Boots & Sabers

The blogging will continue until morale improves...

M
Category: Law

Court Karens Purge Name of Conservative Predecessor

by | 0638, 20 Jun 24 | , , | 0 Comments

It should worry us all that people who are this bitter and petty are making judgments about anything to do with us. These are the people you see berating the poor barista for putting too little oat milk in their latte.

The liberal partisans on the Wisconsin Supreme Court are erasing former conservative Justice David Prosser’s name from the state Law Library, a move that conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley labeled a “petty and vindictive maneuver.”

 

They are replacing his name with the name of Lavinia Goodell, “Wisconsin’s first female lawyer,” according to a press release from the Court.

 

[…]

 

In 2016, then Supreme Court Chief Justice Pat Roggensack, a conservative, announced that the law library would be named after Prosser “in light of Prosser’s upcoming retirement and many years of service.”

 

Prosser served on the court for 18 years. He was first appointed to the court by Republican Gov. Tommy Thompson in 1998 and was re-elected twice, according to his court bio.

 

A Supreme Court press release at the time the law library was named for Prosser says, “In all, Prosser spent more than 40 years in public service, including experience in all three branches of state government. He retired July 31, after 18 years on the Supreme Court. Earlier in his career, he served as a tax appeals commissioner, legislative leader, and a prosecutor.”

Wisconsin Supreme Court Takes Case of Evers’ 400-year Tax Increase

by | 1946, 17 Jun 24 | , | 5 Comments

This will be interesting.

MADISON, Wis. — The Wisconsin Supreme Court will hear a challenge to Democratic Gov. Tony Evers’ partial veto that locked in a school funding increase for the next 400 years, the justices announced Monday.

 

The Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce Litigation Center filed a lawsuit in April arguing the governor exceeded his authority. The group asked the high court to strike down the veto without waiting for the case to go through lower courts.

 

The court issued an order Monday afternoon saying it would take the case. The justices didn’t elaborate beyond setting a briefing schedule.

 

At issue is a partial veto Evers made in the state budget in July 2023 that increased revenue public schools can raise per student by $325 annually until 2425. Evers took language that originally applied the $325 increase for the 2023-24 and 2024-25 school years and vetoed the “20” and the hyphen to make the end date 2425, more than four centuries from now.

By the law, it seems clearly unconstitutional. While the Wisconsin Constitution stupidly gives the Governor the power to veto individual letters, it is clear that the power to write laws and raise taxes lies exclusively within the power of the legislature.

Politically, the leftists control the court. One might instinctively think that they will rule in favor of Evers to support “their guy.” However, handing that kind of power to the governor in perpetuity is fraught with risk for the Liberals. Wisconsin is an evenly divided state and there is no certainty that the Democrats will control the governorship last Evers’ current term. If the court enhances the power of the governor’s veto, what will a Republican governor do with it?

Remember that the court just unconstitutionally redrew the legislative districts in the hopes of taking back one or both houses of the legislature. Will the shoot themselves in the foot by disempowering the legislature just when they are poised to take it back?

If I were a betting man, I’d bet that the court’s liberals will make the correct ruling that the governor exceeded his authority. It’s smarter politics to play the long game for legislative power. It also allows them to portray the court as balanced just before a pivotal court election next spring.

Federal Judge Rules Against Agency Overreach

by | 1924, 17 Jun 24 | , | 0 Comments

Again… it’s not about the rule. It’s about the fact that Biden does not have unilateral authority to change laws on a whim. We have a legislature in our nation that writes laws. The Executive Branch is just supposed to… you know… execute them.

FRANKFORT, Ky. — The Biden administration’s effort to expand protections for LGBTQ+ students hit another roadblock Monday, when a federal judge in Kentucky temporarily blocked the new Title IX rule in six additional states.

 

U.S. District Judge Danny C. Reeves referred to the regulation as “arbitrary in the truest sense of the word” in granting a preliminary injunction blocking it in Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia. His ruling comes days after a different federal judge temporarily blocked the new rule from taking effect in Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi and Montana.

 

Attorneys general in more than 20 Republican-led states have filed at least seven legal challenges to President Joe Biden’s new policy. Republicans argue the policy is a ruse to allow transgender girls to play on girls athletic teams. The Biden administration said the rule does not apply to athletics.

SCOTUS’ Ruling On Bump Stocks is About Agency Overreach

by | 0608, 17 Jun 24 | , , | 2 Comments

Democrats are really trying to scare people with SCOTUS’ bump stock ruling by making it about guns because they want you to ignore that the ruling was really about reining in rogue agencies who are abusing their authority. For example:

“But now that they have got a Supreme Court that seems ready to unwind the entirety of the Second Amendment and take away from Congress or the executive branch the ability to keep our communities safe, they’re once again lining up behind the gun industry.”

 

Murphy’s comments echo the response of gun control advocacy groups, which argued Friday that the court’s ruling will have a dangerous impact in a country constantly reeling from gun violence.

But if you read the actual ruling, the court did not even mention the 2nd Amendment. The ruling rested on the fact that the ATF exceeded its statutory authority to define a bump stock as a “machinegun.”

Held: ATF exceeded its statutory authority by issuing a Rule that classifies a bump stock as a “machinegun” under §5845(b). Pp. 6–19.

(a) A semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock is not a “machinegun” as defined by §5845(b) because: (1) it cannot fire more than one shot “by a single function of the trigger” and (2) even if it could, it would not do so “automatically.” ATF therefore exceeded its statutory authority by issuing a Rule that classifies bump stocks as machineguns. P. 6.

(b) A semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock does not fire more than one shot “by a single function of the trigger.” The phrase “function of the trigger” refers to the mode of action by which the trigger activates the firing mechanism. No one disputes that a semiautomatic rifle without a bump stock is not a machinegun because a shooter must release and reset the trigger between every shot. And, any subsequent shot fired after the trigger has been released and reset is the result of a separate and distinct “function of the trigger.” Nothing changes when a semiautomatic rifle is equipped with a bump stock. Between every shot, the shooter must release pressure from the trigger and allow it to reset before reengaging the trigger for another shot. A bump stock merely reduces the amount of time that elapses between separate “functions” of the trigger.

What Democrats really want to preserve is the ability of federal agencies to operate on their own without the authority of Congress. They WANT to empower the Executive Branch at the expense of the Legislative Branch because they know that their agenda is too unpopular to implement with the consent of the governed. That is why they are up in arms, so to speak, to usurp the court as a means to usurp the Congress.

SCOTUS ruled how all Americans should want them to rule. They simply said that a federal agency may not make up laws. Congress has the sole authority to make laws. If you wanted a different ruling, then you don’t really support democracy.

Wisconsin Lawfare

by | 2106, 11 Jun 24 | , | 0 Comments

Realize where we are. The Democrats are willing to weaponize any office to punish their political opponents. In this case (setting aside the Scott Bauer’s comically rank bias by using the phrase “fake electors”), we had some honest people who were doing what they thought right, proper, and within the law in response to a tightly contested election riddled with issues. For their care for the rule of law and preservation of democratic rule, the state’s Attorney General is using every resource at his disposal to ruin their lives. Liberals are burning cities without consequence while dreary lawyers get prosecuted for having a legal opinion contrary to the ruling order.

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The Wisconsin Supreme Court on Tuesday suspended former President Donald Trump’s Wisconsin lawyer from a state judicial ethics panel a week after he was charged with a felony for his role in a 2020 fake electors scheme.

 

Liberal advocates have been calling for Jim Troupis to step down from the Judicial Conduct Advisory Committee, saying he is unsuitable due to his role advising the Republicans who attempted to cast Wisconsin’s electoral votes for Trump after he lost the 2020 election in the state to Democrat Joe Biden.

 

Troupis, a former judge, Kenneth Chesebro, another Trump attorney, and former Trump aide Mike Roman were all charged by state Attorney General Josh Kaul last week for their role in the fake electors plot.

Trump Convicted

by | 0740, 31 May 24 | , | 12 Comments

We all knew it was inevitable because it was clear from the beginning that the trial was rigged. A biased partisan prosecutor fabricated charges in front of a hack judge and a jury of stupid rabid liberals with not enough integrity to see past their own hate to uphold the rule of law. All of this was done for political reasons to eliminate a presidential candidate for the benefit of the sitting incumbent. From the perspective of thinking of the general health of our Republic, this is a true turning point. We do not easily walk back from this.

From a political perspective, the verdict is still out. No doubt this will continue to polarize the electorate. I can say from personal observation that it has hardened my mind. It has moved me from being a grouchy and reluctant Trump voter to one who will vote for him for the sake of our Republic. If Biden and the Democrats are allowed to retain and extend their power after throwing their opponents in jail, they will repeat the tactic at all levels forevermore. Biden has become America’s Putin.

It is also noting how the Democrats are willing to mobilize the entire judicial system to prosecute and convict Trump for an alleged paperwork crime (it was not a crime) from a decade ago, but they let rapists, thieves, and violent criminals walk the streets with impunity. Were I a New Yorker, I would be beside myself that I can’t safely walk through Central Park while my politicians use the police and judicial system to further their political interests.

There will be brighter days, but our Republic is different now. Worse. More flawed. Less fair. Less free.

China Cracks Down in Hong Kong

by | 0704, 30 May 24 | , | 1 Comment

Meanwhile, in Hong Kong, we see the full expression of the logic of using government force to “preserve Democracy.” They just convicted people in a political party for campaigning saying that they would use a constitutional power to veto budgets they didn’t support. In order to prevent a “constitutional crisis,” they silenced, arrested, and now convicted politicians. If you think that this would never happen in America, you haven’t been paying attention.

HONG KONG — Fourteen pro-democracy activists were convicted in Hong Kong’s biggest national security case on Thursday by a court that said their plan to effect change through an unofficial primary election would have undermined the government’s authority and created a constitutional crisis.

 

After a 2019 protest movement that filled the city’s streets with demonstrators, authorities have all but silenced dissent in Hong Kong through reduced public choice in elections, crackdowns on media and the Beijing-imposed security law under which the activists were convicted.

 

[…]

 

In a summary of the verdict distributed to media, the court said the election participants had declared they would use their legislative power to veto the budgets.

Under the city’s mini-constitution, the chief executive can dissolve the legislature if a budget cannot be passed but the leader would have to step down if the budget is again vetoed in the next legislature.

 

In the full, 319-page verdict, the judges approved by the government to oversee the case also said if the plan to veto bills would lead to the dissolution of the legislature, it meant “the implementation of any new government policies would be seriously hampered and essentially put to a halt.”

 

“The power and authority of both the Government and the Chief Executive would be greatly undermined,” the court said in the verdict. “In our view … that would create a constitutional crisis for Hong Kong.”

 

[…]

 

Observers said the subversion case illustrated how the security law is being used to crush the political opposition following huge anti-government protests in 2019. It also showed that Beijing’s promise to retain the former British colony’s Western-style civil liberties for 50 years when it returned to China in 1997 was becoming increasingly threadbare, they said.

Pro-criminal groups try to invalidate election results

by | 0715, 28 May 24 | , , | 10 Comments

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here you go.

Confronted with increasing and pervasive crime being driven by our open-border and soft-on-crime district attorneys and judges, the voters of Wisconsin overwhelmingly passed two state constitutional amendments to empower judges. Now there are two pro-criminal groups trying to overturn the will of the people.

 

The cost of crime on individuals and communities is immeasurable. Roughly fifteen years ago, organized groups — many of which were funded by billionaire George Soros — began supporting soft-on-crime DAs and judges throughout America who have been exceedingly lenient to criminals to the detriment of victims. This problem was exacerbated by the leftist effort to defund the police after the death of George Floyd and the importation of legions of criminals through Biden’s open-border policy. The result of all of these policy choices has been an explosion in crime. Even though much of the crime goes unreported (if we don’t arrest and convict people for crimes, then the crime rate will look better than it really it), we, the people, feel it.

 

In Wisconsin, judges had strict restrictions about what they could consider when determining bail for criminal offenders. They could not consider the offender’s criminal record, history of violent crime, or risk to the general public when determining bail. While one might think that such considerations are paramount when setting a cash bail threshold that will determine how easy it is for an offender to roam the streets while awaiting trial, Wisconsin’s judges were not allowed to use such factors in their judgment.

 

In normal times, correcting this fault in the criminal justice code would have been a simple matter of the Legislature passing a law and the governor signing it. But in Wisconsin, Gov. Tony Evers is part of the pro-criminal ideology who would veto any suggestion that we be stricter with criminals. To get around this, the Republicans in the Legislature passed two constitutional amendments to allow judges to consider an offender’s criminal history and threat to the public when setting bail. Wisconsin’s process for amending the Constitution does not require the governor’s assent, but it does require the voters to approve amendments in a statewide vote.

 

Wisconsin’s voters overwhelmingly approved the two amendments last year by a two-to-one margin.

 

Despite the clear and undeniable support for the bail amendments, a couple of pro-criminal groups have sued to overturn the will of the voters and a Dane County judge appears open to the argument. The case they are making is that the Legislature violated procedure when sending the proposed amendments to be put on the ballots, so the results should be thrown out.

 

By law, ballot questions must be “filed with the official or agency responsible for preparing the ballots” no less than 70 days before the election. The Legislature sent the ballot questions to the Wisconsin Election Commission 76 days before the election, but the WEC didn’t send the questions to local county election officials until 69 days before the election. The plaintiffs are arguing that the will of the voters should be turned over based on interpreting “official or agency responsible for preparing the ballots” as local election officials instead of the state agency responsible for overseeing elections.

 

The lawsuit is a farce and should be thrown out, but Dane County Circuit Judge Rhonda Lanford has said that she will issue a written decision in the coming weeks. Lanford’s court has been a favorite destination for leftist plaintiffs. She was originally elected to the bench in 2013 with strong support from fellow leftists like Congressman Mark Pocan, AFSCME, SEIU, Madison Teachers Inc., and others. She said when running that, “I believe that the trial courts have inherent power to act in the interest of justice, and do not need permission from the Legislature.” Said another way, Lanford is exactly the kind of judge who thinks that her own judgment supersedes the judgment of the people as expressed through their elected representatives in the Legislature.

 

I strongly urge Judge Lanford to follow the law and allow the will of the people to be fulfilled. Not only is it the law, but it will help Wisconsin’s judges keep habitual criminals from victimizing more people while out on bail.

 

Uvalde Families Sue Gun Maker; Video Game Company

by | 2035, 26 May 24 | , , | 0 Comments

My sympathy for the people of Uvalde wanes when they begin to engage in frivolous lawsuits that look like they are meant more as a shakedown than as recompense for their suffering.

Families of the Uvalde victims have filed a lawsuit against Daniel Defense, the makers of the AR-15 assault rifle, and Activision, the publisher of the first-person shooter video game series “Call of Duty,” and Meta, the parent company of Instagram, over what they claim was their role in promoting the gun used in the shooting.

 

The suit alleges the companies partnered to market the weapon to underage boys in the games and on social media.

 

The lawsuit filed on Friday, marked two years since the shooting took place.

Federal Officials Condemn ICC

by | 0731, 21 May 24 | , , | 1 Comment

It’s good to see the entire federal government united and correct in their condemnation of the ICC.

The State Department was out with a longer statement that denounced the court for pairing Israel with Hamas.

 

‘We reject the Prosecutor’s equivalence of Israel with Hamas. It is shameful. Hamas is a brutal terrorist organization that carried out the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust and is still holding dozens of innocent people hostage, including Americans,’ Secretary of State Antony Blinken said in a statement.

 

And White House spokesman John Kirby noted that ‘we don’t believe the ICC has any jurisdiction in the matter.’

 

House Speaker Mike Johnson blasted the ICC and threatened to hold sanctions against the court.

 

‘The ICC has no authority over Israel or the United States, and today’s baseless and illegitimate decision should face global condemnation,’ he said.

 

‘Congress is reviewing all options, including sanctions, to punish the ICC and ensure its leadership faces consequences if they proceed. If the ICC is allowed to threaten Israeli leaders, ours could be next,’ he added.

 

Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik was in Israel when the decision came down.

 

‘As Bibi leads @Israel through one of the darkest moments in its history, we must stand unequivocally with Israel against Iran and their proxies who seek to destroy the only democracy in the Middle East,’ she wrote on X.

Abbott Pardons Man Convicted of Killing Violent Protestor

by | 2112, 17 May 24 | , , | 0 Comments

Excellent

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott issued a full pardon Thursday for a former U.S. Army sergeant convicted of murder for fatally shooting an armed demonstrator in 2020 during nationwide protests against police violence and racial injustice.

 

Abbott announced the pardon shortly after the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles announced a unanimous recommendation that Daniel Perry be pardoned and have his firearms rights restored.

 

Perry had been in state prison on a 25-year sentence since his 2023 conviction in the killing of Garrett Foster, and was released shortly after the pardon, a prison spokeswoman said.

Perry, who is white, was working as a ride-share driver when his car approached a demonstration in Austin. Prosecutors said he could have driven away from the confrontation with Foster, a white Air Force veteran who witnesses said never raised his gun.

 

A jury convicted Perry of murder, but Abbott called it a case of self-defense.

 

“Texas has one of the strongest ‘Stand Your Ground’ laws of self-defense that cannot be nullified by a jury or a progressive district attorney,” Abbott said.

Wisconsin Supreme Court to Decide Fewest Cases in 40 Years

by | 0809, 10 May 24 | , | 3 Comments

Is this a problem? I rather like a minimalist court. Although it does seem that this particular court is usurping power and running roughshod over the Constitution where they choose.

It would be the first time the court has issued fewer than 40 decisions in a term in at least four decades.

 

According to Ball’s analysis, the court filed more than 130 decisions in its 1980-81 term and has generally fluctuated between 40 and 100 per term in subsequent years. Before the late 1970s and the creation of the court of appeals, the state Supreme Court often filed more than 200 decisions per term and sometimes more than 300.

 

[…]

The number of petitions for review has dropped significantly. The court received 658 petitions in its 2020-21 term, 624 in 2021-22 and 573 in 2022-23. According to a March 2024 report from the court, 332 petitions have been filed in the current term.

“In addition to a smaller number of petitions for review, the justices have clearly decided that fewer of the petitions merit acceptance. Why that might be is harder to say,” Ball said.

It is interesting that there are so few petitions. Does this indicate a lack of confidence in the court? Maybe. Maybe it’s just coincidence.

SCOTUS hears Case On Banning Homeless Encampments

by | 1953, 22 Apr 24 | , | 0 Comments

This should be pretty simple. The Constitution is silent on homeless people, thus laws about them are up to the states.

A majority of Supreme Court justices on Monday appeared sympathetic to an Oregon city making it a crime for anyone without a permanent residence to sleep outside in an effort to crack down on homeless encampments across public properties.

 

The case, City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, carries enormous stakes nationwide as communities confront a growing tide of unhoused residents and increasingly turn to punitive measures to try to incentivize people to take advantage of social services and other shelter options.

 

“These generally applicable laws prohibit specific conduct and are essential to public health and safety,” argued the city’s attorney Theane Evangelis during oral arguments, which stretched more than two and a half hours.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals said in a decision last year that a homeless camping ban amounts to “cruel and unusual punishment” under the 8th Amendment. But several members of the high court’s conservative majority took a critical view of that conclusion.

 

“Have we ever applied the Eighth Amendment to civil penalties?” asked a skeptical Justice Clarence Thomas.

Colorado Seeks to Ban Semiautomatic Weapons

by | 2027, 14 Apr 24 | , , | 0 Comments

Blatantly unconstitutional. 

DENVER (AP) — Colorado’s Democratic-controlled House on Sunday passed a bill that would ban the sale and transfer of semiautomatic firearms, a major step for the legislation after roughly the same bill was swiftly killed by Democrats last year.

 

The bill, which passed on a 35-27 vote, is now on its way to the Democratic-led state Senate. If it passes there, it could bring Colorado in line with 10 other states — including California, New York and Illinois — that have prohibitions on semiautomatic guns.

 

Geyser to Remain Institutionalized

by | 2110, 11 Apr 24 | , | 0 Comments

Good.

WAUKESHA, Wis. — A judge ruled the woman accused of nearly killing her friend 10 years ago to appease the fictional character Slender Man will not be released back into the community. The judge said Morgan Geyser will remain in a mental health institution and continue to get treatment. This comes as the second day of a hearing to see if Geyser could get a conditional release, wrapped up.

Leftist Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Won’t Seek Reelection

by | 1810, 11 Apr 24 | , | 0 Comments

This was unexpected, but welcome. We will have an open seat with no power of incumbency in play.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley announced Thursday she would step down at the end of her term next spring, putting liberals’ majority on the pivotal swing state’s highest bench at stake.

 

The April 2025 election to replace Bradley promises to be an expensive and bitter race and will likely feature many of the same momentous issues — like abortion rights and redistricting — that defined a 2023 Wisconsin Supreme Court race that ultimately gave liberals their first majority on the bench in 15 years.

 

In a statement, Bradley, 73, said she would not run for a fourth 10-year term on the court, saying it was a good time to bring “fresh perspectives to the court.”

“My decision has not come lightly. It is made after careful consideration and reflection. I know I can do the job and do it well. I know I can win re-election should I run, but it’s just time to pass the torch,” wrote Bradley, who was elected to the technically nonpartisan court in 1995.

State Bar Tries to be Less Racist

by | 1835, 5 Apr 24 | , , | 1 Comment

Victory? I guess? But if the results of the program are the same, it doesn’t seem like much of a victory. Liberals have no problem saying one thing to appease the law and then doing whatever they want.

The State Bar of Wisconsin said that under terms of the settlement, its “diversity clerkship program” would continue unchanged under the new definition.

 

But the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, which brought the lawsuit in December, declared victory, saying in a statement that “mandatory and annual State Bar dues will not fund internships and policies primarily based on race, but rather on merit and diversity of viewpoint.”

 

The original definition of “diversity” for the Wisconsin program said the concept includes race, ethnicity, gender identity and other factors. The new definition simply says it involves “including people with differing characteristics, beliefs, experiences, interests, and viewpoints.”

 

Under the deal, the bar association must also clearly say in all materials related to the program that race is not a factor in considering participation in the program, according to the conservative law firm.

 

The bar association also may not say that only law students from diverse backgrounds, with backgrounds that have been historically excluded from the legal field, or who have been socially disadvantaged are eligible, the law firm said.

 

The program in question offers summer internships for first-year law school students at top law firms, private companies and government offices. Past participants have included Alliant Energy, Froedtert Health, the Kohler Co., the city of Madison, the Wisconsin Department of Justice and the state Department of Corrections.

SCOTUS Allows Texas to Arrest Illegal Aliens

by | 2117, 19 Mar 24 | , | 3 Comments

Excellent.

A divided Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed Texas to begin enforcing a law that gives police broad powers to arrest migrants suspected of crossing the border illegally while a legal battle over the measure plays out.

 

The conservative majority’s order rejects an emergency application from the Biden administration, which says the law is a clear violation of federal authority that would cause chaos in immigration law.

 

Texas Gov Greg Abbott praised the order — and the law — which allows any police officer in Texas to arrest migrants for illegal entry and authorizes judges to order them to leave the U.S.

The high court didn’t address whether the law is constitutional. The measure now goes back to an appellate court and could eventually return to the Supreme Court. In the meantime, it wasn’t clear how soon Texas might begin arresting migrants under the law.

 

It was also unclear where any migrants ordered to leave might go. The law calls for them to be sent to ports of entry along the U.S.-Mexico border, even if they are not Mexican citizens.

 

But Mexico’s government said Tuesday it would not “under any circumstances” accept the return of any migrants to its territory from the state of Texas. Mexico is not required to accept deportations of anyone except Mexican citizens.

I suggest that Mexico make some effort to prevent non-Mexicans from crossing their country to jump our border.

Women Sue to Compete Against Women

by | 1843, 14 Mar 24 | , | 0 Comments

Really… what does Title IX even mean if we obliterate women’s sports?

ATLANTA (AP) — Former Kentucky swimmer Riley Gaines was among more than a dozen college athletes who filed a lawsuit against the NCAA on Thursday, accusing it of violating their Title IX rights by allowing Lia Thomas to compete at the national championships in 2022.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Atlanta, details the shock Gaines and other swimmers felt when they learned they would have to share a locker room with Thomas at the championships in Atlanta. It documents a number of races they swam in with Thomas, including the 200-yard final in which Thomas and Gaines tied for fifth but Thomas, not Gaines, was handed the fifth-place trophy.

SCOTUS Unanimously Sides With Constitution

by | 0933, 4 Mar 24 | , | 3 Comments

Excellent. Surprising that it was unanimous, but a good sign that the justices can sometimes put aside their personal political biases in favor of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court’s Monday ruling that Donald Trump should appear on the ballot in Colorado is a massive victory for the former president, vanquishing one of the many legal threats that have both plagued and animated his campaign against President Joe Biden.

 

Using the 14th Amendment to derail Trump’s candidacy has always been seen as a legal longshot, but gained significant momentum with a win in Colorado’s top court in December, on its way to the US Supreme Court. Since that decision, Trump was also removed from the ballot in Maine and Illinois.

Login | Register

Archives

Categories

Pin It on Pinterest