2026 SCOTUS Thread

[Caribbean Hen]

A win for sanity.

Something so basic

Unbelievable this went to Supreme Court

[UNI88]

Trump Loses It at Supreme Court Justices Who Voted Against Him

“I got a decision on tariffs that’s going to cost our country... hundreds of billions, potentially, of refunds,” Trump told attendees at the dinner, which was held in D.C’s Union Station. “Giving them back to people that have been ripping off our country because the Supreme Court didn’t want to put one little sentence that all money taken in up till this date doesn’t have to be paid back,” he continued. “Going to cost us hundreds of billions of dollars. So sad to see.”
...
“And not that it matters, doesn’t matter at all,” he continued. “But two of the people that voted for that I appointed and they sicken me. They sicken me because they’re bad for our country,” he added, referring to Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, both of whom he appointed during his first term.
...
In response to the ruling, the president decried the judges as “lap dogs,” adding that they were a “disgrace to our nation” and “disloyal to the Constitution.” He also accused them of being swayed by foreign interests and unidentified “slimeballs” from other countries.

Should we compare the foreign interests allegedly swaying SCOTUS to the foreign interests that the trump regime has been influenced by and profiting off of?

[BDKJMU]

How many times has KBJ been the 1 in 8-1 decisions now? The dumbest SCOTUS pick in the last half century.

Kagan turns on liberal ally Jackson with footnote jab over free speech
Kagan said Jackson's dissent ignored the "well-settled distinction" between viewpoint-based and content-based speech restrictions

Fellow liberal Justice Elena Kagan criticized Jackson for failing to acknowledge case law that governs when speech can be regulated in the medical field, marking a rare public break between two justices typically aligned in cases centered on high-profile cultural issues.

"Justice Jackson’s dissenting opinion claims that this is a small, or even nonexistent, category," Kagan wrote in a footnote of a concurring opinion, which Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined. "But even her own opinion, when listing laws supposedly put at risk today, offers quite a few examples."

Kagan, an Obama appointee, said Jackson’s view "rests on reimagining—and in that way collapsing—the well-settled distinction between viewpoint-based and other content-based speech restrictions."

The 8-1 decision on Tuesday arose from a lawsuit brought by Kaley Chiles, a licensed Christian therapist, who argued her conversations with youth clients were a form of protected speech. The Colorado government had said the conversations amounted to professional conduct that the state was allowed to regulate.

Jackson’s fiery 35-page dissent, which she read from the bench when the high court announced the opinion, was longer than the majority opinion and Kagan’s concurrence combined…..

….One conservative lawyer on social media observed that Kagan seemed "exasperated" by Jackson, who has become known as a verbose justice inclined to tack on lengthy solo dissents to the majority's opinions in prominent cases. Manhattan Institute’s Ilya Shapiro agreed.

"That should be a separate descriptor of an opinion: concurring, dissenting, expressing exasperation with Justice Jackson," Shapiro wrote on X….

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/kagan- ... ree-speech

[BDKJMU]

Not AI. This is real.

[UNI88]

[BDKJMU]

on which our Declaration is based.”

"Many progressives expressed admiration for each of them shortly before their governments killed tens of millions of people."

"It comes as no surprise that the progressives embraced eugenics... It was only a small step for Wilson to resegregate the federal workforce."

"It was only another step for the government to launch sterilization programs on those deemed by the experts of the day to be unfit to reproduce."

“European thinkers have long criticized America for remaining trapped in a Lockean world, with its weakened, decentralized government and strong individual rights. They say our 18th-century Declaration has prevented us from progressing to higher forms of government."

"But we were fortunate not to trade our Lockean bonds for the supposedly enlightened world of Hegel, Marx, and their followers. Fascism, which after all was national socialism, triggered wars in Europe and Asia that killed tens of millions."

"The socialism of the Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China proceeded to kill tens of millions more of their own people. This is what happens when natural rights give way to higher-good notions of history or progress, or, as Thomas Sowell has written, the visions of the anointed."

"None of this, of course, was an improvement on the principles of the Declaration. Tocqueville's Democracy in America is largely about how America owed its superiority over Europe to its conscious decision to reject central planning and administrative rule, root and branch."

"Progressivism, in other words, is retrogressive.”

[kalm]

on which our Declaration is based.”

"Many progressives expressed admiration for each of them shortly before their governments killed tens of millions of people."

"It comes as no surprise that the progressives embraced eugenics... It was only a small step for Wilson to resegregate the federal workforce."

"It was only another step for the government to launch sterilization programs on those deemed by the experts of the day to be unfit to reproduce."

“European thinkers have long criticized America for remaining trapped in a Lockean world, with its weakened, decentralized government and strong individual rights. They say our 18th-century Declaration has prevented us from progressing to higher forms of government."

"But we were fortunate not to trade our Lockean bonds for the supposedly enlightened world of Hegel, Marx, and their followers. Fascism, which after all was national socialism, triggered wars in Europe and Asia that killed tens of millions."

"The socialism of the Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China proceeded to kill tens of millions more of their own people. This is what happens when natural rights give way to higher-good notions of history or progress, or, as Thomas Sowell has written, the visions of the anointed."

"None of this, of course, was an improvement on the principles of the Declaration. Tocqueville's Democracy in America is largely about how America owed its superiority over Europe to its conscious decision to reject central planning and administrative rule, root and branch."

"Progressivism, in other words, is retrogressive.”

Cherry picking the parts he likes and labels he assigns while embracing liberalism. You a big fan of liberalism now?

[BDKJMU]

YUGE!

[BDKJMU]

Alito rips Jackson’s ‘utterly irresponsible’ solo dissent as Supreme Court fight shakes up 2026 map
Alito's concurrence, joined by Gorsuch and

Thomas, said Jackson's rhetoric 'lacks restraint'
Justice Samuel Alito tore into Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s lone dissent in a high-stakes Louisiana redistricting dispute on Monday, calling her arguments "baseless and insulting" after the Supreme Court decided to fast-track implementing its recent redistricting ruling ahead of the 2026 midterms.

Alito used a concurring opinion, joined by Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas, to directly rebuke Jackson, saying her "dissent in this suit levels charges that cannot go unanswered."

"The dissent goes on to claim that our decision represents an unprincipled use of power," Alito wrote, adding that that was a "groundless and utterly irresponsible charge."

The clash highlighted Jackson's increasingly isolated position on the court, as she broke not only from the conservative majority but also from her two liberal colleagues, who did not join her dissent. Jackson forcefully accused the Supreme Court of overreach, marking the latest in a pattern of solo dissents in which the Biden-appointed liberal justice has blasted high-profile majority decisions that have frequently favored President Donald Trump and Republicans.

In Monday's order, the high court decided in an unsigned ruling to allow Louisiana officials to quickly move forward with changing their congressional map, which is expected to reshape the state's congressional representation in favor of Republicans ahead of the midterms.

Alito argued that delaying the judgment of the high court's 6-3 ruling last month — which significantly narrowed section two of the Voting Rights Act by finding Louisiana's map was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander — served no practical purpose. Jackson's reasons for wanting to prolong implementation of the landmark ruling were "trivial at best" and "baseless and insulting," Alito said.

"The dissent accuses the Court of 'unshackl[ing]' itself from 'constraints,'" Alito wrote. "It is the dissent’s rhetoric that lacks restraint."

Jackson had warned that the high court's intervention risked improperly injecting itself into an active election and creating the "appearance of partiality," pointing to ongoing voting and legal challenges already unfolding in the state.

Legal experts observed the unusually pointed tone of Alito’s response, suggesting it indicated a deeper internal friction. George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said the conservative justice appeared to reach a breaking point in responding to Jackson’s criticism.

"Justice Alito had had enough," Turley wrote. "He noted that her reliance on the 32-day period was a ‘trivial’ objection that put form above substance since no party had asked for reconsideration. It would be waiting for 32 days for no purpose, while the other parties had stated a reasonable and pressing need to finalize the opinion."

Turley added that Alito took particular issue with Jackson’s accusation that the Supreme Court was acting in an "unprincipled" manner.

The dispute centered on the Supreme Court's procedural rule that typically allows about 32 days before a judgment is formally sent down to lower courts. Alito emphasized that the rule is flexible and intended primarily to allow time for rehearing petitions, which he signaled were not expected in this case.

The Supreme Court's decision Monday sends Louisiana into a scramble to implement a new map as ballots have already been sent to voters and the state's primary has been paused. The ruling is expected to have broader implications across the country as state election officials and courts attempt to finalize constitutionally compliant maps in time for the upcoming election...

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/alito- ... p-2026-map

[UNI88]

Alito rips Jackson’s ‘utterly irresponsible’ solo dissent as Supreme Court fight shakes up 2026 map
Alito's concurrence, joined by Gorsuch and

Thomas, said Jackson's rhetoric 'lacks restraint'
Justice Samuel Alito tore into Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s lone dissent in a high-stakes Louisiana redistricting dispute on Monday, calling her arguments "baseless and insulting" after the Supreme Court decided to fast-track implementing its recent redistricting ruling ahead of the 2026 midterms.

Alito used a concurring opinion, joined by Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas, to directly rebuke Jackson, saying her "dissent in this suit levels charges that cannot go unanswered."

"The dissent goes on to claim that our decision represents an unprincipled use of power," Alito wrote, adding that that was a "groundless and utterly irresponsible charge."

The clash highlighted Jackson's increasingly isolated position on the court, as she broke not only from the conservative majority but also from her two liberal colleagues, who did not join her dissent. Jackson forcefully accused the Supreme Court of overreach, marking the latest in a pattern of solo dissents in which the Biden-appointed liberal justice has blasted high-profile majority decisions that have frequently favored President Donald Trump and Republicans.

In Monday's order, the high court decided in an unsigned ruling to allow Louisiana officials to quickly move forward with changing their congressional map, which is expected to reshape the state's congressional representation in favor of Republicans ahead of the midterms.

Alito argued that delaying the judgment of the high court's 6-3 ruling last month — which significantly narrowed section two of the Voting Rights Act by finding Louisiana's map was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander — served no practical purpose. Jackson's reasons for wanting to prolong implementation of the landmark ruling were "trivial at best" and "baseless and insulting," Alito said.

"The dissent accuses the Court of 'unshackl[ing]' itself from 'constraints,'" Alito wrote. "It is the dissent’s rhetoric that lacks restraint."

Jackson had warned that the high court's intervention risked improperly injecting itself into an active election and creating the "appearance of partiality," pointing to ongoing voting and legal challenges already unfolding in the state.

Legal experts observed the unusually pointed tone of Alito’s response, suggesting it indicated a deeper internal friction. George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said the conservative justice appeared to reach a breaking point in responding to Jackson’s criticism.

"Justice Alito had had enough," Turley wrote. "He noted that her reliance on the 32-day period was a ‘trivial’ objection that put form above substance since no party had asked for reconsideration. It would be waiting for 32 days for no purpose, while the other parties had stated a reasonable and pressing need to finalize the opinion."

Turley added that Alito took particular issue with Jackson’s accusation that the Supreme Court was acting in an "unprincipled" manner.

The dispute centered on the Supreme Court's procedural rule that typically allows about 32 days before a judgment is formally sent down to lower courts. Alito emphasized that the rule is flexible and intended primarily to allow time for rehearing petitions, which he signaled were not expected in this case.

The Supreme Court's decision Monday sends Louisiana into a scramble to implement a new map as ballots have already been sent to voters and the state's primary has been paused. The ruling is expected to have broader implications across the country as state election officials and courts attempt to finalize constitutionally compliant maps in time for the upcoming election...

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/alito- ... p-2026-map

Is she wrong about the Court departing from usual practice by not delaying issuance of its mandate for a short period. Is she wrong about the Court inserting itself into an active election or is her concern grounded in a well-established principle regarding avoiding mid-election rule changes judicial interference with ongoing electoral processes? What did louisianastan do after the ruling?

Poor sammy, triggered by a strong black woman. Terms like baseless, insulting, and utterly irresponsible are subjective value judgements not legal determinations or findings. Did poor lil sammy go home and turn his flag upside down in distress?