DIRS.INFO The most relevant business & tech news

☆ In shadow of Trump tweets, Supreme Court outlines when officials can be sued for social media use
▼ + stars: | 2024-03-15 | by ( Lawrence Hurley | ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +5 min

The court ruled unanimously that officials can be deemed "state actors" when making use of social media and can therefore face litigation if they block or mute a member of the public. The court held that conduct on social media can be viewed as a state action when the official in question "possessed actual authority to speak on the state's behalf" and "purported to exercise that authority." While the officials in both cases have low profiles, the ruling will apply to all public officials who use social media to engage with the public. The cases raised the question of whether public officials' posts and other social media activity constitute part of their governmental functions. The court is wrestling with a whole series of social media-related free speech issues in its current term, which runs until June.

Persons: WASHINGTON —, Donald Trump's, Amy Coney Barrett, —, Barrett, Trump, Elon Musk, Michelle O'Connor, Ratcliff, T.J, Zane, Christopher, Kimberly Garnier, O'Connor, Christopher Garnier, James Freed, Kevin Lindke, Freed Organizations: Twitter, Poway Unified School District, of, Circuit, Southern District of, Port, U.S Locations: Southern California, Michigan, California, San Francisco, Southern District, Southern District of California, Port Huron City

☆ Supreme Court Sets Rules for Blocking Citizens From Officials’ Accounts
▼ + stars: | 2024-03-15 | by ( Adam Liptak | ) www.nytimes.com time to read: +1 min

The Supreme Court, in a pair of unanimous decisions on Friday, added some clarity to a vexing constitutional puzzle: how to decide when elected officials violate the First Amendment by blocking people from their social media accounts. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the court in the lead case, said two things are required before officials may be sued by people they have blocked. The court did not apply the new standard to the cases before them, involving a city manager in Port Huron, Mich., and two members of a school board in California. The cases were the first of several this term in which the Supreme Court is considering how the First Amendment applies to social media. The court heard arguments last month on whether states may prohibit large technology platforms from removing posts based on the views they express, and it will consider on Monday whether Biden administration officials may contact social media platforms to combat what they say is misinformation.

Persons: Amy Coney Barrett Organizations: Biden Locations: Port Huron, Mich, California

☆ Justices Barrett and Sotomayor urge Americans to tone down political rhetoric despite charged atmosphere
▼ + stars: | 2024-03-12 | by ( John Fritze | ) edition.cnn.com time to read: +2 min

CNN —Two Supreme Court justices on Tuesday urged Americans to turn down the temperature of civic discourse – even as the high court is working through some of the most charged political cases to land on its docket in years. Justice Sonia Sotomayor said that on the Supreme Court she and her colleagues come to disagreements with an assumption that all nine are operating in good faith. Neither justice mentioned those cases – or any others – in their remarks at George Washington University during the annual Civic Learning Week National Forum. “In my judgment, this is not the time to amplify disagreement with stridency,” Barrett wrote in her concurring opinion. “So for us to be beholden to one of them is a little crazy,” said Sotomayor, who was nominated by former President Barack Obama.

Persons: Amy Coney Barrett, Sonia Sotomayor, “, ” Sotomayor, Donald Trump’s, Barrett, ” Barrett, Sotomayor, ”, Barack Obama Organizations: CNN, George Washington University, Trump, National Governors Association Locations: Washington , DC

☆ Justice Amy Coney Barrett Stakes Out Distinctive Stance in Trump Case
▼ + stars: | 2024-03-05 | by ( Adam Liptak | ) www.nytimes.com time to read: +1 min

Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s opinion was just a page long, all of two paragraphs. Justice Barrett was the third of Mr. Trump’s appointees, rushed onto the court after the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, arriving just before the 2020 election. But she is viewed as one of the more moderate members, relatively speaking, of the court’s six-member conservative supermajority. In public appearances, she is adamant that the court is apolitical, though she sometimes says so in venues that undercut her message. In 2021, for instance, Justice Barrett told an audience in Kentucky that “my goal today is to convince you that this court is not comprised of a bunch of partisan hacks.”

Persons: Amy Coney Barrett’s, Donald J, Justice Barrett, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Barrett Organizations: Mr Locations: Monday’s, Kentucky

A five-member majority from the court said in Monday's ruling that Congress would need to pass an enforcement mechanism before states could remove federal candidates from the ballot based on the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban.” Four members of the court – the three liberals, plus Justice Amy Coney Barrett – disagreed. "The relevant provision is Section 5, which enables Congress, subject of course to judicial review, to pass 'appropriate legislation' to 'enforce' the Fourteenth Amendment.”Some more context: This finding from the majority revolves around whether the insurrectionist ban is “self-executing,” which would mean that its ratification in 1868 is enough for election officials or courts to enforce it against Trump or any other candidate. Historically, that is what happened to thousands of Confederates during Reconstruction, according to testimony at the Colorado disqualification trial from a leading constitutional scholar. Trump argued that the Colorado courts got it wrong when they concluded that Congress doesn’t need to pass a resolution disqualifying him from office for the ban to be enforced against him. One of the dissenting Colorado justices embraced Trump’s theory that the provision isn’t self-executing, citing a ruling from the 1869 “Griffin’s Case,” which Trump heavily leaned on in his Supreme Court appeal.

Persons: “, Amy Coney Barrett –, United States …, Trump Organizations: United, Congress, Trump Locations: United States, Colorado

All the opinions focused on legal issues, and none took a position on whether Mr. Trump had engaged in insurrection. In an interview on a conservative radio program, Mr. Trump said he was pleased by the ruling. The Colorado Supreme Court affirmed the first part of the ruling — that Mr. Trump had engaged in an insurrection. Mr. Trump asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene, setting out more than half a dozen arguments about why the state court had gone astray and saying his removal would override the will of the voters. 23-719, is not the only one concerning Mr. Trump on the Supreme Court’s docket.

Persons: Donald J, Trump, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson —, “, ”, John G, Roberts, ” “, Amy Coney Barrett, Barrett, Bush, Gore, George W, Mr, ” Mr, Trump’s, Anderson, Michael Gold Organizations: Trump, Congress, Jackson, Health Organization, Colorado, Republican, United, The, The Colorado Supreme, Colorado Supreme, Mr, U.S, Supreme Locations: Dobbs v, United States, Colorado, The Colorado, New York

☆ The Supreme Court rules Trump is eligible to run for office again
▼ + stars: | 2024-03-04 | by ( Katherine Tangalakis-Lippert | Brent D. Griffiths | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +5 min

Read previewThe Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Monday that Donald Trump is eligible to run for president again, quashing legal challenges that loomed over the GOP frontrunner's candidacy for office. Instead, the court effectively foreclosed almost any challenge to a federal office holder under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, the insurrection clause. "Today, the majority goes beyond the necessities of this case to limit how Section 3 can bar an oathbreaking insurrectionist from becoming President," the justices wrote. The Supreme Court had never before issued a ruling on the post-Civil War era provision known as the "insurrectionist clause." The Supreme Court is set to hear separate arguments in April over whether Trump can be criminally prosecuted for election interference charges, including those stemming from his role during the January 6 attack on the Capitol.

Persons: —, Donald Trump, SCOTUS, Trump, Steve Vladeck, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson, John Robert's, Roe, Wade, Amy Coney Barrett, Barrett, overturns Organizations: Service, GOP, Trump, Business, Lawmakers, Congress, University of Texas, Austin, Colorado, Colorado's, Capitol, Department of Justice Locations: Colorado , Illinois, Maine, California , New York, Wisconsin, Colorado

☆ Supreme Court keeps Trump on Colorado ballot, rejecting 14th Amendment push
▼ + stars: | 2024-03-04 | by ( John Fritze | ) edition.cnn.com time to read: +9 min

“The Supreme Court had the opportunity in this case to exonerate Trump, and they chose not to do so. 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. But in Colorado, a series of decisions by state courts led to a case that Trump ultimately appealed to the US Supreme Court in January. The Colorado Supreme Court, on a sharply divided 4-3 vote, affirmed the findings about Trump’s role in the US Capitol attack but said that the ban did, in fact, apply to presidents. Trump is appealing, and a state court paused those proceedings while the Supreme Court dealt with the Colorado case.

Persons: Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Trump, John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh –, “, ” Trump, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Amy Coney Barrett, Steve Vladeck, Sotomayor, Kagan, Barrett, Jackson, ” SCOTUS, Trump’s, State Jena Griswold, ” Griswold, ”, Norma Anderson, Trump “, Roberts, Kavanaugh, lobbed, Jonathan Mitchell, Barack Obama, ” Kagan, Jason Murray, CNN’s Marshall Cohen, Devan Cole Organizations: CNN, GOP, Trump, University of Texas School of Law, US Capitol, Republican, Colorado, State, U.S, Democrats, Citizens, Colorado Supreme, Biden Locations: Colorado, Washington, U.S ., “ Colorado, Colorado’s, Maine and Illinois, Minnesota , Michigan , Massachusetts, Oregon, Maine, An Illinois, United States

☆ Supreme Court rules states can't remove Trump from presidential election ballot
▼ + stars: | 2024-03-04 | by ( Dan Mangan | ) www.cnbc.com time to read: +4 min

The Supreme Court on Monday unanimously reversed the Colorado court ruling that barred former President Donald Trump from appearing on the state's Republican presidential primary ballot because of a provision in the U.S. Constitution related to people who engage in insurrection. "The judgment of the Colorado Supreme Court therefore cannot stand." "This suit was brought by Colorado voters under state law in state court," Barrett wrote. "The Court has settled a politically charged issue in the volatile season of a Presidential election," she wrote. Monday's ruling reverses decisions by two other states, Maine and Illinois, which acted after the Colorado Supreme Court, to bar Trump from their primary ballots.

Persons: Donald Trump, Trump, Joe, disqualifying Trump, Elena Kagan, Kagan, Sonya Sotamayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Amy Coney Barrett, Barrett Organizations: Republican, Colorado, Trump, U.S . Capitol, Electoral, Colorado Supreme Locations: Conway , South Carolina, Colorado, U.S, United States, Maine, Illinois

☆ Amy Coney Barrett disagreed with the majority over Trump, but admonished the liberals instead
▼ + stars: | 2024-03-04 | by ( Joan Biskupic | ) edition.cnn.com time to read: +9 min

CNN —Justice Amy Coney Barrett packed two very different messages into her one-page opinion on Monday as the Supreme Court declared states could not toss former President Donald Trump off the ballot. But then she admonished the court’s three liberal justices, who also split from the majority’s legal rationale, in unusually biting terms. “All nine Justices agree on the outcome of this case,” Barrett wrote. Joining Roberts in the majority were Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. Echoes of John Roberts’ complaint about the liberalsIn criticizing the court’s critics, Barrett appeared to take a page from Roberts.

Persons: Amy Coney Barrett, Donald Trump, ” Barrett, Trump, Barrett, Bush, Gore, George W, Al Gore, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Wade, who’ve, John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh, United States …, President Trump, Joe Biden, … ”, ”, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Roberts, ” Roberts, Roe, “, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson Organizations: CNN, Supreme, Liberal, Texas Gov, White House, Senate, Colorado Supreme, United, Colorado Supreme Court, Capitol, Trump, Trump atty, Biden administration’s, Gore Locations: rebuking, Florida, Colorado, United States

“Responsibility for enforcing Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates rests with Congress and not the States,” they wrote in a 20-page decision. “The judgment of the Colorado Supreme Court therefore cannot stand. The high court’s ruling resolves just one of two that could have sweeping implications for the 2024 election. “The Court has settled a politically charged issue in the volatile season of a Presidential election. Particularly in this circumstance, writings on the Court should turn the national temperature down, not up.

Persons: Donald Trump, ”, Trump’s, Trump, affirmatively, ’, ‘, ’ ”, State Jena Griswold, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Amy Coney Barrett Organizations: Colorado Supreme, Capitol, Trump, Republican, Donald Trump View, National Government, United, Colorado, State Locations: Colorado, United States

☆ Takeaways from the Supreme Court arguments over bump stocks and machine guns
▼ + stars: | 2024-02-28 | by ( John Fritze | Devan Cole | ) edition.cnn.com time to read: +7 min

CNN —The Supreme Court’s conservatives pressed the Biden administration Wednesday to justify a federal ban on bump stocks, a device that can convert a semi-automatic rifle into a weapon that can fire far more rapidly. The ATF reclassified the devices as machine guns in 2018. “And through many administrations, the government took the position that these bump stocks are not machine guns.”The court’s liberals seemed more certain the devices fell within what Congress intended when it banned machine guns. “That’s exactly what bump stocks do, as the Las Vegas shooting, vividly illustrated.”Justice Samuel Alito asked the attorney representing the ban’s challenger, Michael Cargill, if he could imagine the reasons why a lawmaker might ban machine guns but not bump stocks. “Bump stocks can help people who have disabilities, who have problems with finger dexterity, people who have arthritis in their fingers.

Persons: Donald Trump’s, Brett Kavanaugh, ensnare, you’re, ” Kavanaugh, Biden, “ That’s, It’s, Barrett, Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett, ” Barrett, “, Neil Gorsuch, ” Gorsuch, Elena Kagan, Kagan, ” Brian Fletcher, Fletcher, ” Fletcher, ”, Samuel Alito, Michael Cargill, Jonathan Mitchell, Sonia Sotomayor, ” Kagan, Alito Organizations: CNN, Biden, Trump, Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, Explosives, ATF, Las Locations: Vegas

☆ Here’s why a SCOTUS ruling on social media rules matters to so many people
▼ + stars: | 2024-02-27 | by ( Brian Fung | ) edition.cnn.com time to read: +8 min

It’s obvious enough that the legislation would affect those social media giants, who are challenging the laws’ constitutionality through industry trade associations. But in scrutinizing the laws’ scope and First Amendment impacts, justices from both sides of the ideological spectrum worried Monday that the legislation’s effects could spill far beyond major social media platforms. “We’re talking about the classic social media platforms, but it looks to me like it could cover Uber. Social media applications are seen on an iPhone in this photo illustration taken on 10 November, 2023 in Warsaw, Poland. (Photo by ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / AFP) (Photo by ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty Images) Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP/Getty ImagesThat law permits social media users to try to sue platforms for violations.

Persons: CNN — Uber, —, Henry Whitaker, “, ”, Amy Coney Barrett, Sonia Sotomayor, Whitaker, Jaap Arriens, ” Whitaker, Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson, “ I’m, ” Jackson, Uber, Aaron Nielson, Barrett, ” Sotomayor, ” Nielson, ” Chris Marchese, ANDREW CABALLERO, REYNOLDS, Andrew Caballero, Reynolds, Neilson, ” Barrett, you’ve, Elena Kagan, you’re, Kagan Organizations: CNN, Facebook, YouTube, Web, LinkedIn, NetChoice Litigation, AFP, Getty, Texans, PayPal Locations: Texas, Florida, Warsaw, Poland, ” Texas, ”, Washington , DC, AFP, El Paso

☆ Supreme Court hears landmark cases that could upend what we see on social media
▼ + stars: | 2024-02-26 | by ( Brian Fung | ) edition.cnn.com time to read: +5 min

More than a dozen Republican attorneys general have argued to the court that social media should be treated like traditional utilities such as the landline telephone network. The tech industry, meanwhile, argues that social media companies have First Amendment rights to make editorial decisions about what to show. Whitaker said Florida’s law is limited by its definition of social media companies, which focuses on large platforms. “We’re talking about the classic social media platforms, but it looks to me like it could cover Uber. Whitaker said social media platforms had opaque algorithms that prevent users from fully understanding how content curation happens.

Persons: “, Blair Levin, ” Levin, Henry Whitaker, Sonia Sotomayor, Sotomayor, Whitaker, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Amy Coney Barrett, ” Barrett, Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh zeroed, Kavanaugh Organizations: Washington CNN, Facebook, YouTube, New, Research, LinkedIn, Web Locations: Texas, Florida

Here are the key takeaways from the courtroom:How far does the First Amendment reach when it comes to social media? Online platforms engage in censorship when they silence certain users’ speech, the states argued to the court. In fact, the tech industry argued, government requirements that social media not moderate content would violate the platforms’ own First Amendment freedoms from government meddling. Section 230 features prominently in argumentsOne question kept coming up during the arguments, just as it has in lower courts: What these state laws could mean for Americans’ overall ability to sue social media companies over content moderation. The state laws explicitly allow users to sue tech platforms for alleged censorship.

Persons: Donald Trump, Samuel Alito, Biden, ” Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, ’, ” Kavanaugh, Elena Kagan, Elon Musk, ” Kagan, –, – that’s, Kagan, Uber, you’re, Amy Coney Barrett, ” Organizations: CNN, Meta, ”, X, Elon, YouTube, Communications Locations: Texas, Florida

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Thursday heard two hours of historic arguments in a Colorado case to remove former President Donald Trump from the ballot. Murray gave well-rehearsed arguments that won the day in the Colorado Supreme Court, whose 4-3 ruling that Trump was ineligible got the case to Washington. Salmon Chase, who was then the chief justice of the Supreme Court, heard the case while acting as an appellate judge. Going into the case, the prevailing view of legal experts was the Supreme Court would keep Trump on the ballot. Would it mean a reelected President Trump suddenly becomes ineligible.

Persons: Donald Trump, “, TRUMP, Trump, Democrat Joe Biden, Elena Kagan, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanagh, John Roberts, Jason Murray, Murray, Salmon Chase, Chase, weren’t, Kavanagh, Ketanji Brown, Jackson, Amy Coney Barrett, Trump's lawyeer, Jonathan Mitchell, Mitchell Organizations: WASHINGTON, Republican, U.S, Capitol, Democrat, Colorado Supreme Locations: Colorado, Washington, Virginia

☆ Chuck Schumer touts bipartisan relationship with McConnell: 'I got 99 problems but Mitch ain't one'
▼ + stars: | 2024-02-01 | by ( Bryan Metzger | ) www.businessinsider.com time to read: +3 min

"I guess you could say I've got 99 problems but Mitch ain't one," Schumer joked. The two party leaders are in relative agreement over a major border security and foreign aid bill. AdvertisementSenate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer made a Jay-Z reference when speaking about his bipartisan relationship with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. "I guess you could say I've got 99 problems but Mitch ain't one." AdvertisementIt was a pun on Jay-Z's 2003 hit "99 Problems," the lyrics of which include the line: "I got 99 problems but a bitch ain't one."

Persons: Sen, Chuck Schumer, Mitch McConnell, I've, Mitch, Schumer, —, McConnell, Merrick Garland, Amy Coney Barrett, Donald Trump, Trump Organizations: Service, Act Locations: Ukraine, Israel, Gaza, Russian

☆ Supreme Court Backs Biden in Dispute With Texas Over Border Barrier
▼ + stars: | 2024-01-22 | by ( Adam Liptak | ) www.nytimes.com time to read: +1 min

The Supreme Court sided with the Biden administration on Monday, allowing federal officials to cut or remove parts of a concertina-wire barrier along the Mexican border that Texas erected to keep migrants from crossing into the state. The ruling, by a 5-to-4 vote, was a victory for the administration in the increasingly bitter dispute between the White House and Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas, an outspoken critic of President Biden’s border policy who has shipped busloads of migrants to northern cities. Since 2021, Mr. Abbott, a third-term Republican, has mounted a multibillion-dollar campaign to impose stringent measures at the border to deter migrants. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined the court’s three liberal members to form a majority.

Persons: Biden, Greg Abbott of, Abbott, John G, Roberts Jr, Amy Coney Barrett Organizations: White Locations: Texas, Greg Abbott of Texas, Biden’s, Rio, Mexico

☆ Will The Supreme Court Upend How Government Works? - The New York Times
▼ + stars: | 2024-01-18 | by ( Jody Freeman | Andrew Mergen | ) www.nytimes.com time to read: +1 min

The Supreme Court heard arguments on Wednesday in two cases inviting the justices to drastically restrict the authority of federal agencies, upend decades of precedent and take more power for themselves. At least four members of the court seem prepared to do so. The question is whether Chief Justice John Roberts or Justice Amy Coney Barrett will go along with them to provide a majority. Out of respect for precedent and judicial humility, they should not. Conservatives have been stalking this precedent for years, believing, in the words of Justice Neil Gorsuch in 2016, that it gives “prodigious new powers to an already titanic administrative state.”

Persons: John Roberts, Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, ” Organizations: Chevron, Natural Resources Defense Council, jettison

☆ Supreme Court won’t resolve case concerning self-appointed ‘tester’ of Americans with Disabilities Act
▼ + stars: | 2023-12-05 | by ( Devan Cole | ) edition.cnn.com time to read: +5 min

The court decided the case was moot after the plaintiff at the center of the dispute, Deborah Laufer, dropped her lawsuit. We are not convinced, however, that Laufer abandoned her case in an effort to evade our review,” Barrett wrote. Jackson reiterated her concerns about when the court should and should not vacate lower-court rulings when a case becomes moot on appeal. Though the justices weighed that question during oral arguments, they spent a considerable amount of time trying to figure out if they should resolve the issue at all. The defendant’s website, everybody agrees, is now in compliance with the ADA,” liberal Justice Elena Kagan said during oral arguments.

Persons: Deborah Laufer, Acheson Hotels, Amy Coney Barrett, Laufer, ” Barrett, “, Acheson, Clarence Thomas, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Thomas, Jackson, didn’t, Elena Kagan, ”, Samuel Alito, ” Laufer, Adam Unikowsky, John Roberts, hasn’t, Kelsi Corkran, Corkran Organizations: CNN, Acheson Locations: Maine

WASHINGTON (AP) — One fall day in 2010, retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor slipped into the courtroom where she worked for nearly 25 years to take in an “amazing” sight. That was pretty amazing.”O’Connor lived to see four women serve at the same time on the Supreme Court. Political Cartoons View All 1277 ImagesO’Connor, who left the court in 2006, died Friday in Phoenix of complications related to advanced dementia and a respiratory illness, the Supreme Court said. “I had never expected or aspired to be a Supreme Court justice. —-Richard Carelli, a former Supreme Court reporter for The Associated Press who is now retired, contributed to this story.

Persons: Sandra Day O’Connor, O’Connor, “, ” O’Connor, Ronald Reagan, Samuel Alito, wasn’t, John, Donald Trump's, Alito, O'Connor, ”, Sandra Day, Bill Clinton, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, “ I’m Sandra, Ruth, ” Ginsburg, Barack Obama, Sonia Sotomayor, David Souter, “ It’s, Obama, Elena Kagan, Trump, Amy Coney Barrett, Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Ketanji Brown Jackson, she'd, SCOTUS, ” Ruth McGregor, O’Connor’s, Mary, David Letterman’s, Jon Stewart, John O’Connor, Scott, Brian, Jay, Potter Stewart, Richard Carelli Organizations: WASHINGTON, New York Times, Iraq, College of William, CBS, Supreme, Associated Press Locations: Phoenix, Arizona, Washington, United States, Virginia, Los Angeles

☆ The Supreme Court’s Search for a More Attractive Gun Rights Case
▼ + stars: | 2023-11-20 | by ( Adam Liptak | More About Adam Liptak | ) www.nytimes.com time to read: +1 min

When the Supreme Court heard arguments this month on whether the Second Amendment allows the government to disarm domestic abusers, Justice Amy Coney Barrett made a cryptic reference that puzzled many in the courtroom. She asked, according to the court’s official transcript, about “the range issue.”Sentencing range? She was, it turned out, referring to a person, Bryan Range, who has challenged a federal law prohibiting people who have been convicted of felonies from owning guns. Range is a far more sympathetic figure than the defendant in the domestic violence case, Zackey Rahimi. According to court records, Mr. Rahimi threatened women with firearms and was involved in five shootings in a two-month stretch.

Persons: Amy Coney Barrett, Bryan Range, Rahimi, Justice Barrett

☆ Supreme Court Refuses to Revive Florida Law Restricting Drag Shows
▼ + stars: | 2023-11-16 | by ( Adam Liptak | More About Adam Liptak | ) www.nytimes.com time to read: 1 min

The Supreme Court refused on Thursday to revive a Florida law that banned children from “adult live performances” such as drag shows. The court’s brief order gave no reasons, which is typical when the justices act on emergency applications, and a First Amendment challenge to the law will continue in the lower courts. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Neil M. Gorsuch dissented. Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, joined by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, issued a statement stressing that the court’s order was addressed to an issue unrelated to the constitutionality of the law. The order, he wrote, “indicates nothing about our view on whether Florida’s new law violates the First Amendment.”

Persons: Clarence Thomas, Samuel A, Alito Jr, Neil M, Gorsuch, Brett M, Kavanaugh, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, ” Organizations: Justice Locations: Florida

☆ Supreme Court says Florida can’t enforce anti-drag law
▼ + stars: | 2023-11-16 | by ( Ariane De Vogue | Devan Cole | ) edition.cnn.com time to read: +4 min

CNN —The Florida law that limits drag shows in the state will remain blocked, the Supreme Court said Thursday, dealing a blow to a key initiative championed by Republican Gov. Florida had asked the high court to narrow a lower court’s injunction that stopped the law from being enforced statewide. The 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals declined Florida’s emergency application for a stay of the district court’s injunction, triggering the state’s ask to the Supreme Court for relief. Since the district court temporarily blocked enforcement of the law, the restaurant has returned to normal operations. The challenge to the law continues at lower courts, and Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law, cautioned against drawing broader implications from Thursday’s order.

Persons: Ron DeSantis, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, Ashley Moody, –, ”, ” Moody, Moody, Hamburger, Hamburger Mary’s, Steve Vladeck, Kavanaugh, Barrett, ” Vladeck, “ Organizations: CNN, Republican Gov, Conservative, University of Texas School of Law Locations: Florida, Ron DeSantis . Florida, ”, Orlando, “ Florida

☆ Supreme Court revisits the Second Amendment in the wake of the latest mass shooting
▼ + stars: | 2023-11-07 | by ( Ariane De Vogue | ) edition.cnn.com time to read: +10 min

The Supreme Court is considering a section of federal law that bars an individual subject to a domestic violence restraining order from possessing a firearm. But then the Supreme Court issued its Second Amendment decision in Bruen. The 6-3 Bruen decision broke along familiar conservative-liberal ideological lines. But Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, wrote separately to stress that the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. The Second Amendment is “neither a regulatory straitjacket nor a regulatory blank check,” Kavanaugh said.

Persons: Clarence Thomas, Joe Biden’s, “ Rahimi, ”, Andrew M, “, Roger Benitez, Zackey Rahimi, Rahimi, ” Biden, Biden, Elizabeth Prelogar, Matthew Wright, Wright, ” Wright, Brett Kavanaugh, John Roberts, ” Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, ” Barrett, Barrett, Kavanaugh, ” Willinger, Hunter Biden, Hunter, That’s, Bruen, Patrick Daniels, Daniels, ” Hunter, Abbe Lowell Organizations: CNN, New York, Duke University School of Law, Circuit, Gun Safety, Chief, 5th Circuit Locations: New, California, Texas, Bruen, United States, North Texas, Wisconsin, Rahimi, USA, Delaware

Search resuls for: "Justice Amy Coney Barrett"

25 mentions found