Discussion: The Supreme Court II



I have found myself turned around on protesting a government official's homes. The right has been doing it for decades, and have ramped up. Let them taste their own medicine.
 
Not a SCOTUS news article. Yet.

The Hill - Jimmy Carter says court ‘misinterpreted’ environmental law he signed


Former President Jimmy Carter is taking the rare step of weighing in on judicial proceedings, saying that an appeals court is misinterpreting a conservation law he signed.

On Monday, Carter filed a briefing chastising a ruling that upheld a Trump-era decision to build a road through a national wildlife refuge in order to enable medical evacuations nearby.

Carter, in an amicus brief, argued that the ruling, from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals “misinterpreted” the law in question, called the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA).

“The understanding adopted by the panel majority here is not only deeply mistaken, it is also dangerous,” Carter wrote.

He wrote that the panels’ findings could be applied to other decisions in the future, circumventing what he described as the law’s intention.

“The secretarial powers the decision recognized would apply equally to National Parks, National Forests, National Wildlife Refuges, as well as Wilderness Areas and other conservation lands, and to all manner of development and extractive activities, not just road building,” he wrote. “Congress’s landmark action—the culmination of years of study and struggle—to designate for permanent preservation specific unrivaled national interest lands would be negated.”

In its ruling, the panel of judges argued that in the law, Congress enabled then-Interior Secretary David Bernhardt to strike an “appropriate balance” between environmental interests and economic and social needs.

But Carter wrote that the law’s mention of “adequate” social and economic needs describes what the legislation had achieved and did not allow for future decisions that sacrificed conservation in the interest of balance.
 
Last edited:
Those corporations should block Texas from accessing their sites and apps. A week without access and Texas will change its mind.

Part of the insanity of the law, is that Twitter can't do that. Which runs over a whole, whole bunch of legal precedent.
 
It's more illegal behavior from Texas. This **** should never have been able to go this far but apparently the judges are luddites who literally have zero understanding of the ruling they just made.
 
Listening to Clarence Thomas whining about "trust", is akin to......hell, I don't even know......
 
He has to know that its the decisions not the leak that's the problem. When you rule against what the majority of Americans think, you've got problems.
 
Yeah the SC has been damaged since 2000. I could not care less about the justice’s relationships. Stories about how RBG and Scalia were friends don’t mean anything and help people who are suffering.
 
Roberts continues his crusade against campaign finance regulation.
 
And now the 5th Circuit says the SEC is unconstitutional. Expand the courts and break up that insane court.
 
We can no longer categorize this as a pissing match, as Democrats, if they could get over being pee-shy in the first place, would be trying to piss out a burning house Republicans torched to profit off the ashes. The only hope now is doing something preventatively radical in the hopes it kills two birds with one stone and stomp these fascist ****s out once and for all.
 
4 Justices got it wrong and it shouldn't have been a close vote but the correct side prevailed in an unusual decision on a temporary stay.





67% of Democratic appointees (Breyer, Sotomayor) got it correct.
50% of Republican appointees (Alito, Gorsuch, Thomas) got it wrong.

 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,549
Messages
21,758,686
Members
45,593
Latest member
Jeremija
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"