63 replies
  1. GSSH-FullyReduced says:

    ProPublica has been outed by Alito!
    Lauren Windsor twittered.
    Plot thickens.
    Clutch my Pearls.

  2. boloboffin says:

    FDA vs AHM – in a unanimous opinion, the Court said the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the FDA on mifepristone!

    • RobertS721 says:

      This was a likely outcome. The argument for standing was always B.S. This is the kind of case that could only come out of the 5th circuit.

      During oral arguments, Alito was groping around for reasons to grant standing to the plaintiffs. He’s already shown that he’d gladly wreck the courts to get his preferred outcome.

      The crazies on the court have found a limit to how far they’ll go.

        • Rayne says:

          Yup. They will continue to pick at this, terrorizing women all the while, until they find that strand of spaghetti which sticks to the wall.

  3. boloboffin says:

    Vidal v Elster – Court reversed the decision, “Lanham Act bars registration of a trademark that identifies a living individual without his consent. The court holds that this restriction does not violate the First Amendment.” They say it’s a narrow decision, and appears to be unanimous, but it’s tangled. Thomas wrote it.

    • Purple Martin says:

      Yup. Justice Thomas wrote the 9-0 decision, joined in full by only by Alito and Gorsuch. Everyone else wrote or joined concurrences in various combinations—for a unanimous decision, interesting.

      Here’s the decision blurb from SCOTUSblog:

      Judgment: Reversed, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Thomas on June 13, 2024. Thomas announced the judgment of the court and delivered the opinion of the court, except as to Part III. Justices Alito and Gorsuch joined that opinion in full; Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kavanaugh joined all but Part III; and Justice Barrett joined Parts I, II-A, and II-B. Kavanaugh filed an opinion concurring in part, in which Roberts joined. Barrett filed an opinion concurring in part, in which Justice Kagan joined, in which Justice Sotomayor joined as to Part I, II, and III-B, and in which Justice Jackson joined as to Parts I and II. Sotomayor filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Kagan and Jackson joined.

      • boatgeek says:

        This reminds me of a description I saw of another case a decade or more ago, revolving around whether offshore industrial workers counted as seamen for some legal purposes. The decision was unanimous or nearly so, but there were several factions between the main opinion and the concurrences. The description said that the justices definitely thought that the workers were seamen, but didn’t agree on why.

  4. boloboffin says:

    Last for the day, another Thomas opinion on Starbucks v McKinley: “The question in this case was whether the traditional four-factor test for a preliminary injunction governs requests by the National Labor Relations Board under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act for a preliminary injunction while administrative enforcement proceedings against employers and labor unions for engaging in unfair trade practices are taking place. The court holds that it does, and it vacates and remands the Sixth Circuit’s decision.”

  5. Old Rapier says:

    How can they find against Alliance Defending Freedom? Yep, all those so called conservative justices are on George Soros’ payroll after all.

    • harpie says:

      DeGirolami joined the law school in 2024 and is
      “the inaugural St. John Henry Newman Professor of Law and
      Co-Director of the Center for Law and the Human Person”.
      He wrote a book in 2013 called The Tragedy of Religious Freedom.

    • Rayne says:

      As soon as I saw “Center for Law and the Human Person” I thought: dog whistle for blastocyst-embryo-and-fetus-as-human-person.

      That school with DeGirolami has established a program to pump out more DeGirolamis and Alitos.

        • Rayne says:

          Ugh. I could have predicted this (via Wikipedia):

          The Catholic University of America (CUA) is a private Catholic research university in Washington, D.C. It is a pontifical university of the Catholic Church in the United States and the only institution of higher education founded by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

          USCCB are a bunch of misogynistic dickheaded penguins.

          Another really scary fact about CUA: it has a STEM program including the Center for Advanced Training in Cell and Molecular Biology. Can you imagine what students learn from them, and how that knowledge is used?

        • Purple Martin says:

          Yup, they’re part of an ultra-conservative DC-based triumvirate (a Trinity if you will):

          Catholic University of America (US Conference of Bishops)
          Catholic Information Center (K Street Lobby and Communications shop)
          Faith & Reason Institute (Thinktank)

          You’ll recall two years ago, San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone sent a letter to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi saying:

          I am hereby notifying you that you are not to present yourself for Holy Communion and, should you do so, you are not to be admitted to Holy Communion, until such time as you [publicly] repudiate your advocacy for the legitimacy of abortion and confess and receive absolution of this grave sin in the sacrament of Penance

          Speaker Pelosi…declined. A couple Washington Post columnists criticized Archbishop’s Cordileone and—n exactly the spirit of the NYT’s publication of Prof DeGirolami’s Guest Essay—the WaPo published a guest Op-Ed in response. It was written by “Mary Eberstadt…the Panula Chair in Christian Culture at the Catholic Information Center…[and] a senior research fellow with the Faith & Reason Institute.”

          If you’ll indulge me, here’s part of a Wapo comment I wrote on the Eberstadt piece, hooking it to an earlier but oddly similar piece:

          Ms. Mary Eberstadt, spokeswoman for the Catholic Information Center:

          The catechism professes this. …the archbishop’s bracing stand for principle is a plus not only for the church but for all Americans regardless of belief. Public figures who want simultaneously the political benefits of “choice” and the personal consolations of being Catholic might have to decide once more which of these two masters they will serve. A new kind of choice is upon them.”

          Mr. Akif Muhajir, spokesman for the Taliban Ministry of Virtue and Prevention of Vice:

          ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Muslim women in Afghanistan must cover from head to toe in public, according to a Taliban ruling announced Saturday, its latest move to constrain the lives of women since taking control of the country last year.

          This is not a restriction on women but an order of the Quran,” said Akif Muhajir, a spokesman for the Ministry of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, referring to the Taliban’s strict interpretation of Islamic law. “It is the order of Allah and the prophet Muhammad.”

          I really do try to avoid calling people names, but I’m afraid the primary difference I’m able to detect between Ms. Eberstadt and similarly fundamentalist Mr. Muhajir is not of intent, but of opportunity.

        • Eschscholzia says:

          Sigh. It’s worse than Rayne said at 11:58am (PDT?). At no level from freshman to PhD does their biology department offer a course on evolution, even though the Catholic Church in general is officially ok with it. And, their lowest level freshman course in Biology:

          BIOL 103: Human Biology: What makes us human
          3.00 Credits
          Is it nature or nurture that makes an elite athlete? How does the human brain differ from all other animals?

          After this I’m not sure I have it in me to go over to the Alito v Science post.

        • Ravenclaw says:

          @ Eschscholzia:

          That course is a general education offering for non-science majors. The mainstream courses on general biology do include evolution as a topic. Most of the department’s offerings are basically chemistry, but that’s the current state of the field – very few people actually do studies of entire creatures any more. Thank heavens for the few!

          In general, Catholic universities let the scientists do their thing. (The Church may have learned something of the error of its ways with, say, Galileo or Bruno.) CU is way over on the conservative side but still has a reputation as an R1 institution to protect. The right-wing crazies hole up in certain departments and especially in mysteriously funded institutes like the Center for Law and the Human Person.

      • RipNoLonger says:

        My juvenile brain immediately focused on your use of “pump out more …” and thought that’s exactly what they are dreaming of – more good Catholics just like them (with willing or unwilling handmaidens to be the vessels.) Sort of like the Scalia Law School at George Mason pumping out RW JDs, and of course, the Jerry Falwell type religious right schools of lower education.

    • harpie says:

      DeGirolami posted a link to his NYT “Guest Essay” on the school website,
      with this introduction [and an excerpt]:

      On Justice Alito, Godliness, and Moral Polarization

      I have an opinion piece in the New York Times today concerning the criticism Justice Alito has received for reactions to and remarks about political polarization in this country, the Supreme Court’s proper role, and God and the nation. […]

      • harpie says:

        That’s MY typo in his intro. uggg

        [Fixed – I’ll delete this comment in a bit. :-) /~Rayne]

      • Konny_2022 says:

        Above which the Center’s homepage reads:
        “Studying Law in the Light of the Catholic Tradition.”

        • JVOJVOJVO says:

          That includes advising and scheming how to move sexual predator priests around to various diocese to avoid (i.e., cover up) their breaking our secular laws! ffs – for facts sake! ;-)

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Amazing that this character has avoided having an entry in wikipedia. It’s the sort of accomplishment a hard right wing academic would achieve to stay under the popular radar, while flooding the academy and the legal profession with his overtly religious legal analysis.

      Clearly, one of Leonard Leo’s candidates for the next opening on the Supreme Court.

      • David Brooks says:

        Well, you know what to do. Just remember it has to be written from a neutral point of view and have footnotes. Needn’t be long. I’ll help with the formatting if you want.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        The point is how much work it takes to avoid being publicly documented, while having so large a footprint in the academy. You’d think DeGirolami was preparing for a Senate hearing on his nomination. It’s standard protocol for Len Leo’s pets.

    • klynn says:

      I was reminded by this “guest essay” that the NYT’s has perfected conflict of interest practices for the purpose of defending conservatives.

    • Old Rapier says:

      Leonard Leo and the army of Catholic Conservatives dream of having their own Pope, but I think it’s out of grasp. Perhaps not. I love the idea of Leonard Leo selecting the pope.

      Eventually I think that crowd is going to establish an American Catholic Church. There have been a few instances in recent years of clergy going off the reservation. Obviously the Roman church is overtaken with Communists. (sarcasm alert)

      To a very large extent the acceptance of fascism by ‘serious’ people, Catholics like Bill Barr, Alito, Leo, and squadrons of Catholic thinkers and haver’s of opinion is what is making it acceptable to mainstream, employed news people. Same as it ever was. Though Hitler was confirmed Catholic I hold no brief against The Church as the root of fascism. Every religion has it’s authoritarians. It’s just that here they are so sober and respectable. Not like those snake handlers with very very close family relationships.

      • Purple Martin says:

        So…what would be an appropriate location for this new American Avignon? Might I suggest…Amarillo?

        • Old Rapier says:

          I’d say Dallas. No association or uncomfortable closeness to dirty brownish Mexico. Dallas is not a Spanish word or association. I’ve heard that nobody knows where the name Dallas came from. At any rate it’s pure American. Omaha or Boise might work as well, Someplace West of the Mississippi in the Heartland. Or back to Dallas, if Musk takes his $56 billion and rides Texas to indepencence, imagine the possibilities. I truly believe Musk envisions himself the President of the Republic of Texas.

        • JVOJVOJVO says:

          Ah yes, when the Jesuits of UDM Law School are not sufficiently “conservative” because they allowed Michigan Supreme Court Justices (who just happen to follow precedent in Roe v Wade) to appear at the Red Mass.
          Monoghan is an absolute Catholic zealot and fits right in with Alito and Thomas.

        • Purple Martin says:

          “Florida, home of Ave Maria…”

          Oh, I thought thought that was Dallas? Wikipedia…

          The term became widespread after an NFL playoff game between the Dallas Cowboys and the Minnesota Vikings on December 28, 1975 (see Cowboys–Vikings rivalry), when Cowboys quarterback Roger Staubach said about his game-winning touchdown pass to wide receiver Drew Pearson, “I closed my eyes and said a Hail Mary.”

        • RipNoLonger says:

          You’ll want your new Papal (PayPal?) center to be near the centers of power. Obviously to influence the congress, I’d think in Virginia (Maryland being too blue and too many intellectual types.) I could suggest the Trump National Golf Club on the banks of the Potomac. Lots of room for grift there!

  6. earlofhuntingdon says:

    The FDA case seems to be part of the Court’s one step back – two steps forward approach. The case was laughably not strong enough to use to promote the majority’s religious project, but it keeps it in the news.

    • harpie says:

      From “Alliance Defending Freedom [sic]” website:

      FDA’s recklessness continues for now
      Published June 13, 2024 Published 1 hour ago

      The following quote may be attributed to Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel [Fist-Pump-INSURRECTIONIST Spouse] Erin Hawley, vice president of the ADF Center for Life and Regulatory Practice, regarding the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision Thursday in U.S. Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine: […]

    • harpie says:

      Also: WHY is it possible for hospitals to hire and place into ERs
      [alleged] Emergency Room physicians who REFUSE to do emergency medicine?

      • boatgeek says:

        Along the same lines, why are hospitals permitted to operate ERs that decline to offer emergency care as a matter of corporate policy?

        • wa_rickf says:

          ***Off topic to thread, but germane to this side discussion***

          My local hospital’s ER is 100% not in any way, shape, or form, afflicted with the hospital in the same building. The ER is a separate company with separate billing and is “out of network” for insurance purposes while the hospital, that literally surrounds and envelopes the ER, is “in network.”

          The ambulance that takes folks to this ER – the ambulance company is “out of network” as well.

          Emergency medical care has become a total scam.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        Why is private equity allowed to slice and dice the most profitable bits of medical practice, organize them as separate practices within what a patient sees as the same hospital, and charge separately for them – at out-of-network rates? All while the patient finds out what the charges are only after they’ve incurred them?

        Seems like regulators could say that every service under a hospital’s umbrella is in or out of network, rather than allow private equity to cherry pick and avoid the restraints of in-network pricing. Or we could just go national health insurance, which seems easier.

    • Peterr says:

      As Mrs Dr Peterr noted when the opinion came down, “This will just make it easier for SCOTUS to rule in favor of Idaho in the case pitting their anti-abortion law against the federal law saying that state law and other lesser regulations do not supersede the federal requirement to treat all emergency medical cases, including when the treatment medically necessary is an emergency abortion.”

      I agree. I await Alito’s ruling in this case, in which he says between the lines: “OK, we gave you mifepristone (at least for now), but we’re gonna rule for Idaho in this one. See – fair and balanced!”

      • Ed Walker says:

        It’ll be rape-gurney Joe 2.0: Idaho can just helicopter dying women to Washington for crucial medical treatment.

  7. P J Evans says:

    Rayne says:
    June 13, 2024 at 12:16 pm
    The Dominicans were founded to enforce canon law. Dominic was the leader in the crusade against the Albigensians.

    • Old Rapier says:

      My Dominican first grade teacher, Sister Ann Patrick was the sweetest person. Sister Calista, not so much.

    • Ravenclaw says:

      The Dominican Order is complicated. There is the “dogs of God” history, and then there is the strong tradition of intellectual, even scientific, inquiry (see: Aquinas, Albertus Magnus). The Dominican Sisters are one of the most open-minded and liberal-thinking groups within the Catholic Church.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        You’ll appreciate that the description of the Dominican Sisters within the Catholic Church might be said to run the gamut from A to B.

  8. arleychino says:

    This would probably have been 7-2 with dissent from Alito and Thomas at least, if not for the public disclosure of their bribe-taking. Now, the deceitful Chief and his co-conspirators, in making the necessary judicial decisions reshaping American democracy towards plutocracy, Robert’s calling, will chill out a bit until the election results, likely logically presuming democrats will retake the House of Representatives, and look for a flip of the Senate, before they resume their conspiracy. Roberts, who has fluttered around the rich and powerful his entire career with the same instinctual necessity of a moth circling a porch light, can’t have his worst nightmare come true, a functional democratic party majority in the Senate, united government, and an expanded SCOTUS.

    • wa_rickf says:

      I 100% agree with your assessment that Alito and Thomas would have had a different opinion had they both not come under scrutiny in the past few weeks. I thought the very same this morning.

      They’re simply flying low right now, to avoid any more of the scrutiny radar.

    • LaMissy! says:

      I agree that Thomas and Alito are merely laying low. Also, by rejecting the case due to a lack of standing, they’re telegraphing: come back with someone who has standing and we’ll revisit.

  9. wa_rickf says:

    Jonathan Turley can’t analyze his way out of a paper bag. Every opinion that he writes for FoxNews.com where predicts the outcome of an event has been wrong. The guy is a joke – and not a very good/funny joke.

    • MsJennyMD says:

      “There’s no question that Roberts will vote like William Rehnquist… If he swings, it will be from right to far right.” Jonathan Turley

      “It’s highly ironic that it was the conservatives on the court who overturned so many statutes.” Jonathan Turley

      “I’m making tapes for insomniacs to use in the future. I’m going to sell them as a kit to cure insomnia.” Jonathan Turley

  10. SebastianFlyte says:

    There is a zero percent chance that you would comment negatively on the religion of a Jewish justice.

    You are a bigot.

    • Rayne says:

      I was baptized and raised Catholic, attended catechism and Catholic school, and consider myself a lapsed Catholic because the U.S. church has fallen under the control of what are little more than Nazis in robes failing Christ’s Beatitudes. When jurists of Jewish/Muslim/Hindu/agnostic/atheist/other beliefs systematically treat women as if they are chattel I will trash them, too.

      Go fuck yourself. And don’t think for a moment I can’t tell you’re a troll.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      That you borrowed your nom de guerre from the extraordinarily dysfunctional Catholic family in Waugh’s Brideshead Revisited might be a clue to your overtly Catholic sympathies. Nominally, that’s fine. But calling Rayne a bigot seems as dysfunctional and self-destructive as your namesake.

Comments are closed.