1 day ago
Several Supreme Court Justices appeared skeptical Monday of a request from oil companies to preemptively block a climate change lawsuit that could hold them liable for climate damages.
Many of the justices raised questions about the court’s ability to even take up the case at this time.
“A number of the discussions that you’ve had with my colleagues make me think that we’re really early in this case – that this is sort of premature from the standpoint of this court exercising its jurisdiction,” liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson told Suncor Energy lawyer Kannon Shanmugam.
Prime Day
BestReviews is reader-supported and may earn an affiliate commission.
#justices #climate #justice #ketanji
Many of the justices raised questions about the court’s ability to even take up the case at this time.
“A number of the discussions that you’ve had with my colleagues make me think that we’re really early in this case – that this is sort of premature from the standpoint of this court exercising its jurisdiction,” liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson told Suncor Energy lawyer Kannon Shanmugam.
Prime Day
BestReviews is reader-supported and may earn an affiliate commission.
#justices #climate #justice #ketanji
1 month ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration Monday in a case over President Donald Trump's executive order restricting mail-in voting, though it remains unclear how much can be implemented before the fast-approaching midterm elections.
The decision leaves room for additional court challenges that could further slow Trump's order, and other similar cases have already been filed. The U.S. Postal Service laid out how it would implement the order last week, but time is running short to impose major changes with some states beginning to send mail ballots to voters in just a few weeks.
The Supreme Court's conservative majority didn't decide the legality of Trump's order, instead ruling that the states did not have the legal right to challenge it.
"The Court's disposition of this application does not mean that any measure taken by the Government to implement the Order will necessarily be lawful. On that score, time will tell," the majority wrote in an unsigned order.
The three liberal-leaning justices publicly dissented, with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson writing that the rule "lets another shoe drop in the Kafkaesque nightmare that our precedents have been steadily creating for certain plaintiffs who seek to bring election-related challenges."
#supreme #court #challenges
The decision leaves room for additional court challenges that could further slow Trump's order, and other similar cases have already been filed. The U.S. Postal Service laid out how it would implement the order last week, but time is running short to impose major changes with some states beginning to send mail ballots to voters in just a few weeks.
The Supreme Court's conservative majority didn't decide the legality of Trump's order, instead ruling that the states did not have the legal right to challenge it.
"The Court's disposition of this application does not mean that any measure taken by the Government to implement the Order will necessarily be lawful. On that score, time will tell," the majority wrote in an unsigned order.
The three liberal-leaning justices publicly dissented, with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson writing that the rule "lets another shoe drop in the Kafkaesque nightmare that our precedents have been steadily creating for certain plaintiffs who seek to bring election-related challenges."
#supreme #court #challenges
2 months ago
Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson backed Michelle Obama's criticism of isolating students of color at elite colleges during Wednesday's episode of the former first lady's podcast, agreeing after Obama said schools failed those students when they spread them thinly across campus.
Jackson said Harvard's sizable Black community helped her feel at home. Jackson was an undergrad there and also received her law degree at Harvard; Obama also received her law degree there but was a Princeton undergraduate.
"You don't do kids of color service by plucking them out and making them one of a few and then scattering them about the campus," Obama said.
"I think that's absolutely right," Jackson said.
Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson
#brown
Jackson said Harvard's sizable Black community helped her feel at home. Jackson was an undergrad there and also received her law degree at Harvard; Obama also received her law degree there but was a Princeton undergraduate.
"You don't do kids of color service by plucking them out and making them one of a few and then scattering them about the campus," Obama said.
"I think that's absolutely right," Jackson said.
Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson
#brown
3 months ago
Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett faced the wrath of conservatives on social media on Monday after she authored the majority opinion ruling in favor of a Mississippi law allowing mail-in ballots to be counted in elections even if they are received after Election Day.
The court was split 5-4 on the ruling with Barrett, appointed by President Donald Trump, writing the majority opinion joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, as well as justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Barrett's opinion held that Election Day, in the context of federal law, set a deadline for when voters must make a choice regarding their preferred candidate but said that relevant laws have no standard for when ballots must be received to be considered valid.
The court was split 5-4 on the ruling with Barrett, appointed by President Donald Trump, writing the majority opinion joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, as well as justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Barrett's opinion held that Election Day, in the context of federal law, set a deadline for when voters must make a choice regarding their preferred candidate but said that relevant laws have no standard for when ballots must be received to be considered valid.
3 months ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration Tuesday in an immigration case dealing with the government's power over green card holders accused of crimes.
The 6-3 decision centers on an immigration officers' 2012 decision to put lawful permanent resident Muk Choi Lau on immigration parole when he returned from a short trip to China because he had been accused of a counterfeiting crime.
Lau argued that the officer overstepped their authority, and the decision wrongly allowed the Department of Homeland Security under then-President Barack Obama an easier path to removal after he pleaded guilty to selling counterfeit clothes in New Jersey.
The high court disagreed. "Border officers did not have the burden to establish by clear and convincing evidence that Lau had committed a crime involving moral turpitude," Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the opinion.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, writing that the decision to put Lau on immigration parole effectively sentenced him to "immigration limbo" before he'd been convicted of any crime.
The 6-3 decision centers on an immigration officers' 2012 decision to put lawful permanent resident Muk Choi Lau on immigration parole when he returned from a short trip to China because he had been accused of a counterfeiting crime.
Lau argued that the officer overstepped their authority, and the decision wrongly allowed the Department of Homeland Security under then-President Barack Obama an easier path to removal after he pleaded guilty to selling counterfeit clothes in New Jersey.
The high court disagreed. "Border officers did not have the burden to establish by clear and convincing evidence that Lau had committed a crime involving moral turpitude," Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the opinion.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, writing that the decision to put Lau on immigration parole effectively sentenced him to "immigration limbo" before he'd been convicted of any crime.
