#Judge of Supreme Court

[navinsamachar]

ब्रेकिंग-बड़ा समाचार: उत्तराखंड हाईकोर्ट से कई जिलों के जिला जजों (Judges) सहित कई न्यायिक अधिकारियों के स्थानांतरण के आदेश जारी

नवीन समाचार, नैनीताल, 30 अक्टूबर 2023। उत्तराखंड में अल्मोड़ा, पौड़ी व रुद्रप्रयाग के जिला जजों (Judges) सहित उच्च न्यायिक सेवा के कई न्यायिक अधिकारियों के स्थानांतरण किये गये हैं। उत्तराखंड उच्च न्यायालय के रजिस्ट्रार-न्यायिक की ओर से स्थानांतरण आदेश जारी किए गए हैं। जारी किये गये आदेशों के अनुसार पौड़ी के जिला जज आशीष नैथानी को हाईकोर्ट का रजिस्ट्रार जनरल बनाया गया है। जबकि, हाईकोर्ट के…

[my-midlife-crisis]

[castielsprostate]

us-ians try not to fuck up this election and vote blue challenge (impossible) (they don't care about anyone but themselves) (they're unable to see the devastating consequences if that orange buffoon is re-elected) (they don't understand how their own government works) (voting blue is literally the only option you have if you want to survive past 2030. like there is literally no other fucking option. if you do not vote blue this year, so much blood will be on your hands you can't even imagine it i don't think) (us-ians are too shortsighted to see what will happen to the rest of the fucking world if their little orange dictator gets reelected and they. don't. care.)

[alwaysbewoke]

[odinsblog]

🗣️This is an illegitimate and deeply corrupt Supreme Court

Justice Samuel Alito spoke candidly about the ideological battle between the left and the right — discussing the difficulty of living “peacefully” with ideological opponents in the face of “fundamental” differences that “can’t be compromised.” He endorsed what his interlocutor described as a necessary fight to “return our country to a place of godliness.” And Alito offered a blunt assessment of how America’s polarization will ultimately be resolved: “One side or the other is going to win.”

Alito made these remarks in conversation at the Supreme Court Historical Society’s annual dinner on June 3, a function that is known to right-wing activists as an opportunity to buttonhole Supreme Court justices. His comments were recorded by Lauren Windsor, a liberal documentary filmmaker. Windsor attended the dinner as a dues-paying member of the society under her real name, along with a colleague. She asked questions of the justice as though she were a religious conservative.

The justice’s unguarded comments highlight the degree to which Alito makes little effort to present himself as a neutral umpire calling judicial balls and strikes, but rather as a partisan member of a hard-right judicial faction that’s empowered to make life-altering decisions for every American.

(continue reading)

[nando161mando]

Clarence Thomas needs to croak

[perseuspixl]

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Occupy Democrats (@occupydemocrats)

#Happy not to be American

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

A federal judge on Monday dismissed the classified documents case against Donald Trump, a shock ruling that clears away one of the major legal challenges facing the former president.

In a 93-page ruling, District Judge Aileen Cannon said the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith violated the Constitution. She did not rule on whether Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents was proper or not.

“In the end, it seems the Executive’s growing comfort in appointing ‘regulatory’ special counsels in the more recent era has followed an ad hoc pattern with little judicial scrutiny,” Cannon wrote.

The ruling by Cannon, a judge Trump appointed in 2020, comes on the first day of the Republican National Convention. Even though a trial before the presidential election was considered highly unlikely, many legal experts had viewed the classified documents case as the strongest one of the four cases that were pending against the former president.

The White House referred requests for comment to the Justice Department. Smith’s office has not responded to a call for comment.

Smith had charged Trump last year with taking classified documents from the White House and resisting the government’s attempts to retrieve the materials. He pleaded not guilty.

In a separate criminal case brought by Smith against Trump in Washington, DC, the special counsel was pursuing federal charges stemming from Trump’s attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Trump also faces a state-level election subversion case in Georgia and he was convicted of state crimes in New York earlier this year for his role in a hush money payment scheme before the 2016 election.

Trump’s efforts to dismiss the case under the appointments clause was seen as a long shot, as several special counsels – even during his own presidential administration – were run the same way.

But the fringe argument gained steam when Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas threw his support behind the theory, writing in a footnote in the high court’s presidential immunity decision that there are “serious questions whether the Attorney General has violated that structure by creating an office of the Special Counsel that has not been established by law. Those questions must be answered before this prosecution can proceed.”

Still, Cannon held a hearing on the issue several weeks ago, pushing attorneys to explain exactly how Smith’s investigation into Trump was being funded. The judge’s questions were so pointed that special counsel attorney James Pearce argued that, even if Cannon were to throw out the case due to an appointments clause issue, the Justice Department was “prepared” to fund Smith’s cases through trial if necessary.

Cannon said in her order that the special counsel’s position “effectively usurps” Congress’ “important legislative authority” by giving it to the head of a department – DOJ, in this case – to appoint such an official.

“If the political branches wish to grant the Attorney General power to appoint Special Counsel Smith to investigate and prosecute this action with the full powers of a United States Attorney, there is a valid means by which to do so,” she wrote.

COULD CASE BE REVIVED?

Cannon said in her ruling Monday that the Justice Department “could reallocate funds to finance the continued operation of Special Counsel Smith’s office,” but said it’s not yet clear whether a newly-brought case would pass legal muster.

“For more than 18 months, Special Counsel Smith’s investigation and prosecution has been financed by substantial funds drawn from the Treasury without statutory authorization, and to try to rewrite history at this point seems near impossible,” Cannon wrote. “The Court has difficulty seeing how a remedy short of dismissal would cure this substantial separation-of-powers violation, but the answers are not entirely self-evident, and the caselaw is not well developed.”

She noted in her ruling that Smith’s team “suggested” at a court hearing on the matter that they could restructure the office’s funding to satisfy her concerns.

[cyarsk52-20]

I'll keep saying it because it's true: the goal of the Roberts Court is to eradicate equal rights and delegitimize the courts. Expand/ change/ get rid of the corrupt judges of the supreme courts

[deadpresidents]

I hope I'm not jinxing things, but do you see President Harris picking former President Obama for the next vacancy on the SCOTUS?

I'd be stunned if President Obama had any interest in being nominated to the Supreme Court. I think any former President would have a difficult time adjusting to being one of nine justices after the experience of being the most powerful person in the world during their Presidency. President Obama has a deliberative temperament, but I think the judiciary requires an entirely different form of deliberation and I imagine Obama would feel handcuffed as a member of the Supreme Court.

William Howard Taft was appointed to the Supreme Court after leaving the White House and spent nearly nine years (1921-1930) as Chief Justice, but he's the exception to the rule when it comes to former Presidents and the Court. Taft was a judge before he was an executive, and it was his lifelong dream to sit on the Supreme Court, not to be President. Taft had actively worked to be appointed to the Supreme Court as far back as 1889 when Benjamin Harrison was President, but the politics or the timing just never worked out in his favor until after his Presidency. If it had been up to Taft, he would have gladly traded his time in the Executive Branch (under Presidents McKinley and Roosevelt) and four years in the White House for a seat on the Supreme Court.

Despite his background in Constitutional law, I think Barack Obama has always been an activist at heart, and while we now have a hyper-political Supreme Court, I don't see the judiciary as the place where Obama wants to spend the rest of his post-Presidency.

(Plus, if/when a President Harris fills a vacancy on the Supreme Court, it's probably best if she picks someone younger than Obama in order to lock down that seat for as long as possible.)

[theywhoshantbenamed]

CT: your honor, permission to call the jury “chat?”

AotJ:

Supreme Court: lol yeah go for it

[tomorrowusa]

Want more bad judges and even worse decisions which will be around for the rest of your life? Just mope around and pretend that there is nothing you can do to impact the election.

When Roe v. Wade went into effect in 1973, the abortion opponents mobilized and worked tirelessly to get it repealed. It took them 49 years but they succeeded in 2022. They never gave up.

Too many people on the progressive side of the spectrum give up easily, don't take the long view, or act like that guy in the "distracted boyfriend" meme when they see a flashy third party or fringe candidate.

Elections are not unlike playing horseshoes – you can win by getting close even if you don't achieve the instant gratification of a direct ringer. And if you don't win on the first try you keep getting chances every 2 to 6 years to improve your score.

Persistence and long-term focus have worked well for Republicans. It's foolish to let them have exclusive use of these tools.

[my-midlife-crisis]

[sher-ee]

[sentimental-apathy]

This is so important. Please reblog this. And please, please, for the love of everything and everyone, PLEASE VOTE!

[kp777]

BREAKING: Judge Cannon pulls the stunt we've dreading in Trump case

The Legal Breakdown

July 5, 2024

The Legal Breakdown episode 332: ‪@GlennKirschner2‬ discusses Judge Cannon seeking to dismiss the Trump classified documents case.