Patrol — argued the other side was being irrational.
Biden’s lawyers’ brief argued that, since it takes 10-30 minutes to remove razor wire, the injunction’s ‘medical emergencies’ exception was irrational and useless, because drowning migrants would be floating around dead by the time Border Agents could cut through all that wire to save them. I mean, come on! How are Agents supposed to deliver medical services to criminals trying to flood the border with all that razor wire sitting there? Plus, it’s the Border Patrol’s J-O-B to be on the border. It’s right in the name. Texas’s razor wire stops them from getting to their workplace.
We never ever remove the wire to let migrants in, Biden’s lawyers soberly promised the Court. We only do it to protect the border and to save human lives.
Texas’s lawyers were like, look, we are literally being overrun and the Border Patrol keeps cutting up our fences as soon as we uncoil them. The fences don’t even stop criminals from crossing, it just slows them down. Plus there’s been no documented case of any Border Patrol agent being stopped from saving a drowning migrant’s life. So it’s irrational to let the Border Patrol access Texas’s border when the Border Patrol is helping an army illegally invade Texas.
Texas’s lawyers insisted that, The Border Patrol is lying; they cut up our razor wire all the time to let the migrants across.
In 2012, the Supreme Court under Obama issued an awful decision in Arizona v. United States, which gave the feds broad border authority, ‘pre-empting’ most of Arizona’s recently-passed law cracking down on illegal immigration. That 2012 case was heavily cited by both sides in the current crop of briefs, with the Border Patrol praising the decision as being wise and being the law of the land, and with Texas insisting that Arizona was either wrongly decided or just not applicable here.
Yesterday’s decision wasn’t a ruling on the case, it only applied to the anti-cutting injunction. Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh would have let the razor-wire injunction stand for now, but Justices Roberts and Barrett sided with the three liberal justices and agreed that, for the time being, the injunction must go. But the case continues and Texas will still argue — the longer way — that under states’ rights it should be allowed to install razor wire along its border whenever necessary.
My best guess at the way the decision came down is the four justices who voted to uphold the injunction are states’ rights absolutists and probably think the Arizona case should be overturned. Justices Roberts and Barrett are less strong on states’ rights, and recognize that unless overturned, Arizona stands as the current law. But I’m only guessing.
☕️ MIGRATORY ☙ Tuesday, January 23, 2024 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠
Missing Lloyd Austin inches closer to a public appearance; Biden fights for Ukraine's border; Proxy War problems; guess what Jamie Dimon said now?; the big awful Supreme Court decision; and lots more.
www.coffeeandcovid.com
Justice Sotomayor says she’s ‘traumatised’ by Supreme Court losses
“Every loss truly traumatises me in my stomach and in my heart,” Justice Sotomayor said on Monday while speaking with students at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law.Justice Sotomayor, who was the first Latina woman appointed to the court, has become known for crafting passionate dissents. Last year, she wrote that the “symbolic damage” of the court’s decision in 303 Creative LLC v Elenis, an LGBT+ rights case, was “done”.
“But I have to get up the next morning and keep on fighting,” Justice Sotomayor said. “What choice do you have to be to fight the good fight.”
Looking to this term, the court is poised to issue opinions on gun rights, access to abortion medication, criminal justice statutes and Donald Trump’s eligibility for the presidency.
Based on the court’s make-up, the majority opinion in those cases is likely to differ from the opinion of Justice Sotomayor and the other liberal justices.
When asked how she continues working alongside conservative justices whom she disagrees with, Justice Sotomayor said she looks for the good in people.
Finally, it wasn’t just me and the Ukrainian troops who were skeptical yesterday. The U.S. Supreme Court held oral arguments on the Trump Insurrection challenge yesterday morning. As you recall, Colorado’s Supreme Court found Trump unqualified for the ballot under an archaic 14th Amendment Constitutional provision precluding “insurrectionists” (i.e., post-Civil War former Democrat slave owners) from holding certain offices or serving as electors.Most intelligent legal minds, including mine, believed there was no way the 14th Amendment applied to President Trump. And, after hearing the Justices’ skeptical questions, including the liberal Justices, it looks like Trump is going to win the case in a landslide, not even close, maybe even 9-0.
There were lots of great moments, but to give you some a taste of what Colorado’s lawyers were up against, here’s a short clip of possibly the most liberal Justice on the Court, and you can tell she wasn’t buying it:
CLIP: Justice Ketanji Jackson appears very skeptical over Trump ‘insurrection’ challenge (2:32).
And .. they know. Corporate media is preparing their readers for disappointment, From the Associated Press yesterday:
Even though we expected this to happen, it’s still great news.
I told you 2024 was going to be off the chain.
☕️ SKEPTICISM ☙ Friday, February 9, 2024 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠
Carlson-Putin interview dents the Proxy War; Special Counsel torpedoes Biden; attacks on Moscow after interview; Zelensky's replacement general butchers morale; Supreme Court favors Trump; and more.
www.coffeeandcovid.com
Supreme Court Asks Special Counsel to Respond to Trump Presidential Immunity Appeal
President Trump is asking for the Supreme Court to halt the appellate decision because it incorrectly ruled that presidential immunity didn’t apply to Mr. Smith’s prosecution of him.
His attorney, D. John Sauer, had argued in January that the Constitution required presidents first face impeachment and trial by Congress before they could be criminally prosecuted within Article III courts. A three-judge panel on the D.C. Circuit unanimously rejected his arguments, stating that” ‘[c]oncerns of public policy, especially as illuminated by our history and the structure of our government’ compel the rejection of his claim of immunity in this case.”
The judges also ruled that “any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as President no longer protects him against this prosecution.”
Ailing Justice Sonia Sotomayor Traveled with Medic, Needed “Medical Supplies” and “Medical Gear”
Trump was right. Again.
Far-left Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor is in really bad shape. The 69-year-old justice is overweight and suffers from type 1 diabetes.
According to newly released US Marshals Service records, Sonia Sotomayor, the oldest left-leaning justice on the bench, traveled with a medic and needed “medical supplies,” and “medical gear.”
“Justice Sotomayor’s health concerns are also apparent throughout the documents. On a Feb. 2018 trip to south Florida with no public events, Sotomayor appears to have a medic from Grand Junction, Colo. accompanying her, and another is with her during an Oct. 2018 swing through Chicago and Nashville for book events. Four of Sotomayor’s 2021 trips mention “medical gear” or “medical supplies.” What’s more, some version of the phrase, “PPE will be utilized for the duration of this mission,” appears to have been written on a dozen of her 2021 USMS travel reports, including one where deputies are directed: “Wear masks regardless of vaccination status,” p. 281.” the records stated.
“Per the documents she appears to have done what many Americans who could afford to did during the pandemic: spend months in a warm place working remotely, as the reports indicate she spent the last six weeks of 2020 and first six weeks of 2021 in south Florida, including for the Court’s Dec. 2020 and Jan. 2021 sittings.” the records said.
Joe Biden has only appointed one Supreme Court Justice since he was installed in January 2021.
Biden picked far-left Ketanji Brown Jackson to replace Justice Stephen Breyer.
Court watchers have long speculated Sotomayor would retire early since she suffers from a host of health problems.
Kinnakeet
Well-Known Member
maybe she should leave her position
Kinnakeet
Well-Known Member
She has the sickness that many fear for which there is no cure...DEMOCRAT
ScotusBlog ran a very encouraging legal story yesterday headlined, “Public officials can be held liable for blocking critics on social media.” It was very bad news for lefty local officials.
In another blockbuster 9-0 opinion supporting the First Amendment, the Supreme Court ruled yesterday that elected officials and bureaucrats who post about their work — even on their personal social media accounts — are acting on behalf of the government. And so they can be held personally liable for violating the First Amendment when they ‘block’ their critics, even from their personal accounts.
The Court created a new test: An official is said to be acting in their official capacity, even on their personal social media, whenever (1) they have the power to speak on behalf of the state and (2) they are actually doing that, talking about their job or politics or whatever. The decision says it doesn’t matter whether it’s on their official government account or their personal account.
Many lefty officials have been avoiding First Amendment liability by talking a blue streak on their personal accounts and not using their official government platforms. Now the Supreme Court — 9-0! — has cut that off.
Even better, the Supreme Court’s solid support for the First Amendment in this case also signals that it will reach the right result in the Missouri v. Biden case about the federal government’s fascistic involvement with the big social media companies.
☕️ GO GETTERS ☙ Saturday, March 16, 2024 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠
Team Fani makes a bold move but it won't help; the Supreme Court supports Free Speech again in a great sign; and the very best news you will get all year.
www.coffeeandcovid.com