Today the Supreme Court of The United States will issue its final set of decisions before Summer recess.
The three expected cases today are:
>Voisine v. United States: Voisine and a co-petitioner are contesting that their previous convictions of misdemeanor assault on their domestic partners does not disqualify them from possessing firearms under federal law that bans possession to persons convicted of domestic violence where there was "use of force" because state law allowed conviction of "reckless, non intentional" behavior.
>Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt: Are 2 Texas laws, that require abortion doctors to have access to hospital and that abortion clinics have fully equipped surgery rooms, constitutional?
>McDonnell v. United States: Do former Virginia Governor McDonnell's actions of recommending a businessman's nutritional supplement qualify as an corrupted "official action"?
Live blog: http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/06/live-blog-of-orders-and-opinions-30/
Official documents: http://www.supremecourt.gov
Ugh, the lighting in that pic is just awful.
EXPECTED RESULTS
>Voisine loses, federal law does not distinguish whether intent is necessary.
>McDonnell wins, language of "official acts" is too broad.
>Court will send case back to Texas lawyers for not gathering enough evidence relating to "demand" of abortion clinics, OR Texas laws will be struck down due to them forcing persons to take more risky surgical abortions rather than medical abortions.
>>78926008
Based on knowing nothing about these other than what you've just presented, I'd vote to confirm your Supreme Court nomination. (Actually no I wouldn't; I'd fire whoever forgot to brief me adequately.)
>>78925671
It really is. I don't know if I could take such a horrid picture on purpose.
ACTUAL RESULTS
>Voisine loses, A reckless domestic assault qualifies as a “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence”.
>Both Texas laws struck down, constitute an undue burden on abortion access, and thus violate the Constitution.
(Long bench reading in Texas case so final case in a bit)
>>78927416
ACTUAL RESULTS
>McDonnel's conviction is vacated, jury instructions relied upon the government's overly broad interpretation of "official acts".
neat
>>78925585
What did the corrupt guy do?
>>78925585
How can the supreme court even shoot down the abortion clinic regulations? We have so many worthless regulations and they choose to target this as unnecessary?
http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/27/politics/supreme-court-abortion-texas/
>"There was no significant health-related problem that the new law helped to cure," Breyer wrote. "We agree with the District Court that the surgical-center requirement, like the admitting-privileges requirement, provides few, if any, health benefits for women, poses a substantial obstacle to women seeking abortions, and constitutes an "undue burden" on their constitutional right to do so."
You know I really wish the leftist fuckers would rule this way regarding firearm regulations.
>"There was no significant crime-related problem that the new law helped to cure," Breyer wrote. "We agree with the District Court that the background-check requirement, like the waiting-period requirement, provides few, if any, benefits for citizens, poses a substantial obstacle to citizens seeking arms, and constitutes an "undue burden" on their constitutional right to do so."
For that matter, the same goes for concealed carry laws, you could change the wording and this would work for that too.
"There was no significant crime-related problem that the new law helped to cure," Breyer wrote. "We agree with the District Court that the background check requirement, like the fingerprint requirement, provides few, if any, benefits for citizens, poses a substantial obstacle to citizens seeking arms for self-preservation, and constitutes an "undue burden" on their constitutional right to do so."
These guys suck at their jobs.
>>78932161
Got lots of golf, private jet flights, dinners, clothes, vacations, a Rolex, and a bunch of other stuff as "gifts" while Governor, from the same people his decisions would effect.
In short, his defense was "I would have made the same decisions anyway, so what if I got a ride on a G6 for a weekend of golf in Vegas"
>>78933148
You are free to bring the "worthless regulations" you refer to to court. This case was appropriate, Supreme Court already upheld a stay of enforcement of the policies and lower courts had overturning rulings on the case itself. Supreme Court also ruled correctly.
