staging.rockymountainvoice.com

Tag: U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court upholds ban on gun ownership by those under domestic violence court orders
National, The Daily Signal

Supreme Court upholds ban on gun ownership by those under domestic violence court orders

By Elizabeth Troutman | The Daily Signal The Supreme Court upheld the federal law banning gun ownership by those under domestic violence restraining orders on Friday morning. In its U.S. v. Rahimi ruling, the court rejected Zackey Rahimi’s claim that the statue that prohibits the possession of firearms by persons subject to domestic violence restraining orders violates the Second Amendment. The court issued an 8-1 ruling, with Justice Clarence Thomas as the only dissenting vote. “Since the Founding, the Nation’s firearm laws have included regulations to stop individuals who threaten physical harm to others from misusing firearms,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority. “As applied to the facts here, Section 922(g)(8) fits within this tradition.” READ THE F...
Supreme Court strikes down Trump-era ban on bump stocks, gun accessories used in 2017 massacre
National, The Washington Times

Supreme Court strikes down Trump-era ban on bump stocks, gun accessories used in 2017 massacre

By Lindsay Whitehurst | The Washington Times The Supreme Court on Friday struck down a Trump-era ban on bump stocks, a gun accessory that allows semi-automatic weapons to fire rapidly like machine guns and was used in the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history. The high court found 6-3 the Trump administration did not follow federal law when it reversed course and banned bump stocks after a gunman in Las Vegas attacked a country music festival with assault rifles in 2017. He fired more than 1,000 rounds in the crowd in 11 minutes, leaving 60 people dead and injuring hundreds more. A Texas gun shop owner challenged the ban, arguing the Justice Department wrongly classified the accessories as illegal machine guns. READ THE FULL STORY AT THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Supreme Court rules for Starbucks in union case over terminated ‘Memphis Seven’
National, THE HILL

Supreme Court rules for Starbucks in union case over terminated ‘Memphis Seven’

By ZACH SCHONFELD | The Hill The Supreme Court on Thursday tossed a lower court’s ruling ordering Starbucks to reinstate seven Memphis-based employees terminated amid a unionization drive.  The decision makes it more difficult to immediately block alleged unfair labor practices as they are litigated in a sometimes years-long administrative process. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion on behalf of eight justices, while Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson partially dissented.  The case arose from the “Memphis Seven,” seven Starbucks employees who were terminated in 2022 during a unionization effort. The employees had publicly posted a letter addressed to the company’s CEO and sat down in the store with a television news crew to discuss the...
Supreme Court unanimously rules for NRA in free speech fight against NYC regulator
National, THE HILL

Supreme Court unanimously rules for NRA in free speech fight against NYC regulator

By ZACH SCHONFELD AND ELLA LEE | The Hill The Supreme Court unanimously ruled Thursday that the National Rifle Association (NRA) can move forward in its free speech fight against a former New York regulator. Authored by liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the ruling revives the gun-rights group’s First Amendment claim against Maria Vullo, who formerly ran the New York Department of Financial Services. Vullo began investigating the NRA in 2017, and the probe led her to encourage insurers and banks she regulated to sever ties with the gun-rights group after the Parkland, Fla., school shooting that killed 17 students and staff and reignited a national debate surrounding gun control measures. The NRA contended Vullo’s steps went beyond permissible advocacy and crossed into unconstitut...
Sloan: Weighing the immunity question facing the Supreme Court
Commentary, Rocky Mountain Voice

Sloan: Weighing the immunity question facing the Supreme Court

By Kelly Sloan | Special Contributor, The Rocky Mountain Voice A fortnight ago, on CBS’s Sunday morning show “Meet the Press”, one of the guests interviewed was Doris Kearns Goodwin, Presidential historian, author of “Team of Rivals” and former staffer for President Lyndon Johnson. Mrs. Goodwin is a frequent guest of the show and, while unabashedly Democratic, often brings up some interesting points, as befitting her role as historian. On this episode, the conversation turned, naturally, to the pending threats to American Democracy – meaning, of course, Donald Trump. Goodwin expressed concern, as all good Democrats do, that the former President would, again, not accept the results of the upcoming election, and how deleterious an impact that could have on America’s political founda...
Supreme Court could pave the way for homeless camp bans in hearing of anti-camping complaint
National, Washington Examiner

Supreme Court could pave the way for homeless camp bans in hearing of anti-camping complaint

ByKaelan Deese | Washington Examiner As the nation’s homelessness crisis deepens, the Supreme Court on Monday will weigh a case that has captured the attention of state officials with some of the largest homeless populations. Originating from the modest city of Grant Pass, Oregon, the case involves fines imposed for violations of its anti-camping ordinance. A pair of homeless people sued the city and convinced lower courts the ordinance was a form of “cruel and unusual” punishment, a decision that state leaders from California to Arizona say has greatly hindered efforts to keep people off of the streets. The high court’s ultimate decision could give cities the power to regulate homelessness, or greatly inhibit those efforts. READ THE FULL STORY AT THE WASHINGTON EXAMI...
U.S. Supreme Court mulls NRA’s free speech fight against N.Y. regulator
National, THE HILL

U.S. Supreme Court mulls NRA’s free speech fight against N.Y. regulator

By ZACH SCHONFELD | The Hill The Supreme Court weighed the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) free speech case against a former New York regulator during oral arguments on Monday. Over 75 minutes of arguments, the justices probed how to distinguish when government officials go beyond permissible advocacy and cross into unconstitutional coercion. “How do you define when it goes too far along that line?” asked Justice Samuel Alito, one of the court’s leading conservatives.
It’s unanimous, Colorado cannot disqualify Trump from ballot
National, THE HILL

It’s unanimous, Colorado cannot disqualify Trump from ballot

By ZACH SCHONFELD | The Hill The Supreme Court unanimously ruled Colorado cannot disqualify former President Trump from the ballot under the 14th Amendment’s insurrection ban, a historic decision that preserves Trump’s ability to seek a second presidential term.  Monday’s unsigned decision effectively ends the long-shot efforts that aimed to prevent Trump from returning to the White House, handing a monumental legal victory to the former president on the eve of Super Tuesday, when he is poised to close in on clinching the Republican nomination.  Voters and advocacy groups had filed dozens of challenges to Trump’s ballot eligibility in states across the country, claiming his actions surrounding the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack triggered his disqualification. READ ...
The Supremes didn’t buy it. Griswold faces crushing defeat to ban Trump from ballot
coloradopeakpolitics.com, Commentary, State

The Supremes didn’t buy it. Griswold faces crushing defeat to ban Trump from ballot

By Colorado Peak Politics Poor Jena Griswold. Despite the secretary of state’s best efforts to ban Donald Trump from the Colorado ballot, the U.S. Supreme Court just wasn’t buying it during Thursday’s arguments. Even the liberal justices were skeptical and sound unlikely to uphold the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision allowing the states to determine who can be president. Liberal Justice Elena Kagan basically told Colorado to get over itself. “Why should a single state have the ability to make this determination, not only for their own citizens but for the rest of the nation?” We concur! Fellow liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson got straight to the point. The 14th Amendment to the Constitution was never intended to determine who is eligible to hold the office of t...
U.S. Supreme Court doubts whether states can bar presidential candidates from running for office in hearing Colorado’s Trump ballot-access case
National, The Colorado Sun

U.S. Supreme Court doubts whether states can bar presidential candidates from running for office in hearing Colorado’s Trump ballot-access case

U.S. Supreme Court justices raised concerns about letting state courts make a decision that could have national consequences. Justice Amy Coney Barrett put it plainly: “It just doesn’t seem like a state call.” By Jesse Paul | Colorado Sun U.S. Supreme Court justices on Thursday aggressively challenged whether states can disqualify a presidential candidate from running for office under the so-called insurrection clause in the Constitution as they heard arguments in the Colorado case seeking to disqualify Donald Trump from running for reelection.  A lawyer from Trump’s reelection campaign said the question is decisively “no” because the clause, in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, is ultimately evaluated by Congress — and only after a candidate has been elected. ...