B-Man

EXACTLY. .

@Irv, leave the great Jack Elam out of this Biden fiasco. LOL .

REMINDER: .

If they do now, after refusing before, It is proof that the actual DC powers want Joe out. .

TRUTH Supreme Court Strikes Devastating Blow to Power of Federal Agencies in Landmark Ruling By ZACH KESSEL The Supreme Court on Friday issued a ruling overturning the 1984 Chevron v. National Resources Defense Council case, striking down a previous decision that granted federal agencies immensely broad power to draw up regulations without congressional approval. The Court ruled in both Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless v. Department of Commerce — two nearly identical cases — that regulatory agencies will no longer be able to fill in the blanks of vague legislation in 6-2 and 6-3 decisions, respectively. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson recused herself from the first case because she sat on the federal appeals court that had previously heard the case. In his majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that it is not the place of agencies to clarify ambiguous legislation. “Perhaps most fundamentally, Chevron’s presumption is misguided because agencies have no special competence in resolving statutory ambiguities,” he wrote. “Courts do. The Framers, as noted, anticipated that courts would often confront statutory ambiguities and expected that courts would resolve them by exercising independent legal judgment.” https://www.nationalreview.com/news/supreme-court-strikes-devastating-blow-to-power-of-federal-agencies-in-landmark-ruling/ . ADDED: The Court announced that there will be one more opinion day, Monday, July 1st .

How CIA interference with the ‘Spies Who Lie’ letter made Biden the president New York Post, by Miranda Devine It is chilling to contemplate that, if it had not been for the malign intervention of the CIA in the 2020 election, Donald Trump would have won a second term and the wars raging in Ukraine and Gaza would never have happened. We now see that the CIA staged a domestic disinformation campaign to protect its favored candidate, the decrepit and pliable Joe Biden, from the political consequences of his corruption. Now we are told that former CIA Director Gina Haspel was in on the “Dirty 51” letter in October 2020 that falsely claimed Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation. This bombshell, revealed by former CIA chief operating officer Andrew Makridis https://nypost.com/2024/06/26/opinion/how-cia-interference-with-the-spies-who-lie-letter-made-biden-the-president/ .

We just witnessed the end of Joe Biden’s presidency New York Post, by Editorial Millions just witnessed the end of a presidency live on television. Joe Biden’s performance during the debate was embarrassing. Whenever CNN put him up on the split screen, he had a thousand-yard stare. He didn’t look old. He looked ancient. He looked empty. But at least he wasn’t speaking. Because when it was his time to answer, Biden was incoherent. He said he “beat Medicaid.” Asked about abortion, he randomly started talking about migrant crime. “I really don’t know what he said at the end of that sentence,” former President Trump noted at one point, “and I don’t think he knows what he said either.” At one point Biden just froze. https://nypost.com/2024/06/27/opinion/we-just-witnessed-the-end-of-joe-bidens-presidency/ .

You MUST care. .

Tom. . . . . . . . . democrat 'rules' are easily bypassed if it is for the greater good. See N.J.

.

EXACTLY !

In the case of a former Pennsylvania police officer who entered the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, Fischer v. United States, the court holds that to prove a violation of the law, the government must show that the defendant impaired the availability or integrity for use in an official proceeding of records, documents, objects, or other things used in an official proceeding, or attempted to do so. The case is returned to the lower court to determine whether the indictment can still stand in light of this new and narrower interpretation. https://www.scotusblog.com/

I've been seeing that Joe can't be replaced ballot-wise in Wisconsin. A swap would effectively remove the D's from the presidential ballot. So it would be write-in only there. They have until 5pm local time, today, in Nevada to make a change. With the exception being if they declare him to be mentally incompetent at a future date (good luck with that, because then you automatically get Kamala.) .

Wow. Just wow. .

You do not seem to understand what the ruling is about. Gorsuch writes that "Today, the Court places a tombstone on Chevron no one can miss. In doing so, the Court returns judges to interpretive rules that have guided federal courts since the Nation's founding." Government agencies cannot decide their own interpretations of the law, the courts should. That's it. Your "evil corporations" scarecrow is not apt. .

Grants Pass v. Johnson. Gorsuch. 6-3... the usual lineup. "The court holds that the enforcement of generally applicable laws regulating camping on public property does not constitute 'cruel and unusual punishment' barred by the Eighth Amendment." https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-175_19m2.pdf Common sense.

What ACTUALLY happened. SCOTUS Delivers a Kill Shot to Big Government PAULA BOLYARD Today, the Supreme Court ruled to overrule the so-called Chevron deference in a 6-3 decision. The ruling is a HUGE victory for those who hate the power the massive bureaucratic state has amassed in recent decades. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, concluded: "Chevron is overruled." In the most basic terms, the Chevron deference (also called the Chevron doctrine) allows the courts, through a two-step process, to defer to "reasonable" administrative agency interpretations if a federal statute is unclear or ambiguous. It was/is essentially a get-out-of-jail-free card for presidents and agency hacks who liked to claim that a law says whatever they want it to say. It gave federal agencies broad authority to regulate everything from health care to immigration to women's sports to Covid jabs. The high court had consolidated two cases—Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce—and heard oral arguments in January of this year. Most of us learned in school (I hope!) that the judicial branch interprets the law. It's explained in both Marbury v. Madison and Alexander Hamilton's Federalist 78. The Chevron doctrine takes some of that power to interpret from the courts and hands it to unelected bureaucrats. The word "deference" in Chevron means that the court defers rulemaking to "experts" in the administrative state. https://pjmedia.com/paula-bolyard/2024/06/28/breaking-supreme-court-rules-on-chevron-doctrine-n4930001 I guess those who want unlimited, uncontrolled big government are ****** .