Posts

Clarence Thomas Creates Shockwaves for Stating Next ‘Error’ That Supreme Court Should ‘Correct’

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas suggested in his concurring opinion with the Court’s ruling on Roe v. Wade on Friday that the judicial body should revisit several key rulings that are politically charged.

In his concurring opinion, Thomas wrote that “[i]n future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.” . . .

Fox News reported:

Griswold v. Connecticut was a landmark 1965 case which ruled the use of contraception between two married individuals was a matter of privacy and constitutionally protected.

Lawrence v. Texas in 2003 dealt with homosexual sex between consenting parties, and Obergefell v. Hodges treaded the same territory in 2015 to rule gay marriage as a constitutionally protected right to privacy.

(Read more from “Clarence Thomas Creates Shockwaves for Stating Next ‘Error’ That Supreme Court Should ‘Correct’” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Supreme Court Rules for Coach Who Prayed at Football Games

The Supreme Court on Monday sided with a former high school football coach who prayed at the 50-yard after games, ruling that his public prayers were protected as free speech and free exercise of religion.

The 6-3 decision is a victory for those who seek a larger role for prayer and religion in public schools.

The court’s conservatives cast aside long-standing ideas that the Constitution mandates a strict separation of church and state. While they agreed students may not be required to pray or listen to a religious message, they said private prayers at school are protected, not prohibited.

They ruled that Coach Joe Kennedy’s prayers began as a personal expression, and were not official acts of promoting religion simply because they drew a crowd.

The 1st Amendment protects the freedom of speech and the free exercise of religion while prohibiting an “establishment of religion,” and all three clauses were at issue in the case of Kennedy vs. Bremerton School District. (Read more from “Supreme Court Rules for Coach Who Prayed at Football Games” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Draft Leak Versus Actual Dobbs Opinion Shows Supreme Court Didn’t Buckle Under Pressure

The leaked Supreme Court draft opinion that foreshadowed the overturning of abortion rights last month resembles Friday’s final decision, signaling that the justices did not buckle under weeks of public pressure.

Despite a national outcry of protests, marches, and an alleged attempted assassination against Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Justice Samuel Alito’s majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization very closely resembled the draft opinion leaked by Politico on May 2.

“It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives. … That is what the Constitution and the rule of law demand,” Alito wrote in the draft and the final decision on Friday.

The draft opinion signaled Friday’s likely outcome that Justices Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett, and Kavanaugh, appointees of former President Donald Trump, would join Justices Clarence Thomas and Alito to upend 50 years of precedent regarding abortion access and allow states to create laws banning or severely limiting abortion. (Read more from “Draft Leak Versus Actual Dobbs Opinion Shows Supreme Court Didn’t Buckle Under Pressure” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Without Trump, Today’s Supreme Court Ruling Would Not Have Been Possible

In 2016, one of Donald Trump’s campaign promises was to appoint Supreme Court justices to overturn Roe v. Wade. Today, his promise became a reality. It’s the latest example of a Trump promise made and a Trump promise kept. Everyone who is against infanticide should be thankful for Donald Trump, regardless of one’s personal feelings about him. . .

Despite all his flaws, Trump was arguably, and surprisingly, the best president for the pro-life movement. He touted his pro-life stance during a presidential debate with Hillary Clinton, in which he promised to appoint pro-life justices. It was an important statement, especially given some of the Supreme Court appointees Republicans have had over the years. But Trump’s promise felt different. Consider his statements from 2016.

“Well, if we put another two or perhaps three justices on, that … will happen automatically, in my opinion, because I am putting pro-life justices on the court,” Trump proclaimed back then.

The promise to nominate Supreme Court justices who would overturn Roe had been met with suspicion by pro-life voters. More often than not, these voters were seduced with the pledges of these nominees, only to live with the reality of their failure to overturn it. But, unlike many previous Republican presidents, Trump delivered.

Furthermore, he demonstrated his commitment to the pro-life movement during his presidency. After all, he was the first sitting president to attend and speak at the annual March for Life Rally, a list that includes those deemed morally superior, such as George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan. (Read more from “Without Trump, Today’s Supreme Court Ruling Would Not Have Been Possible” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Second Amendment Win: Supreme Court Says Constitution Protects Right to Carry a Gun Outside the Home; Biden DOJ Releases Bizarre Statement in Response to SCOTUS Opinion

By CNN. The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a New York gun law enacted more than a century ago that places restrictions on carrying a concealed handgun outside the home — an opinion marking the widest expansion of gun rights in a decade.

“Because the State of New York issues public-carry licenses only when an applicant demonstrates a special need for self-defense, we conclude that the State’s licensing regime violates the Constitution,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the court’s 6-3 majority.

The opinion changes the framework that lower courts will use going forward as they analyze other gun restrictions, which could include the proposals currently before Congress if they eventually become law. (Read more from “Second Amendment Win: Supreme Court Says Constitution Protects Right to Carry a Gun Outside the Home” HERE)

________________________________________________

Biden DOJ Releases Bizarre Statement in Response to SCOTUS Opinion

By Townhall. The Department of Justice is weighing in after the Supreme Court struck down restrictive “may issue” concealed carry laws Thursday morning, bizarrely stating they do not agree with the decision.

“We respectfully disagree with the Court’s conclusion that the Second Amendment forbids New York’s reasonable requirement that individuals seeking to carry a concealed handgun must show that they need to do so for self-defense. The Department of Justice remains committed to saving innocent lives by enforcing and defending federal firearms laws, partnering with state, local and tribal authorities and using all legally available tools to tackle the epidemic of gun violence plaguing our communities,” DOJ Spokesperson Dena Iverson released in a statement.

(Read more from “Biden DOJ Releases Bizarre Statement in Response to SCOTUS Opinion” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

SCOTUS Justice Protection Bill One Step Closer to Becoming Law

The House passed a bill 396-27 to increase security for Supreme Court justices’ immediate families on Tuesday, approving a measure that had already been passed by unanimous consent in the Senate.

The bill comes after one man was arrested for allegedly plotting to kill Justice Brett Kavanaugh and protesters demonstrated outside the homes of conservative justices following the leak of a draft opinion in a high-profile abortion case.

The bill provides for 24-hour protection for Supreme Court justices’ families, similar to what is already provided for some members of the executive and legislative branches. . .

The Senate bill was introduced three days after Politico published the leaked draft opinion, which suggested that the Supreme Court intends to overturn Roe v. Wade. While the Senate acted quickly, the House waited more than a month before approving the bill. (Read more from “SCOTUS Justice Protection Bill One Step Closer to Becoming Law” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

WATCH: ‘Handmaid’s Tale’ Protesters Outside Supreme Court Justice’s House

Pro-abortion activists are protesting outside the home of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in Chevy Chase, Maryland.

The activists are also planning on protesting at Chief Justice John Roberts’s home in Maryland. Protesters were reportedly seen wearing outfits from the TV series The Handmaid’s Tale in preparation for the protest.

This protest is part of a wave of pro-abortion demonstrations across the country following the leak of a Supreme Court draft opinion, authored by Justice Samuel Alito, that would overturn Roe v. Wade.

Furthermore, leftist activists have specifically targeted the homes of the six Supreme Court Justices, who are on the conservative wing of the bench, outside of Washington DC in Northern Virginia and Maryland.

Despite the tactics to intimidate the justices, Thomas told attendees at a judicial conference last week that “We can’t be an institution that can be bullied into giving you the outcomes you want.” (Read more from “WATCH: ‘Handmaid’s Tale’ Protesters Outside Supreme Court Justice’s House” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Is This the Supreme Court Leaker?

. . .Will Chamberlain of the Internet Accountability Project and Human Events had a lengthy Twitter thread about who this leaker could be and zeroed in on Elizabeth Deutsch. It’s pure speculation based on information from the public domain, but after he makes his case—it sort of sounds like she could fit the bill. She’s a current law clerk for Justice Breyer. Chamberlain leaves it open that he could be wrong about her, but let’s go through what he found:

Here’s where things start to get interesting. Every law student has to write a note – a long legal research paper, usually making a novel argument about the law.

Elizabeth Deutsch wrote hers about reproductive rights and abortion.

Specifically, she argued that Obamacare’s non-discrimination provision should be interpreted to force Catholic hospitals to perform “emergency abortions.”

Aggressive argument – and hey, law students make aggressive arguments.

(Read more from “Is This the Supreme Court Leaker?” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Asking for Violence? WH Says Biden Wants Protesters to Continue Targeting Justices’ Homes (VIDEO)

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki was asked again on Tuesday about protests targeting the homes of Supreme Court Justices, and she again doubled down on supporting the attempted intimidation of Justices saying that it’s President Biden’s position to “certainly continue to encourage” the protests “outside of judges’ homes” that “have been peaceful to date.”

Watch:

The statement from Psaki regarding President Biden’s position on the protests contradicts her earlier statement in a gaggle last week that Biden didn’t have a “particular view” on the protests targeting Justices with the intention of swaying their decision on an unreleased opinion. (Read more from “Asking for Violence? WH Says Biden Wants Protesters to Continue Targeting Justices’ Homes” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Report: Supreme Court Majority Still Supports Overturning Roe v. Wade; Democrats Push Radical Abortion Bill Far More Expansive Than Roe

By Daily Wire. A Supreme Court majority in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade was reportedly still in agreement long after a draft of the majority opinion was written in February.

The draft, which was leaked to the public last week, does not represent the final decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health. Justices are still able to suggest changes to the majority opinion or switch their votes altogether until the court publishes its decision in the case.

As recently as two weeks ago, however, the reported majority in favor of striking down Roe was still together, sources told The Washington Post. “[T]hree conservatives close to the court” told WaPo that “the majority of five justices to strike Roe remains intact,” a question that has stirred those on both sides of the debate that has erupted around the future of abortion law in the U.S. in the wake of the leaked draft.

Chief Justice John Roberts is not siding with the majority, telling his colleagues in December that he planned to write an opinion upholding both Mississippi’s restrictions on abortion, in question in Dobbs, as well as Roe to the extent possible. The majority of the court disagreed with the chief justice and were “more interested in an opinion that overturned the precedents,” WaPo reported, citing a source “close to the most conservative members of the court.”

The leak of the draft decision on May 2 sparked outcry across the political spectrum. Conservatives generally decried the leak of the document, unprecedented in recent history and a significant breach of trust among the nine justices of the high court. Leftists rallied to protest the contents of the draft and claimed that the end of Roe could spell the end of abortion access in the U.S. Notably, ending Roe would revert the question of legal access to abortion back to the states, where laws would vary widely. (Read more from “Report: Supreme Court Majority Still Supports Overturning Roe” HERE)

____________________________________________________

Democrats Push Radical Abortion Bill Far More Expansive Than Roe

By Daily Signal. The Senate on Wednesday is expected to vote on whether to end debate on S 4132, the Women’s Health Protection Act of 2022.

Even though a similar vote on the virtually identical HR 3755 failed on Feb. 28, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., quickly set up this repeat in the wake of the leaked first draft of the Supreme Court’s opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

If the position in that draft holds, the court will overturn its decisions in Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which created and continued the right to abortion.

The Women’s Health Protection Act would prohibit any government anywhere from doing anything that could, even potentially, reduce the number of abortions from actually taking place. Not only that, it would require every government everywhere to repeal any statutes, regulations, or anything else that may already be on the books that could potentially have that effect.

Abortion advocates claim the Women’s Health Protection Act would merely “codify” those Supreme Court decisions, protecting the right to abortion by legislation should its constitutional protection vanish. (Read more from “Democrats Push Radical Abortion Bill Far More Expansive Than Roe” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.