Judgement Day
The Supreme Court ruled on six cases on Thursday.
Three are considered Landmark Cases. All three of these rulings were unanimous.
1) An Ohio woman sued the state for reverse discrimination claiming she was passed up for a promotion because she’s straight. The Justices all agreed the woman’s civil rights were violated because of this reasoning. This case makes it easier for future reverse discrimination cases to be heard.
2) The nine justices have also unanimously ruled on Catholic Charities v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission, which focuses on the separation of church and state. The justices say the charity is entitled to tax relief it was denied because it’s operations were not primarily religious. This decision could expand eligibility for religious tax exemptions.
3) All justices agreed to throw out a lawsuit brought on by the Mexican government against gun maker Smith & Wesson. Mexico argued that the gun manufacturer was worsening violence in the country. But justices cited a 2005 law that shields gun companies from legal liability. Justice Elana Kagan acknowledged Mexico’s gun problems in the opinion. But she says the country’s lawyers failed to make allegations that would surmount those liability protections.
Supreme Court rules on six cases on Thursday
I'm glad to see the Court able to handle cases at this pace. The court is trying to deal with a lot of appeals from the Trump administration. Maybe we'll hear about the district judges next week.
Tags
Who is online
101 visitors
Easy cases.
Next round of decisions coming a week from today.
They actually were, yeah.
I hope so. The resist everything Trump with the courts needs to stop.
I can't wait to see what the court rules.
I doubt that one will be unanimous.
See, I don't mind them trying.
That's how the system is supposed to work.
Some, maybe. But many are just frivolous to muck things up. I also have an issue with a local judge making country wide decisions. I am really looking forward to how that goes.
Exactly.
A Federal judge should have federal reach It's that simple. Otherwise jurisdictions become a logistical nightmare
We shall see how that goes.
You can overdo a thing, though. I think a lot of what the administration is doing is illegal and should be stopped, but there does develop a sort of hysteria over all things Trump that isn’t always warranted.
You have to start somewhere, though, and most every case starts in a District court. You can’t start every case in the Supreme Court. And then, several of these cases are about executive orders or agency regulations that impact the whole country. So the national impact is unavoidable.
Finally moving towards the end of different legal standards for different races. This sums it up as well as anything:
Not exactly. The lower court was requiring her to prove her case at a higher standard because she is part of a majority group (she is straight). The Court basically said that was BS and she should be able to make a discrimination case just like anyone else (I agree). SCOTUS has not established that she was discriminated against at her work, although it sounds like she has a good case.
The key point in this case is that government must remain neutral between one religion and another. The Wisconsin court didn’t want to treat them as religious because they weren’t proselytizing and they were helping people of all faiths, but sometimes a religion doesn’t want its people proselytizing or discriminating in that way. Honestly, I think Wisconsin’s holding was bizarre. This was not a hard case.
Again, not a hard one. Try going after criminals instead of manufacturers. Mexico has a LOT of work to do with organized crime.