The US Supreme Court refused to review the constitutionality of a now-rescinded Securities and Exchange Commission policy that forced people and companies settling enforcement cases to never publicly criticize or contest the Wall Street watchdog’s claims.
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that federal law allows states to count non-military mail-in ballots received after Election Day. In a 5-4 ruling written by Trump-appointed Justice Amy […]
Justice Sonia Sotomayor accused the Supreme Court of giving President Donald Trump "power unknown even to the English Crown."The 6-3 ruling Monday in Trump v. Slaughter wiped out a 91-year-old precedent that let Congress protect the heads of independent federal agencies from being fired at will."In holding otherwise," Sotomayor wrote in dissent, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, "the Court gives the President a power unknown even to the English Crown against which the Founders revolted, elevating him above his once-coequal branches by transforming a duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed into a license to act in defiance of those very laws.""Perhaps worst of all, the Court today forgets its place," she continued. "Today's majority, however, decides that it knows better: better than even Hamilton, Story, Webster, Holmes, Brandeis, Frankfurter, and Rehnquist.""Today, the majority replaces 90 years of proven, workable practice with a half-baked theory of executive power that is simultaneously all encompassing yet also subject to necessary but undefined exceptions," she wrote. "The one thing that does appear to be clear going forward is that chaos will follow."The ruling guts the independence of more than two dozen federal agencies — including the bodies that police Wall Street, protect workers, and regulate airwaves. Trump can now fire their leaders for any reason, or no reason at all."In granting the President this unbridled authority, the Court upends its precedent, misconstrues our history, and sheds any pretense of judicial modesty," Sotomayor wrote, calling the decision "egregiously wrong."The court issued a separate 5-4 ruling the same day, preserving the Federal Reserve's independence, for now.
States that already ran voter rolls through the SAVE database can continue investigations of an estimated 24,000 voters.
President Donald Trump was mocked on Monday after the Supreme Court shut down his appeal of the E. Jean Carroll sexual abuse verdict, leaving a $5 million judgment against him standing.In 2023, a jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing writer E. Jean Carroll in a New York department store dressing room in the mid-1990s. They also found he defamed her when he denied it. The verdict carried $5 million in damages, which Carroll can now move to collect.Legal experts reacted to the major decision, detailing the significance."Trump starts today as a loser. E. Jean Carroll wins. The Supreme Court has declined to hear his appeal of her defamation verdict against him. It’s over, and it’s time for him to pay up," Joyce Vance, lawyer and former United States Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama, wrote on X."That’s the end of the line for Trump on the Carroll case," Ron Filipkowski, MeidasTouch editor and attorney, wrote on X."Roberta Kaplan, attorney for E. Jean Carroll: 'Today's Supreme Court decision affirms once and for all the jury's unanimous verdict that President Donald J. Trump sexually assaulted and defamed E. Jean Carroll. His multiple efforts to appeal that verdict have all failed and today's ruling ends his quest to avoid accountability for his actions,'" Kyle Griffin, executive producer of The Weeknight on MS NOW, wrote on X."What this means is that the jury verdict that determined that @realDonaldTrump had sexually abused my friend E. Jean Carroll by penetrating her v----- with his fingers, and therefore had defamed her by denying that he had done so, will stand as a final and conclusive judgment. The highly respected district judge who tried the case, the Hon. Lewis A. Kaplan, correctly stated multiple times that the jury's finding of sexual abuse under New York law meant that, in common parlance and under the law of most jurisdictions, Donald Trump was found to have raped E. Jean. So henceforth and forever more, it will be completely accurate—and utterly inactionable under the common and constitutional law of defamation—to state the following fact: DONALD J. TRUMP IS AN ADJUDICATED RAPIST," George Conway, attorney and Lincoln Project co-founder, wrote on X.
The US Supreme Court on Monday ruled 6-3 to allow President Trump to fire Biden-appointed Federal Trade Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter and other political appointees from executive branch agencies. Last March, President Trump fired both Democratic commissioners at the FTC. The post JUST IN: Supreme Court Overturns Landmark Humphrey’s Executor Case, Says Trump Can Fire Biden-Appointed FTC Commissioner – Trump Responds! appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
The Supreme Court has ruled 5-4 in favor of Mississippi -vs- RNC that state legislature can decide how long after election day that qualified election ballots cast may be received. [PDF HERE] Essentially, federal election day is election day, but ballots can be received after election day for the length of time determined by state […] The post Supreme Court Rules States Can Decide How Long After Election Day Ballots May Be Received appeared first on The Last Refuge.
The Supreme Court on Monday ruled 5-4 that states can accept mail ballots after polls close in federal races, rejecting the Republican National Committee’s (RNC) push to defeat the practice. More than a dozen states deem mail ballots that arrive after Election Day valid, so long as they were postmarked by then. Justice Amy Coney [...]
The U.S. Supreme Court narrowly ruled against President Donald Trump in his attempt to fire a Federal Reserve governor.The court voted 5-4 to deny the president's request to stay a lower court's injunction that prevented him from firing Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook, and the majority rejected the government's argument that the president's decision was not reviewable by the courts."Acceptance of the Government’s position would in effect transform the Federal Reserve’s for-cause protection into at-will employment — an interpretive leap out of step with the statute Congress enacted and our Nation’s tradition of central banking protected from political interference," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts for the majority.The court rejected the government's view that any concern about "conduct, ability, fitness, or competence" suffices and also rejected Cook's view that "cause" is limited to a fixed list of statutory categories. Instead, they ruled, given the Fed's unique constitutional design and importance to economic independence, "cause" requires a serious showing — not just a pretext to install a "more congenial" replacement.Justice Clarence Thomas in his dissent said he would have ruled for Trump entirely and argued that Cook's alleged mortgage fraud clearly counted as a justifiable cause for firing, and he was joined in the minority by Trump-appointed justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, as well as fellow conservative Justice Samuel Alito.