Nonilex , to random
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

accidentally posts ruling that would allow in

The would allow in ID despite the state’s , acc/to Bloomberg , which viewed a copy of a not-yet-released opinion that was briefly posted on the court’s website Wed.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/06/26/supreme-court-emergency-abortions-idaho-decision/

Nonilex OP ,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

From Justice Jackson’s opinion:

“We cannot simply wind back the clock to how things were before the Court injected itself into this matter. Our intervention has already distorted this litigation process. We permitted 's to go into effect by staying the District Court's injunction in the first place, then allowed this matter to sit on our docket for 5 months while we considered the question presented.
1/

Nonilex OP ,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

“It is too little, too late for the Court to take a mulligan & just tell the lower courts to carry on as if none of this has happened. As the old adage goes: The Court has made this bed so now it must lie in it—by proceeding to decide the of the critical pre-emption issue this case presents.”

2/

Nonilex OP ,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

“Despite clarity of the issue & the dire need for an answer…,today 6 Justices refuse to recognize the rights protects.…The majority opts, instead, to dismiss these cases. But storm clouds loom….3 Justices suggest…that have free rein to nullify .…& 3 more decline to disagree w/those dissenters on the .…The latter group offers only…that 'petitioners have raised a difficult & consequential argument' about Congress's authority under the Spending Clause.…

4/

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • test
  • worldmews
  • mews
  • All magazines