WSJ.com : U.S. News
Opinion | A Supreme Court Split Decision on Executive Power
The President can fire agency heads—except for the Federal Reserve.
Center
New York Post
Germany’s extra-time goal disallowed versus Paraguay in controversial World Cup decision
Right
It was a devastating moment for Germany, which could have wrapped up the match with the goal and advanced in the tournament
Compare Perspectives
Found 8 stories
Raw Story
Expert slams GOP pundit's analogy for controversial Supreme Court case: 'Ridiculous'
A Constitutional law expert slammed a GOP pundit's "absolutely ridiculous" analogy about the Supreme Court's decision to overturn more than nine decades of precedent on presidential power. On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in Trump v. Slaughter that President Donald Trump has the authority to fire members of the previously independent Federal Trade Commission. The decision overturned a precedent known as Humphrey's Executor, which had stood for more than 91 years, and prevented the president from firing employees of independent government agencies. Trump celebrated the opinion in a post on Truth Social, saying it "greatly increased presidential power at a time when it is needed most." Hogan Gidley, a senior advisor to the America First Policy Institute, argued on CNN's "The Arena" with host Kasie Hunt that the Supreme Court was right to rule that Trump has a right to fire people, just like a new head football coach is allowed to bring in a coaching staff of their choice. Michele Goodwin, a Constitutional law professor at Georgetown Law, replied that the analogy, if applied by the Trump administration, "should cause all of us to worry about the reach of the decision.""Let's be clear. We just experienced a global pandemic, and during that pandemic, we had a president who suggested that if people looked at the sun and just drank bleach, bathed in bleach, or something along those lines, COVID might not reach them," Goodwin said. "That was absolutely ridiculous." "This is exactly why you need experts who are learned and in agencies, and it is why they need an arms-length distance not only from the President, but also from Congress and the Supreme Court, to be able to do the work," she added.
Far Left
Alternet.org
Trump 'completely livid' over mail-in ballot decision
President Donald Trump is reportedly “livid” at a Supreme Court judge he appointed for not siding with him in his desire to force states to not count mail-in ballots when they arrive after Election Day.“He is completely livid over the mail-in ballot ruling,” senior White House correspondent Kristen Holmes said on Monday. “And of course, part of this is about the justices who decided to rule against him in this case. Just a reminder — this was the Republican National Committee challenging a Mississippi law that allowed mail-in ballots that came in after Election Day to still be counted.”She added that “if you look at the justices who voted against Donald Trump and the Republican National Committee, one of them sticks out in particular, and that is Amy Coney Barrett — whom President Trump himself appointed to the bench. Trump has been growing increasingly frustrated. We've reported multiple times that behind closed doors he has slammed Amy Coney Barrett, saying that she has not stepped up and has not done basically what he put her in place to do.”Trump has particularly focused on reducing the influence of mail-in ballots and on passing the SAVE America Act because, as he has admitted, he hopes to disenfranchise enough Democratic voters that Republicans can retain control of the House of Representatives and Senate.“We have heard from senators up and down that they just don't have the votes to get it through, that there aren't enough Republicans who support it,” Holmes said. “And now we're hearing that the White House as well as Speaker Johnson are putting a lot of pressure on members, working the phones, to try to get this through whatever way they possibly can. You heard President Trump saying this is now more important than ever.”She added, “And I will tell you, Erin — I'm told by a White House official that President Trump is unlikely to sign that bipartisan housing bill. He'll just let it go into law. He's not going to veto it, but right now he views actually signing it as a betrayal to his base. He has promised to get the Save America Act through before he signs any major legislation, so he's willing to potentially not sign this very widely supported housing bill in order to try to push the Save America Act forward.”Speaker to AlterNet earlier this month Dan Vicuña, the Senior Policy Director for Voting and Fair Representation at the good government nonprofit Common Cause, accused Trump of attempting to suppress mail-in voting, demand stricter voter ID laws, obtain access to voter rules to conduct mass purges and threaten to install ICE at polling places in order to rig the 2026 midterm elections in his favor.“What they all add up to is a desire to avoid any accountability to the voters in the midterm elections — to ensure, to preordain the outcome of a midterm that he thinks is going to go badly for him,” Vicuña told AlterNet. “We know, from the Big Lie of the 2020 election to spurring on a violent revolt to overthrow a free and fair election, that he has no respect for democratic norms, for the voice of the people. This is entirely about his own power and his own ego. He will even invest in protecting that ego and protecting his power at the expense of the needs of the public. People are suffering with high gas prices and affordability issues, and he does not care. All that matters is protecting his power, and he has no interest in whether he does that through democratic means.”Vicuña added that Trump’s attempts to national elections could also be illegal.“I think some of these attempts to federalize, to nationalize elections are clearly illegal,” Vicuña said. “You've seen some of that overreach already struck down — attempts to order independent agencies to force a strict voter ID requirement on people. That has been rejected. Common Cause is in court challenging the latest executive order to turn the United States Postal Service into some election administration agency and to create a further bureaucratic layer to make it more difficult to vote by mail. In terms of the president's authority to order around USPS, it's illegal. In terms of USPS's authority to become some sort of national election administration agency, it far exceeds the legal authority that Congress gave to the postal service. The statute describing what kind of work the postal service would do is about postal service work — processing mail and selling stamps. It has nothing to do with election administration.”Republican lawmakers have reportedly complained that Trump has given them an “impossible task” by demanding that they pass the unpopular SAVE America Act.
Left
NYT > U.S. > Politics
Supreme Court Decision on Late-Arriving Mail-In Ballots Grants Relief to 18 States
The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that state laws allowing ballots to arrive after Election Day are legal. The decision is the latest in a series of setbacks for President Trump’s efforts to regulate elections.
Center Left
Latest Political News on Fox News
Embattled Maine Democrat deadlocked with Collins despite controversies in key Senate race, new poll shows
Graham Platner holds a slim two-point edge over Susan Collins in a new poll, but controversies and character concerns cloud his path to victory.
Right
The Hill News
Trump renews call to force Lisa Cook from Federal Reserve board after Supreme Court decision
President Trump doubled down on his push to remove Lisa Cook from the Federal Reserve board after a divided Supreme Court blocked him from doing so immediately Monday. In a post on Truth Social, Trump noted the Supreme Court “sent back” the case to a lower court “on a strictly procedural basis.” The president also…
Center
The Hill News
Ex-FTC commissioner calls on Congress to reassert authority after SCOTUS decision
Former Federal Trade Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter on Monday called on Congress to reassert its authority as a coequal branch of government after the Supreme Court ruled that President Trump had the authority to fire her last year. The conservative majority ruled 6-3 in favor of the president, expanding presidential power over an independent agency within…
Center
RealClearPolitics - Homepage
Trump Slams Ballot Decision, Pushes Voter ID Bill
President Trump railed against Monday's Supreme Court ruling that allows states to keep counting ballots after Election Day and urged Congress to pass his voter ID legislation that would severely restrict mail-in ballots.
Center Right