fbpx
Advertisements
Fri. Feb 22nd, 2019

Supreme Court Gearing Up

The Supreme Court has made a series of impactful decisions recently, both agreeing to hear certain cases as well as declining to hear others.

Advertisements

President Donald J. Trump and First Lady Melania Trump participate in a meet and greet with Supreme Court Justices Thursday, November 8, 2018, at the Supreme Court of the United States in Washington, D.C. (Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead)

The Supreme Court has made a series of impactful decisions recently, both agreeing to hear certain cases as well as declining to hear others.

From declining to rule on the legality of Trump’s ban on transgender soldiers serving in the military to allowing the rule to be enforced without a decision, the Supreme Court has been making a lot of interesting decisions lately.

Keep reading for a breakdown of each of these landmark decisions.

First, as we mentioned, the Supreme Court declined to rule on the actual legality of banning transgender individuals from serving in the military, but decided to allow the administration to enforce the rule anyway.

Unsurprisingly, the 5-4 decision was clinched by the conservative majority that was locked in with the confirmation of Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

The Supreme Court also declined to hear another case: the administration’s attempt to repeal the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.

This decision will leave the program in place for now, building on the rulings made by lower courts that ruled against the repeal.

They have decided, however, to hear a case that is widely supported by gun advocates and which challenges a New York City law preventing licensed gun owners from bringing their weapons outside city limits.

It will be the first case related to the Second Amendment that the Court will have heard since 2010.

Finally, the Department of Justice has again requested that the Court review a ruling made by a New York judge last week barring the administration from including a citizenship question in the 2020 census.

Opponents of the question argue that it will skew important data used when drawing congressional maps and allocating federal funding because states with high immigrant populations will be disproportionately represented due to fewer immigrants participating in the census out of fear of deportation.

So far, the Court has not confirmed whether or not it will hear the case.

Regardless, each and every one of these legal battles, now and for the next 20 years, will underscore the consequences of the GOP blocking President Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland, as well as the hasty confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh.

 

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: