#SCOTUS is hearing a challenge today to a federal #law prosecutors used to charge >350 people who attacked the Capitol on #Jan6.
>100 have been convicted & sentenced under the statute for obstructing or impeding an ofcl proceeding—the joint session that convened to confirm Biden’s victory.
The case could impact #Trump’s federal trial in DC for trying to remain in power, 2 charges he faces are based on the same #obstruction statute.
Justice Neil M. #Gorsuch offered several hypotheticals when asking about the breadth of the statute.
“Would a sit-in that disrupts a trial or access to a federal courthouse qualify?" he asked. "Would a heckler in today’s audience qualify or at the State of the Union address? Would pulling a fire alarm before a vote qualify for 20 years in federal prison?”
Murray’s Denver-based law firm, a small national #PublicInterest firm w/a bench of experienced fmr SCOTUS law clerks, opened just 6 mos ago. The firm filed the lawsuit on behalf of the #ColoradoVoters the next day.
In 2017, Murray wrote an opinion piece in support of #Trump’s nomination of #Gorsuch. He emphasized the similarities between his 2 fmr bosses despite their different #politics. “Both Gorsuch& #Kagan consistently emphasized to us #law clerks that, if we weren’t telling them when we thought their instincts on a case were wrong, we weren’t doing our jobs,”wrote Murray, a Harvard Law grad. “For both, the goal was to reach the correct #legal result, rather than advance any #political party’s agenda.”
#SCOTUS sided w/ the #Biden admin on Mon & cleared the way for #border patrol agents to remove #RazorWire#Texas ofcls installed along a busy stretch of the southern border until the legality of the barriers is resolved in court.
4 conservatives — Justices #ClarenceThomas, Samuel #Alito, Neil #Gorsuch & Brett #Kavanaugh — noted their dissents w/o explanation.
On Wednesday, Justices Brett M. #Kavanaugh & Neil M. #Gorsuch, both nominees of #Trump, took turns peppering the #Biden admin w/skeptical questions as Solicitor General Elizabeth B. #Prelogar defended the Trump admin initiative — & the longstanding #Chevron#precedent.
Kavanaugh said Chevron has allowed #federal agencies to flip flop & impose new rules each time a new admin takes over, leaving judges w/little choice but defer to the changing interpretations of agency officials.
"Here's how the New York Times covered plagiarism by a Trump Supreme Court nominee. It didn't.
In the wake of Harvard’s president resigning after a month of wall-to-wall New York Times coverage of plagiarism allegations against her, a lot of people are recalling plagiarism allegations against Supreme Court justice Neil Gorsuch that arose shortly after Donald Trump nominated him to the high court in 2017."
"That got me wondering: How did the New York Times cover the Gorsuch plagiarism allegations during his confirmation fight? My hypothesis was 'minimally,' but the actual answer, as far as I can tell, is that it didn't. …
The New York Times keeps showing us who they are. It’s long past time liberals start believing them, and stop letting them off the hook by thinking of them as innocent dupes instead of the intentional actors they are."
But this time, despite the document’s length, Justice Neil M. #Gorsuch wrote back just 10 mins later to say that he would sign on to the opinion & had no changes…. The next morning, Justice #ClarenceThomas added his name, then Justice #AmyConeyBarrett, & days later, Justice Brett M. #Kavanaugh. None requested a single alteration. The responses looked like a display of #conservative force & discipline.
Just another right-wing Twitter kook with empty threats about putting people on lists?
No. This guy is a former #SCOTUS clerk for Neil #Gorsuch and is currently Chief Counsel for Nominations to Senator Chuck Grassley.
Is it a joke? Is it for real? As NYU journalism professor Jay Rosen says, 'it's the stakes, not the odds.' Or, as the WA Post's Dan Baltz wrote today, 'Take [them] seriously and literally.'
As is customary in emergency orders, the majority did not explain its reasoning for granting the #Biden admin’s request. But #conservative Justices Samuel #Alito, #ClarenceThomas & Neil #Gorsuch dissented from the decision not to leave the lower court order in place, calling the development “highly disturbing.”
to be clear for anyone who doesn’t know, Mike Davis clerked for #SCOTUS Justice #Gorsuch & he was Senator #ChuckGrassley’s Chief Counsel for Nominations for the Senate Judiciary.
Last I checked #SCOTUS justices are appointed officials. Bribery of an appointed official and taking the bribe is a federal felony. Why are #ClarenceThomas#Alito and #Gorsuch not charged?
So let me get this straight. The Supreme Court is only supposed to take cases where there is a real injury and real controversy, but it took the case of a web designer who faked a request by a gay customer for a website design? The guy was actually straight, married and with kids?
Another day, another #SupremeCourt decision I have now read with care and will try to shed some light on. This time it is #303CreativevElenis, available at https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-476_c185.pdf. By a 6-3 majority, the Court holds that a business that holds itself open to the public may deny its services to LGBTQ people if the business’s activities are “expressive”. A thread. 1/ #LawFedi
#Gorsuch, however, insists that wedding websites are protected speech and compelling the plaintiff to make wedding websites for any wedding a client wants one for, including weddings the plaintiff “does not believe in” is compelling the plaintiff to endorse such weddings. This seems palpably incorrect. Service and goods providers sell to all sorts of people for all sorts of occasions that the seller does not endorse. 6/
But #Gorsuch and #Sotomayor do not simply disagree about whether providing a wedding website for a same or opposite sex marriage indicates anything about the seller’s attitude toward or beliefs about the kind of marriage involved. Their disagreement is much deeper: it is about the nature of markets, the state, and the public. This is crucial to understand. 7/ #303Creative#LawFedi
#Sotomayor understands markets as spheres of public activity, spheres that exist because of government action of all kinds. The government may regulate the market, including by banning discrimination by sellers. This can make markets more fair or more efficient or just more socially valuable. #Gorsuch, on the other hand, … 8/ #303Creative#LawFedi
#Gorsuch opposes government regulation of markets. He conceives of them as institutions that exist independently of government, some kind of collective activity that occurs separate from state action. The market is not, fundamentally, a public sphere. Furthermore, Gorsuch believes government has no right to regulate or ban discrimination in private settings. 9/
#Gorsuch sees selling in the market more like going to a church or temple or attending a party at somebody’s home. In those venues, the government may not ban discrimination. You can go to the homophobic house party and conduct yourself in whatever anti-LGBTQ way you want (so long as you do not act criminally). Gorsuch wants the seller going to market to have the same opportunity. 10/
The chasm between how #Sotomayor and #Gorsuch understand the market illustrates how, compared to the left, the right generally diminishes the scope of the public sphere. In #303Creative, the majority sees the case as being centrally about the government and the plaintiff-seller whereas the dissent sees it as as centrally about the plaintiff-seller and the public sphere. 11/ #LawFedi
‘So Blatant’: Gorsuch Failed to Disclose He Sold Home to CEO of Major Law Firm
"This is exactly the type of situation that an ethics code that included vetting of transactions and full disclosure would clear up," the head of the watchdog Accountable.US asserted.
Nine days after Gorsuch’s April 2017 confirmation to the Supreme Court, Brian Duffy, the CEO of the law firm Greenberg Traurig, signed a contract to purchase the property.
"#SupremeCourt Justice Neil #Gorsuch failed to disclose that the CEO of a prominent law firm that frequently argues cases before the Court purchased a large piece of property he had invested in — a transaction that occurred just days after Gorsuch had been appointed to the bench in 2017, a new report reveals.
The report comes just weeks after a separate report uncovered that Justice Clarence Thomas..."
Nightcore - Oops!... I Did It Again (Rock Version)
Neil Gorsuch Has Joined the Supreme Court Ethics Scandal Party
The head of a law firm that practices before the court bought property from the conservative justice nine days after he was confirmed, Politico reports