The US Supreme Court Thread - Post Roe v. Wade reversal edition

Supreme Court, by a 6-3 margin, has granted DOGE affiliates access to SSA records. Hopefully we can finally get a real audit done and make sure people aren't collecting from dead relatives.

 

A few pro Doge rulings, as stated above, they can look at Social Security data, but the DC government can't look at Doge data (not all, the scope needs to be limited)

Both decisions were down party line.

JUST IN: The Supreme Court agrees to pause a district court's orders permitting discovery of DOGE materials under the Freedom of Information Act. The case is sent back to the lower court with instructions to narrow the discovery order. All three Democratic appointees would deny.

— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 6, 2025

BREAKING: The Supreme Court grants DOGE affiliates access to Social Security Administration records. Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson would deny the request.

— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 6, 2025

 

Liberals certainly have a love-hate relationship with this court.

But conservatives do too, which goes to show it's working as it should.

 

Vast majority of Americans polled thinks Trump should follow federal court orders. But Trumplicans?

The vast majority of American adults believe the Trump administration must comply with federal court orders, though the president’s strongest supporters are split over the issue, according to a new NBC News Decision Desk Poll powered by SurveyMonkey.

In the poll, 81% of U.S. adults say that if a federal court rules that an administration action is illegal, then the administration has to follow its ruling, while 19% say the administration can ignore the ruling and continue its action.

But among people who consider themselves supporters of the MAGA movement, there's a sharper divide. According to the poll, supporters of President Donald Trump are split, 50%-50%, over whether he should comply with federal court orders.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/su...rump-obey-court-rulings-maga-repub-rcna212783

 

I think that this should be cross-posted in the Doom thread...sigh

 

The Supremes ruled in favor of Ed Sheeran, who was accused of plagiarism of Let’s Get I On by Marvin Gaye.

 

Well, hopefully this discourages the plaintiff from continuing their copyright trolling. They have been extremely vigorous in their lawsuits based on people stealing the "vibe" of Marvin Gaye songs. It largely started when Gaye's estate won a lawsuit against Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke's song "Blurred Lines" for infringing upon the Marvin Gaye song "Got to Give It Up", despite the songs not sharing anything other than the vibe. The estate saw money and started going after other artists as well, with Sheeran being the latest.

 

A blog post on a presidents ability to fire remove members of 'independent agencies'.

"And just weeks ago, the court issued a decision on its emergency docket, involving a dispute that arose after President Donald Trump fired members of the National Labor Relations Board and the Merit Systems Protection Board despite statutes saying they could only be removed “for cause.” The employees asked to be reinstated while the case makes its way through the courts – but the court declined. In her own memorable dissent, Justice Elena Kagan wrote: “Today’s order favors the President over precedent.” A fitting echo of the old debate.

The question now is not whether Morrison will be remembered; it’s whether its dissent will become the majority. If it does, it will mark one of the great reversals in Supreme Court history – and represent a posthumous triumph for Scalia over the wolf he believed Congress had let loose. "

https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/06/the-lone-wolf/


This author seems to be a believer of the unitary executive theory.

 

SCOTUS upholds Tennessee law banning gender affirming care for minors by a 6-3 margin

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS TENNESSEE'S LAW BANNING SO-CALLED GENDER-AFFIRMING CARE FOR MINORS, SAYS SUCH LAWS DO NOT REQUIRE HEIGHTENED SCRUTINY AND MEET RATIONAL BASIS REVIEW. ROBERTS WITH THE OPINION. 6-3, BUT WITH LOTS OF SPLITS.

— Varad Mehta (@varadmehta) June 18, 2025

 

Prisoners can have jury trials

The 5-4 decision is from Chief Justice Roberts. Justice Barrett dissented, joined by Thomas, Alito and Kavanaugh. https://t.co/kAah9afE2l

— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 18, 2025

The Tennessee decision.

The 6-3 decision is from Chief Justice Roberts. Justice Sotomayor dissented, joined by Jackson. Justice Kagan also dissented. https://t.co/6AGLRyBJaS

— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 18, 2025

I am not sure about this one, I guess EPA ruling can be appealed in regional courts, can someone smart explains this to me?

The 8-0 decision is from Justice Thomas. Justice Alito did not take part in the case. https://t.co/dmjGzHHV8y

— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 18, 2025

Texans loses a case about Nuclear licensing.

The 6-3 decision in Nuclear Regulatory Commission v. Texas is from Justice Kavanaugh. Justice Gorsuch dissented, joined by Thomas and Alito. https://t.co/4kcIcTU9UI

— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 18, 2025

 

Man, that Justice Thomas N. Alito, he's just always on the wrong side of everything, isn't he?

 

I've kinda gotten used to Gotcha Libs! posts without any context or links. As have our stupidfaces...

 

As I understand the transgender decision, the various medical treatments are still legal in Tennessee, just not for minors who have sexual dysphoria.

 

Just to be clear, I'm biased, and my sources are biased. Elie Mystal at The Nation wrote about this, and he used the analogy of a minor cis boy (assigned male at birth) who wants testosterone supplements so he can be better at football in high school, is allowed that medication, but a minor trans boy (assigned female at birth) who wants testosterone supplements so he can be better at football in high school, cannot have them. Even if his parents and doctors agree that he should have them for medical reasons.

I don't have a free link to Elie Mystal's article because I'm not yet a subscriber, but here's the free site, which people can read if they haven't used up their three free articles from The Nation yet.

https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/us-vs-skrmetti-ruling-analysis/

 

Gender dysphoria.

The important thing is a bunch of heterosexual cisgender people (mostly "Bible-believing" and males, of course) know what is best for LGBT+ people.

 

No, they think it is just attention seeking and not real. They think "they should just straighten up and fly right."

 

This is not a contradiction. Take the “No” out, and it has all the same meaning.

 

So you think they care what's best?

 

Thanks for the correction, and also thanks for being gentle with my error, for extending some grace.