Tag: U.S. Supreme Court

Brett Kavanaugh: A Representation of the Damaged U.S. Judiciary

Center for American Progress logoOn October 6, 2018, the U.S. Senate voted 50-48 to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court despite credible, powerful allegations of sexual assault. The vote came on the heels of a partisan display by Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearings in which he put forward conspiracy theories that echoed his long career in conservative politics. His appearance drew more than 80 serious ethics complaints that were dismissed only because lower court judges do not have the legal authority to discipline Supreme Court justices. Recently, new information has come to light strongly indicating that little to no meaningful investigation by the Senate or the FBI into Kavanaugh’s past occurred after the allegations were made—underscoring the troubling nature of his nomination—despite claims to the contrary from the administration and his supporters in the Senate.

But Kavanaugh is not an anomaly; rather, he embodies major issues with regard to conservative court packing and a lack of ethical oversight within the entire judiciary—issues that necessitate reforms. So, while Kavanaugh and his confirmation process should be the focus of robust oversight, policymakers must also direct their efforts to fixing accountability issues within the federal judiciary as a whole that damage the institution’s legitimacy.

Conservative court packing

For decades, conservatives have worked in concert with wealthy donors to develop a pipeline of ideologically conservative jurists prepared to assert their ideology and life experiences over the law. In recent years, the impact of this work has multiplied thanks to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-KY) subversion of long-held procedures in order to pack the courts with ideologically conservative judges.

View the complete October 1 article by Maggie Jo Buchanan and Abbey Meller on the Center for American Progress website here.

Sen. Chris Coons told FBI last year about Kavanaugh allegation in NYT

Axios logoSen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) told the FBI last year about a sexual misconduct allegation against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh that was at the heart of a New York Times piece published over the weekend, reports the Washington Post.

Why it matters: Coons’ letter to FBI director Christopher Wray described an account from Kavanaugh’s Yale classmate Max Stier and was dated Oct. 2, 2018 — days before Kavanaugh was confirmed by the Senate on Oct. 6. The FBI, despite conducting a supplemental background investigation into Kavanaugh after multiple allegations of sexual assault and misconduct, did not investigate the allegation in Coons’ letter.

What he said: Coons told Wray that he had “several individuals” contact him to levy allegations against Kavanaugh, but he singled out the Stier allegation as “one individual whom I would like to specifically refer to you for appropriate follow up,” per the Post.

View the complete September 16 article on the Axios website here.

Supreme Court comes to Trump’s aid on immigration

The Hill logoThe Supreme Court has repeatedly come to President Trump’s aid over the border, bolstering his efforts to build a wall and turn aside migrants seeking asylum on the southern border.

The latest example came Wednesday night, when the court issued an unsigned order allowing the administration’s stringent new asylum policy to remain in place while battles over its legality continue.

The new rule is essentially a blanket rejection of asylum-seekers who pass through Mexico before arriving at the southern border, denying entrance to almost all Central American migrants, who make up the majority of the recent surge in border-crossers.

View the complete September 14 article by Chris Mills Rodrigo on The Hill website here.

Ginsburg completes radiation treatment for cancerous tumor

The Hill logoJustice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Friday completed three weeks of radiation treatment for a malignant tumor on her pancreas, the Supreme Court announced.

The treatment, conducted on an outpatient basis at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City, was to combat a tumor that was detected in early July during a routine blood test. A stent was also inserted into her bile duct as part of the treatment.

“The Justice tolerated treatment well,” the Supreme Court said in a statement. “The tumor was treated definitively and there is no evidence of disease elsewhere in the body.”

View the complete August 23 article by Tal Axelrod on The HIll website here.

Spokesman Says The President Isn’t ‘Going To Be Beholden To Courts Anymore’

A White House spokesman let slip something in a Fox News interview on Friday he probably didn’t mean to say.

Discussing the defeat in the Commerce Department’s effort to put a citizenship question on the 2020 census, Principal Deputy Press Secretary Hogan Gidley tried to argue — as President Donald Trump and Attorney General Bill Barr have said — that despite all appearances, the administration was actually vindicated by the Supreme Court.

“The Supreme Court even ruled this question could be on there, but it was impossible to get it on in time for printing,” Gidley said.

Of course, Gidley didn’t mention the fact that the reason it’s “impossible” to put the citizenship question on the Census in time is that the court found that the administration’s first attempt to include the question violated the law. Chief Justice John Roberts struck down the Commerce Department’s plans because it provided an apparently “contrived” justification for including the question. The impossibility only became a factor because the administration was so wildly inept and deceptive; it would have had to start all over again to add the question back to the Census because it is currently legally blocked from including it. And there just isn’t enough time for redo.

View the complete July 13 article by Cody Fenwick on the National Memo website here.

Trump: Commerce, Justice positions on Census are ‘FAKE’

Administration officials said census would go forward without citizenship question

Contradicting his own Justice and Commerce departments, President Donald Trump on Wednesday said his administration is moving ahead with an effort to place a citizenship question on the census amid a fierce legal battle.

After the Supreme Court called the administration’s census plan “contrived,” administration officials on Tuesday said they were dropping the proposal. But the president tweeted Wednesday he will continue the push.

Despite his own subordinates saying the citizenship question effort had been scrapped, the president called media reports of their plans to end the push “incorrect or, to state it differently, FAKE!”

View the complete July 3 article by John T. Bennett on The Roll Call website here.

Gerrymandering and the Rising Risk of a Monopoly on Power

New York Times logoThe Supreme Court’s decision merely preserves the status quo, but together with other trends, it could put a strain on democracy.

At some point or another over the last decade, Democrats have won the most votes but lost national elections for the presidency, the House and the Senate.

Partisan gerrymandering is just one of the reasons the Democrats are at such a disadvantage. But the Supreme Court’s decision on gerrymandering Thursday came as long-term political and demographic trends threaten to put Democrats at an even greater disadvantage in the Senate and perhaps also the presidency.

It’s even possible to imagine a future in which Republicans could effectively claim a monopoly on federal power despite continued weakness in the national vote.

View the complete June 28 article by Nate Cohn on The New York Times website here.

‘A court without a middle’: Supreme Court term signals changes ahead

The five conservative justices sent signals they want to undo long-standing precedents they think were wrongly decided

The Supreme Court started its term last October amid the political divisiveness of Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh’s confirmation process and with a much more private battle among the justices unfolding through the last day of the term Friday.

The departure of former Justice Anthony M. Kennedy after a decade as the court’s ideological axis, and the arrival of a more conservative Kavanaugh, sparked a new dynamic among the justices and a burst of writing as they staked out legal territory.

The court was expected to solidify its conservative tilt. But the question over the last nine months was just how far and how fast that would happen on major issues such as abortion rights, LGBT rights and the reach of government agencies.

View the complete June 28 article by Todd Ruger on The Roll Call website here.

Supreme Court stokes DACA fight for 2020

The Hill logoThe Supreme Court’s decision to hear cases on whether President Trumplawfully ended Obama-era protections for undocumented immigrants is teeing up the program as a key issue for Democrats in the 2020 presidential election.

Friday’s order was a win for the Trump administration after a pair of federal appeals courts ruled that officials’ move to wind down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program was unlawful and allowed the protections for “Dreamers” to stay in place.

And the order ensures that the protections for Dreamers, or undocumented immigrants who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children, will remain in place as the Supreme Court considers the cases.

View the complete June 29 article by Jacqueline Thomsen on The Hill website here.

Supreme Court rejects bid to restore Alabama abortion law

The Hill logoThe Supreme Court on Friday declined to hear a case on a 2015 Alabama abortion law that bans a common form of the procedure during the second trimester of pregnancy.

Alabama had sought to overturn lower court rulings that struck down the law, but the justices rejected that bid in their order.

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in a concurring opinion that he agreed the court should not hear the case, but called it a “stark reminder that our abortion jurisprudence has spiraled out of control.”

View the complete June 28 article why Jacqueline Thomsen on The Hill website here.