Daily Supreme Court News Briefing - June 27, 2024

🗽Supreme Court updates to help us hold our leaders accountable. A well informed citizenry is the best defense against tyranny.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 27, 2024

People Power United declares the Supreme Court has become unhinged.

In response to recent Supreme Court shenanigans, People Power United - a progressive grassroots group - issued the following statement:

“The Supreme Court has become unhinged. There is no power like that of the people, and People Power United stands ready to protect our communities against any and all injustices,” said Laurie Woodward García of People Power United.

People Power United will continue to oppose such harm to our community and champion civil rights for all.

Daily Supreme Court News Briefing

Two more cases were kicked down the road today. OHIO v EPA (EPA’s Good Neighbor rule of trying to curtail air pollution) and the EMTALA (emergency room abortion care) case were returned to lower courts for review but did not rule out that the Supreme Court could take these cases later.

In SEC v. Jarkesy, a 6-3 Supreme Court decision significantly restricted the SEC's ability to impose fines and penalties for fraud, ruling that defendants accused of fraud by the SEC have the right to a full jury trial. Mark Joseph Stern from Slate noted that this decision undermines the enforcement capabilities of not only the SEC but also other federal agencies like the FCC, FTC, NLRB, and Department of Labor, which lack the resources for extensive federal court trials. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in her dissent, criticized the majority's legal errors and its failure to recognize the threat to the separation of powers, warning that this decision is a power grab by the Supreme Court that diminishes the authority of agencies protecting against lawbreakers and other harmful actors. This ruling is especially concerning as we await the outcome of the Relentless case, which will determine if Congress can delegate decision-making authority to agency experts.

NEW Rulings

New York Times: Supreme Court Rejects Liability Shield at Center of Purdue Pharma Settlement

• Abbie VanSickle reports that on Thursday the Supreme Court rule 5-4 to reject “ a provision at the heart of a multibillion-dollar settlement with Purdue Pharma that would have channeled billions of dollars to help curb the opioid epidemic in exchange for shielding members of the wealthy Sackler family from related lawsuits.” 

NBC: Supreme Court curbs SEC powers to enforce securities laws

• Lawrence Hurley reports that on Thursday the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to “put new limits on the power of the Securities and Exchange Commission to enforce securities laws — the latest ruling in a series of cases that take aim at federal agencies.” 

Washington Post: Supreme Court blocks EPA’s ‘downwind’ air-quality initiative

• Justin Jouvenal reports that on Thursday the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 against the EPA, putting “on hold a major initiative to improve public health by reducing smog-forming pollution from power plants and factories that blows across state lines.” This is the third time in as many years that the Court has curbed the EPA’s ability to regulate pollution. 

Leaked EMTALA Ruling 

NBC: Supreme Court acknowledges accidentally posting Idaho abortion case document that may preview narrow Biden admin win

• Lawrence Hurley reports that on Wednesday a spokesperson for the Supreme Court acknowledged that a draft opinion in Moyle was accidentally posted online and then removed from the website that morning.

Also covered by: Vox, Politico

Ms. Magazine: The Supreme Court’s EMTALA Ruling Leaves U.S. Women at Risk

• Ms. Magazine reports that based on the leaked ruling in Moyle, the Court’s ruling only leaves pregnant patients and doctors confused about abortion care in the state. 

Slate: The Supreme Court’s New Leaked Abortion Draft Reeks of Cynicism

• Mark Joseph Stern argues that the leaked ruling in Moyle, which dismisses the case, “reeks of a cynical compromise, secured by the more tactical conservative justices, to push this explosive issue past this fall’s election.” 

NBC: What accidentally posted document could mean for Supreme Court security

CNN: Supreme Court analyst on possible reason SCOTUS pulled abortion document

Polling 

AP: 7 in 10 Americans think Supreme Court justices put ideology over impartiality: AP-NORC poll

• Thomas Beaumont and Linley Sanders report on new polling showing that “7 in 10 Americans think the high court’s justices are more influenced by ideology.” 

General 

New York Times: Behind the Curtain at the Supreme Court

• Abbie VanSickle and Amir Hamja provide a rare photo-based essay about the courtroom in the Supreme Court. 

Washington Monthly: Jamie Raskin’s Battleplan for Liberals in the War Over the Constitution

• Simon Lazarus argues in favor of Rep. Raskin's approach to the Constitution, originalism, and the Supreme Court.

Other Rulings

CNN: What the Supreme Court ruling on social media means

• Brian Fung writes about the Supreme Court’s ruling in Murthy v. Missouri, noting the impact the decision may have on the 2024 election and the scope of the ruling. 

Also covered by: NPR

New York Times: Corruption Law Allows Gifts to State and Local Officials, Supreme Court Rules

• Abbie VanSickle and Adam Liptak report that on Wednesday the Supreme Court “limited the sweep of a federal law…aimed at public corruption, ruling that it did not apply to gifts and payments meant to reward actions taken by state and local officials.” 

Vox: The Supreme Court rules that state officials can engage in a little corruption, as a treat

• Ian Millhiser argues that Snyder v. US is the latest in a trend of the Republican justices weakening anti-corruption laws. 

Slate: The Supreme Court Gave Biden a Chance to Fight Disinformation. It’s Too Little, Too Late.

• Mark Joseph Stern argues that the overarching message of the Court’s ruling in Murthy on Wednesday is that the justices are “losing [their] patience with hyperpartisan lower court judges who are eager to transform goofy political stunts into legitimate constitutional controversies.” 

Also covered by: Vox

HuffPost: Justice Jackson Lobs Snark At Supreme Court In Dissent On Government 'Greed'

• Sarah Boboltz reports on Justice Jackson’s dissent in Snyder, in which she “lobbed snark” at the Court itself, saying “greed makes governments — at every level — less responsive, less efficient, and less trustworthy from the perspective of the communities they serve.” 

Wall Street Journal: A Supreme Court License for Social-Media Censorship

• The Editorial Board writes a criticism of the Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling in Murthy, saying that the decision “ducks the First Amendment problem when government pressures tech platforms to limit speech it doesn’t like.” 

The Guardian: The US supreme court just basically legalized bribery

• Moira Donegan argues against the Supreme Court’s ruling in Snyder v United States, saying that it is no surprise that this Court takes no issue with “the sort of generous ‘gifts’ and ‘gratuities’ that justices have been known to accept.”

# # #

People Power United champions progressive values and power to the people. The 2024 election depends on us, and we are attempting to persuade people to vote for Freedom over Fascism. If you wish to support our efforts, please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.