JarlCarl

@blankslate2017 These are good points; I think for me the signalling earlier this year that the Fed is different + letting her keep her job in the meantime points towards good news, though I'm with you in not being too confident.

@JarlCarl I find it hard to believe that this court is going to spend its political capital to keep a black woman in a high level position against the dictate of Trump. I hope I'm wrong.

Court is about to tie itself in knots on another inscrutable position which boils down to letting Trump do what he wants.

@LSXYZ9 This is pretty normal for the top chess players (Magnus is usually real low cause the guy is just chilling) in especially these faster time controls.

Just realized rewatching the Magnus vs Hikaru games but Hikaru's heartrate was perma between 130 and 150 at some points?? I saw it and initially feel worried but idk

@BStarsigns @Zprtr1 Boerne explicitly states that it's up to the courts to define rights under the 14th amendment and if Congress isn't saying there's a right to abortion, they can't ban states from regulating it.

@BStarsigns @Zprtr1 I'm with you that it's a commercial activity (and generally on the policy), but if states can validly ban abortion, Congress can't pass a law that says states can't interfere with abortion providers. The commerce clause allows Congress to ban things, not guarantee them.

The next Dem trifecta should absolutely nuke the filibuster to codify abortion rights & voting rights If Republicans can use it to enact their draconian tax cuts, then it’s fair game for Dems to do the same

@BStarsigns @Zprtr1 Those are both examples of a negative law, banning cannabis use and banning late term abortions (Carhart analyzed under Roe/Casey). Proactively guaranteeing a right to abortion is prohibited by City of Boerne v. Flores as its effectively finding a right, rather than regulating.

@JarlCarl @Zprtr1 Abortion care is very clearly commerce and it would allow healthcare workers to be able to do their jobs without interference from government. Gonzales v Raich and Gonzales v Carhart are good examples of the commerce clause.

@BStarsigns @Zprtr1 I would imagine the commerce clause could be used to ban abortions (since products travel past states lines), but I'm not sure how it could be used to affirmatively legalize abortion in all states, regardless of the state laws.

@JarlCarl @Zprtr1 Commerce clause

@JLevering4 Chourio called for interference, not obstruction! Obstruction on the defense, interference on the offense.

@dpf11100 @elchicanomarine Uh yeah that would appear to be the case. We'll see where this goes, but currently the Gov. seems to be uninterested in bringing him home, despite the Court's order.

@JarlCarl @elchicanomarine So the guy is now permanently stuck in one of the most infamous prisons in the world?

The Trump administration admitted they wrongfully deported a brown man. Then when ordered to bring him back by a federal judge. They dragged it to the Supreme Court, where the conservative justices predictably gave them cover. All this to keep one man of color -deported without reason or due process- out of the country. This isn’t policy. It’s racist, authoritarian bullshit.

@dpf11100 @elchicanomarine That appears to be the current status quo, though I'm sure there will be more litigation. SCOTUS' ruling was a bit vague (as they tend to be) and the Gov. is running with that and sorta trying to delay. There will certainly be more litigation now that the gov. is resisting

@JarlCarl @elchicanomarine So he's stuck in there forever?

@dpf11100 @elchicanomarine That part is sort of unclear. The Government (well, mostly Trump) says that they cannot get him back and El Salvador says they won't give him back. Concerning, to be sure, especially after the Gov. was ordered to get him back.

@JarlCarl @elchicanomarine So when is he coming back?

@dpf11100 @elchicanomarine The Court ruled 9-0 that his due process rights were violated and ordered the government to facilitate his return! supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf…

@JarlCarl @elchicanomarine So how did it turn out? Did they reach a consensus yet?

@dpf11100 @elchicanomarine If the Court keeps him there? That would be very not good, though I'm pretty optimistic that they will allow the District Court's order to go back into effect. If I had to guess I'd go 6-3 or 5-4 (I think they may or may not peel off Kavanaugh)

@JarlCarl @elchicanomarine And what if they dont do that? If they just keep him there?

@Terriblerevor @elementgermani3 @elchicanomarine Yes, but the entire court (or, well, most of it probably) speaking and ordering his return is a lot more powerful and compelling and will come with a Court Opinion than the Chief denying a stay or the court summarily denying a stay. It'll take an additional few days though

@JarlCarl @elementgermani3 @elchicanomarine Sending people to a prison in another fricken country without due process or even a goddamn hearing is so far outside the ‘normal procedures’.

@elementgermani3 @elchicanomarine I don't think that the court should be acting outside of its normal procedures just because the answer is obvious. The CJ ordered very rapid briefing and I imagine they'll decide this week.

@JarlCarl @elchicanomarine When the thing in question is the government claiming they have a right to disappear anyone they want without due process, and then refuse to bring them back even when it’s proven they did so illegally… to even consider it is a grievous insult to us all.

@EthanHiguain @blankslate2017 While I agree it's concerning, the dissent isn't on the merits and more on the stay pending appeal since the government isn't likely to be able to get its money back if it prevails on appeal.

@blankslate2017 Yeah, this made me quite uneasy even though they ultimately upheld the decision of the lower court which was a no-brainer

5-4? This should've been a 9-0 decision against Trump.

@blankslate2017 The dissent isn't on the merits of whether the government should eventually pay, it's about whether the District Court's order should be enforced pending appeal. Since the money is going to be gone forever, there's little recourse for the government on appeal should they prevail

Contracts were signed; work was fully performed; invoices sent; Trump government refused to pay. I really don't get why this was a 5-4 decision. This was not a close call.

@DebLaughton @TimRunsHisMouth If you're interested in reading the caselaw in this area I'd point you to: Myers v. United States (1926), Buckley v. Valeo (1976) and Humphrey’s Executor v. United States (1935).

@TimRunsHisMouth Where in the Constitution does it grant judges the authority to block the President from firing Executive Branch employees? Spoiler: NOWHERE‼️‼️ In fact, the Constitution makes it clear that all Executive Power is vested in the President

Democrats cheered when Joe Biden ignored rulings from the Supreme Court... now they're afraid that Trump might ignore court rulings... Funny how that works, isn't it?