Supreme Court News

WASHINGTON, March 15 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court, addressing free speech rights in the digital age, decided on Friday that government officials can sometimes be sued under the Constitution's First Amendment for blocking critics on social media.
In unanimous decisions in two cases from California and Michigan, the justices set a new standard for determining if public officials acted in a governmental capacity when blocking critics on social media - a test to be applied in lawsuits accusing them of violating the First Amendment
Click to expand...

 
www.washingtonexaminer.com

Supreme Court declines to take Nicholas Sandmann’s petition - Washington Examiner

The Supreme Court declined to hear the case of Nicholas Sandmann, who sued news outlets for libelous coverage of his viral encounter with an activist in 2019.
www.washingtonexaminer.com www.washingtonexaminer.com

OIP.jpeg
 
Remember this decision. The opinion page is no longer the only place where opinions are published in a newspaper. The courts have ruled that the entire newspaper can be opinions only and no facts are required.
 
Altor said:
Remember this decision. The opinion page is no longer the only place where opinions are published in a newspaper. The courts have ruled that the entire newspaper can be opinions only and no facts are required.
Click to expand...
How else can they end up with the disinformation board "to silence dangerous dissenting voices" that they want ?
 
Last edited:
Cubsandtigers said:

A surprisingly good day in court for the pro choice crowd. Also liked to hear Gorsuch pound the table over the misuse of nationwide injunctions.
Click to expand...
Of interest was the article headline

Supreme Court to anti-abortion activists: You can’t just challenge every policy you don’t like​

Click to expand...
Can that be construed as a plea to both the left and right to use legislation to change policy rather than the court system?
 
Decision day:

  • In Sheetz v. El Dorado County, a challenge to a traffic impact mitigation fee levied on a California man who wanted to build a home on his property, the court held that the takings clause does not distinguish between legislative and administrative permit conditions.the
  • The court ruled unanimously in Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L. P. that pure omissions in connection with the sale or purchase of securities are not actionable under SEC Rule 10b-5(b).
  • In Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries Park St., LLC, the court held that a transportation worker need not work in the transportation industry to fall within the Federal Arbitration Act’s exemption for any “class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce.”

SCOTUSblog - Independent News & Analysis on the U.S. Supreme Court

Devoted to covering the US Supreme Court comprehensively, without bias according to the highest journalistic standards as a public service
www.scotusblog.com www.scotusblog.com

Links are to PDF files.
 
Omega said:
amgreatness.com

Supreme Court Rejects Black Lives Matter Appeal, Holds Leader Liable for Violence › American Greatness

On Monday, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) rejected an appeal from a leader of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement who was found liable for one of his follower’s violently attacking…
amgreatness.com amgreatness.com
Click to expand...
Seems like this has implication on the J6 riot.

The officer sued Mckesson, who organized the protest, on the basis that Mckesson “should have known” that the event “would become violent as other similar riots had become violent.”
 
time.com

Supreme Court to Decide Whether Donald Trump Can Be Criminally Prosecuted

The case over Trump's immunity is one of the most pivotal presidential power cases in a generation.
time.com time.com

This case is less about Trump and more about the control of the ever growing power of the imperial presidency. A president needs presumed immunity to govern, but a threat to that immunity might make future presidents follow the Constitution in their governance.

A side thought: Time magazine still exists?
 
Omega said:
Can that be construed as a plea to both the left and right to use legislation to change policy rather than the court system?
Click to expand...
It most certainly can. Just for the simple fact that the Supreme Court literally doesn't have the time to do it all for them. The number of denials of writ of certirorai are off the charts high.
 
Oral arguments before Supreme Court on Trump's claim of presidential immunity.

www.vox.com

Donald Trump had a fantastic day in the Supreme Court today

It’s unclear if the Court will explicitly hold that Trump could commit crimes with impunity, or if they’ll just delay his trial so long that it doesn’t matter.
www.vox.com www.vox.com

The USSC will probably punt more the case back to the lower courts. Immunity is not decided, but a remand back to lower courts likely means Trump's trial in the Jack Smith prosecution will start after the election.
 
Omega said:
Oral arguments before Supreme Court on Trump's claim of presidential immunity.

www.vox.com

Donald Trump had a fantastic day in the Supreme Court today

It’s unclear if the Court will explicitly hold that Trump could commit crimes with impunity, or if they’ll just delay his trial so long that it doesn’t matter.
www.vox.com www.vox.com

The USSC will probably punt more the case back to the lower courts. Immunity is not decided, but a remand back to lower courts likely means Trump's trial in the Jack Smith prosecution will start after the election.
Click to expand...
conservativeroof.com

LISTEN TO THIS: Justice Brett Kavanaugh Drops a BOMBSHELL Question...

CHECK THIS OUT!
conservativeroof.com conservativeroof.com

Jack Smith is in trouble.

conservativeroof.com

BETTER LATE THAN NEVER! JUST IN: In an Unexpected Move SCOTUS Justices Signal Th..

Here are the details...
conservativeroof.com conservativeroof.com
 
www.scotusblog.com

Court allows Texas to enforce age verification for online porn sites - SCOTUSblog

The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to temporarily block a Texas law that requires pornographic websites to verify their users’ ages. In a brief unsigned order, the justices turned down a request from a group of challengers that included an adult industry trade association to put the law on hold t
www.scotusblog.com www.scotusblog.com

The case will now weave its way through the lower courts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top