SCOTUS decisions coming today...

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by mcrain, Jun 20, 2013.

  1. mcrain, Jun 20, 2013
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2013

    macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #1
    Live blog here: http://www.scotusblog.com/

    (edit1) Descamps - In Plain English, it is now harder for the government to use the facts of a prior conviction to enhance a federal criminal sentence.

    (edit2) American Express- The Federal Arbitration Act enforces a class action arbitration waiver; cannot defeat the waiver on the ground that individual arbitration is too expensive. (L vs R ideological decision)

    In Plain English, this means that if you have a contract with a business in which you agree to arbitrate a dispute but it says you can't get together with other plaintiffs in a "class action," that contract will be enforced, even if it may be too expensive for you to pursue your own claim given what you might win.

    (edit3)
    Next AID. The Court holds that the policy violates the First Amendment by compelling affirmation of a belief outside the scope of the program.

    The vote is 6-2.

    The Chief Justice writes the majority, with Justices Scalia and Thomas dissent.

    No more decisions today.
     
  2. macrumors 68030

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #2
    Looking at the rest of the rest of the cases left over from 2012, that leaves the 3 biggest cases in recent history:

    Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl. This is known as the "Baby Veronica" case. this involves the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978, and if it can be used to block a voluntarily and legally initiated adoption of an Indian baby girl by non-Indian parents.

    Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin. This is over the use of the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment and its use concerning race in undergraduate admissions.

    And as we all are waiting for...

    Hollingsworth v. Perry. Prop. 8. Nothing more to be said.

    So far, the decisions we're waiting on are only for arguing the merits, not the actual cases.. yet.

    BL.
     
  3. macrumors 68000

    likemyorbs

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Location:
    NJ
    #3
    Not happening today. Will have to wait til next week.
     
  4. macrumors 6502a

    Gutwrench

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    #4
    I'm not sure your synopsis of the Descamps case is quite accurate. The Descamps case makes perfect sense and the salient point is the court is willing to do fact finding to arrive at the correct decision.
     
  5. macrumors 68030

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #5
    And then there were two.

    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...24-11-10-23]The Associated Press is reporting that SCOTUS has effectively punted on the Fisher case (read: affirmative action), and sent it back to the lower courts for another review.

    If I were a betting man, I would bet that a decision on the Prop. 8 case will be made this week. Baby Veronica is going to take a lot longer, because of how gut wrenching that will be.

    BL.
     
  6. macrumors 68040

    Moyank24

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    in a New York State of mind
    #6
    Why do I get the feeling that DOMA and Prop 8 will be the last 2 decisions made? They're going to announce their decisions as they are on their way out of town.
     
  7. macrumors 65816

    SwiftLives

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2001
    Location:
    Charleston, SC
    #7
    I personally think the Baby Veronica case will be the last one.
     
  8. thread starter macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #8
    Oh goody, the right wing justices just gutted voting rights!
     
  9. macrumors 68040

    Moyank24

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    in a New York State of mind
    #9
    I'd say unbelievable, but I'm not really surprised.


    And tomorrow, we hear on Prop 8 and DOMA. Oy.
     
  10. rdowns, Jun 25, 2013
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2013

    macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #10
    Something tells me that voter turnout in 2014 will be record breaking, especially black voters.

    From 1986-2006, DOJ objections blocked over 700 voting changes based on a determination that they were discriminatory. Yeah, we don't need this.

    I give it 2 weeks until new voting laws are proposed in our racist, er, I mean, red states.
     
  11. macrumors 68020

    ugahairydawgs

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    #11
    Is there any sort of list on what types of changes were blocked during that time?
     
  12. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Location:
    FL
    #12
    You mean you actually have to have proof of citizenship and an ID to vote. Oh no what is this world coming to.
     
  13. macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #13
    I have no issues with having to have ID to vote. I have issues with trying to do this close to an election to disenfranchise those (predominantly poor and elderly) who don't have ID or getting one is hard. Make it easy and free to obtain an ID and I'm all for it.
     
  14. macrumors 68040

    renewed

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Location:
    Bemalte Blumen duften nicht.
    #14
    And what would you suggest? Unfortunately nothing is perfect.

    On one hand, an ID proves (at least attempts to prove; fakes can occur) residency.

    On the other hand, someone born in an alley with no birth certificate may have trouble when they turn 18 proving where they came from.
     
  15. macrumors 68020

    ugahairydawgs

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    #15
    I understand what you're saying and it's both understandable and reasonable to question the motives of the people pushing for reform when they do it so close to an election. The problem with that though is that elections are happening all the time....special elections, local elections, etc......nothing is ever too far off. Add in the fact that you usually only have a limited window to get something done with a state legislature and the problem is even further compounded.

    To me the wait for stronger voter ID laws is a lot like people who put off becoming parents until they are "100% ready". If you wait until the completely ideal time you're probably going to be waiting forever.
     
  16. macrumors 6502a

    tbobmccoy

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    #16
    I'd be in support of Voter ID to vote if there was no registration to vote needed. If getting a Voter ID that's eligible to be used was all that was required to vote, then sign me up. Registration to vote is stupid.
     
  17. macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #17

    I don't think it would be hard at all. A law can be passed and not take effect until 2 elections have occurred. Plenty of time to implement it.
     
  18. macrumors 68030

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #18
    And there was one (major case): Perry.

    While this could be construed as a comment in itself, I'm going to refrain from commenting on the Baby Veronica case. It's too heart wrenching as a parent to see.

    Background on it: the Father wasn't around before, during, and barely after the mother got pregnant and gave birth. He signed over his rights to the child to the mother prior to going to Afghanistan. Mother gives the child up for adoption. Couple in S. Carolina adopts the baby.

    The problem: he's part Cherokee (don't get me into this part; 1/256th blood could make him "Cherokee"; I'll save that argument for the Freedmen thread). So now that he wants back into his daughter's life after basically having nothing to do with her, he uses the Indian Child Welfare Act to prevent the adoption from happening.

    SCOTUS' ruling didn't overturn the ICWA, but instead overruled its use, based on the father not having legal or continuing custody of the child (which he didn't; he signed his rights away). SCOTUS danced a very fine line here; one I hope no parent will put a child through. it's heart and gut wrenching.

    With that, I'm off to see my wife and children. I miss them.

    BL.
     
  19. macrumors 601

    Technarchy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    #19
    SCOTUS likes to save the big ones for last. This is nothing new.
     
  20. macrumors 68020

    Macky-Mac

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
  21. macrumors 6502

    lannister80

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    #21
  22. macrumors 603

    quagmire

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    #22
    Prop 8 decision coming soon.....
     
  23. macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #23
    They didn't rule on prop 8, let the lower court ruing stand.
     
  24. macrumors 603

    quagmire

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    #24
    Yeah. Pretty much what we expected.... The court punts gay marriage back to the states instead of making a sweeping decision saying bans on gay marriage is unconstitutional.
     

Share This Page