Posted on Oct 31, 2023
Too conservative for the Supreme Court? The nation's most right-leaning appeals court draws...
458
5
3
3
3
0
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2023/10/31/trump-guns-abortion-supreme-court-fifth-circuit/ [login to see] 7/
Deeply partisan legal battles this year over the abortion pill mifepristone, the regulation of ghost guns and a White House effort to remove social media posts all have something − or rather, some place − in common: They all made their way to the Supreme Court from the same federal appeals court in Louisiana.
And in each of those cases, the conservative Supreme Court sided with President Joe Biden.
After overturning Roe v. Wade, expanding access to guns and undermining the separation of church and state, the current Supreme Court has become the most right-leaning in decades. Yet some of the court's conservatives appear eager to also send a message to the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals: Don't overdo it.
Deeply partisan legal battles this year over the abortion pill mifepristone, the regulation of ghost guns and a White House effort to remove social media posts all have something − or rather, some place − in common: They all made their way to the Supreme Court from the same federal appeals court in Louisiana.
And in each of those cases, the conservative Supreme Court sided with President Joe Biden.
After overturning Roe v. Wade, expanding access to guns and undermining the separation of church and state, the current Supreme Court has become the most right-leaning in decades. Yet some of the court's conservatives appear eager to also send a message to the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals: Don't overdo it.
Too conservative for the Supreme Court? The nation's most right-leaning appeals court draws...
Posted from usatoday.com
Conservative
Supreme Court
Abortion
Firearms and Guns
Posted 1 y ago
Responses: 1
1
1
0
What both "the left" and "the right" cannot comprehend is that the so-called "conservative" Supreme Court has simply sided with the the law of this nation in each of those cases and each of the other cases that one side or the other screams about.
You (well, maybe not you, but more reasonable people) will notice that it is only a very recent trend that the media brands every federal judge and justice with a lifelong stigmata of the name of the president when the judge was appointed.
You (well, maybe not you, but more reasonable people) will notice that it is only a very recent trend that the media brands every federal judge and justice with a lifelong stigmata of the name of the president when the judge was appointed.
(1)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
They sided with their view of the law of the nation.
What is and is not the law is neither conservative nor liberal and is often vague, which is why we need a Supreme court.
The easy cases where the law are clear usually result in unanimous decisions (which happens in more SCOTUS cases than not), but the hot button issue cases that get all of the press are definitely not clear, and swing back and forth between liberal and conservative interpretations over time.
What is and is not the law is neither conservative nor liberal and is often vague, which is why we need a Supreme court.
The easy cases where the law are clear usually result in unanimous decisions (which happens in more SCOTUS cases than not), but the hot button issue cases that get all of the press are definitely not clear, and swing back and forth between liberal and conservative interpretations over time.
(1)
(0)
MSG Thomas Currie
LTC (Join to see) - That's true enough.
People have always complained about activist judges inventing their own laws. Most recently, of course, people have screamed that the "conservative" court outlawed abortion (it didn't) and did lots of other things (most of which it did).
But this is hardly the most "activist" US Supreme Court.
And neither was the 1973 Supreme Court that invented the rationale for Roe v Wade.
If you want to see a really activist US Supreme Court inventing new legal concepts, you have to look back to 1857 when the court invented its power to declare laws unconstitutional. We take that power for granted today, but at the time that power was even more controversial than the decision that introduced it.
People have always complained about activist judges inventing their own laws. Most recently, of course, people have screamed that the "conservative" court outlawed abortion (it didn't) and did lots of other things (most of which it did).
But this is hardly the most "activist" US Supreme Court.
And neither was the 1973 Supreme Court that invented the rationale for Roe v Wade.
If you want to see a really activist US Supreme Court inventing new legal concepts, you have to look back to 1857 when the court invented its power to declare laws unconstitutional. We take that power for granted today, but at the time that power was even more controversial than the decision that introduced it.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google