![Supreme Court Term in Review 2024: 'With Fear for Our Democracy, [We] Dissent’](https://i.headtopics.com/images/2024/10/9/msmagazine/supreme-court-term-in-review-2024-with-fear-for-ou-supreme-court-term-in-review-2024-with-fear-for-ou-F92A5762BC4A58080009057D081271CF.webp)
More Than A Magazine, A Movement
Welcome to On The Issues with Michele Goodwin at Ms. Magazine. As you know, we’re a show that reports, rebels, and we tell it just like it is, and every year we bring you a Supreme Court term in review with a live studio audience and it’s always packed, and for the first time we’re bringing you one from Washington, DC and what a term to review before we prepare for what’s coming next with the Supreme Court.
They said well is someone like forcing you to do something against your will. They say well no. Is someone like making you not do something you want to do. Well, also no. So, again what is it to you but then you have Kacsmaryk say this sounds like standing to me and it goes to the fifth circuit and the fifth circuit agrees yeah I think there’s standing here and a particularly extra wild moment…Extra wild.
And so, what the Supreme Court has done has empowered Matthew Kacsmaryk and his ilk to do a bunch more garbage like that every day all around the country, and if you combine that with judge shopping I think it shows that this fake facts problem it’s going to get so much worse before it maybe gets better because these judges are absolutely shameless in embracing junk science overruling the views of experts and doing whatever they want and the supreme court has kind of given that a thumbs up now.
So, this is a legal recipe to impose disfigurement and potentially death on women who happen to live in these states with these sadistically pro bans and in fact it is creating emergencies we know from the briefings in the Moyle case that multiple Idaho women have had to be airlifted out of the state to receive emergency medical care.Yeah.
So, they’re just like you know.
This is all to say that this expanded notion of states’ abilities to impose themselves on the residents of other states to extend their power beyond state borders is what was really quashed with the Civil War amendments and what was unraveled in the Supreme Court’s reaction to those amendments was exactly this. Jim Crow in a lot of ways is an attempt to recreate the kind of constitutional sentiment that existed pre-1865.
And thank goodness for Judge Carlton Reeves who in the opinion to put a stay on the Mississippi law before the Supreme Court took that off talked about Fannie Lou Hamer and acknowledged that high percentage of black women who were being coercively sterilized there in Mississippi, to go back and tie it up with facts and what we call things they called it the appendectomy. The Mississippi appendectomy rather than the coercive forced sterilizations of black women. Okay. We must move on.
So, Chevron. Mark, what is Chevron? I mean people think that’s a car. It’s like Chevy. Is that a car? What is the Chevron doctrine? Why should people be concerned about it and what did we hear from the court this year?What was the Chevron doctrine? You know, I thought this was a little technical but Barbara Streisand recently tweeted about it ____00:33:17.But you know Babbs is tweeting about it. Thank you Babbs wherever you happen to be.
You want an agency to be able to say you know we think it is. Just because there’s like one different carbon molecule it still is the same thing. And so, the ability of agencies to no longer be able to securely make those determinations. They can still make those determinations but if a company sues with Chevron overturned it’ll be the courts now deciding whether or not the regulation was reasonable. There are two things I want to note here.
What all of these decisions that we’ve had in Jarkesy, in EPA today in Corner Post and in Loper Bright what they do is make it more difficult for people now to even make laws that allow for future progressive action. And so, it’s sort of like on the front end and back end we’re limited.It’s like one weird trick to seize power from both the executive branch and Congress all at once.
I think that this is going to lead to many people mistakenly attributing bad stuff to, you know, Congress or the executive branch or the president when in reality it is the Supreme Court that is blocking the effective enforcement of these laws.Well, we’re going to carry on and push just a little bit beyond our time. They’re very good back there but we’ve got a couple more things to cover before we let this go but you can see just how not boring talking about the Supreme Court is. All right.
What’s funny about it is that the majority opinion you have all these justices who are saying you know it seems like the lower courts didn’t understand Bruen. We were really clear but the lower courts must not have understood it. They didn’t comprehend because that’s not what we meant. We recognize that’s wild and that’s not what we meant and then you have Clarence Thomas in dissent saying that’s exactly what I meant.
What was fascinating about that amongst many things…that’s the case that turned over the more than centuries old gun control law is that Justice Thomas said it was important to include a prologue. It is very rare that there is any prologue in any law decision but he said a prologue is needed, so he could spend five paragraphs talking about how important male bodily autonomy is and how protecting male bodily autonomy was connected to men being able to have guns.
They say he can be prosecuted for unofficial acts but just to be clear any time he says he does something because he’s trying to enforce his executive power that is basically presumptively an official act that receives robust protection. And so, in my view the court has really cut the heart out of the indictment against Trump for January sixth.All right. Chris, did you want to add anything to that? Jamelle? Madiba, Moira. I don’t know if I quite agree with all of that.
Norge Siste Nytt, Norge Overskrifter
Similar News:Du kan også lese nyheter som ligner på denne som vi har samlet inn fra andre nyhetskilder.
Supreme Court Begins New Term With Major Cases on Gun Control, LGBTQ+ RightsThe Supreme Court commences its new term with a lineup of significant cases addressing gun control, transgender rights, and the death penalty. The court will weigh challenges to federal regulations on 'ghost guns' and a Tennessee law banning gender-affirming care for minors.
Les mer »
Supreme Court Begins New Term With Ghost Guns, Death Penalty, and Transgender Rights CasesThe Supreme Court will hear cases on ghost guns, a death sentence appeal, and transgender rights as the new term begins. While the docket may not be as packed as last year's blockbuster rulings, the conservative-majority court could still influence election disputes after November.
Les mer »
Supreme Court Begins New Term With High-Profile CasesThe Supreme Court kicks off its new term this week with several important cases on its docket, including challenges to Biden administration policies on ghost guns and transgender healthcare. The court will also hear the case of Oklahoma death row inmate Richard Glossip.
Les mer »
Supreme Court's New Term Begins Amidst High-Profile Cases and Potential Election DisputesThe Supreme Court's new term commences on Monday with a docket full of significant cases, including challenges to state bans on gender-affirming care for minors, regulations on ghost guns, and litigation over death sentences and online pornography.
Les mer »
Red state bans on transgender procedures for minors lead Supreme Court’s next termPolitical News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government
Les mer »
Harris embraces Supreme Court term limits that could retire Thomas by 2025Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government
Les mer »