Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts tagged as “the Supreme Court”

Justice Alito Responds to Criticism from Senate Democrats Over Interview with Right-Wing Commentator

Justice Samuel Alito of the Supreme Court issued a statement on Friday in response to criticism from Senate Democrats over his decision to grant two interviews to a right-wing commentator and attorney with a case before the court. Alito argued that the critics fail to understand “the circumstances under which Supreme Court Justices must work” and that the interview he gave violated no ethical standards. This statement is a reminder of the ongoing debate over ethical standards for Supreme Court Justices, as the court has yet to adopt an official ethics code.

White House Files Complaint Against Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito for Interview with Wall Street Journal

The White House has filed a complaint against Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito for his involvement in an interview with The Wall Street Journal, in which he stated that Congress does not have the authority to impose ethics rules on the Supreme Court. In response, Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse has sent a letter to Chief Justice John Roberts, accusing Alito of obstructing a congressional investigation and demanding action. The White House's complaint is the latest in a series of attempts to hold the Supreme Court accountable for its actions.

Federal Panel Strikes Down Alabama Congressional Map in Major Victory for Voting Rights

This article discusses a federal panel of judges striking down a congressional map created by Alabama Republicans, which only included one majority-Black district. The panel noted that they are not aware of any other case in which a state legislature responded with a plan that does not provide an additional opportunity district, despite a federal court order. As a result, the job of redrawing the congressional map has been given to a special master, which is a major victory for voting rights.

Texas Supreme Court Allows Controversial Law Banning Gender-Affirming Care for Minors to Take Effect on Friday

Texas Supreme Court has allowed a new state law banning gender-affirming care for minors to take effect on Friday, making Texas the most populous state with such restrictions. The law will prevent transgender minors from accessing hormone therapies, puberty blockers and transition surgeries. LGBTQ rights advocates have criticized the ruling and vowed to continue to fight the law in court.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas Discloses Trips Paid for by Billionaire Friend in Annual Financial Disclosure Report

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has disclosed trips paid for by his friend, billionaire Harlan Crow, in his annual financial disclosure report. This has renewed focus on judicial ethics, as it is the first disclosure form filed by the justice since he came under scrutiny for his relationship with the Texas developer. The remaining seven justices have filed their 2022 reports, but it is unclear if any of them have had similar trips paid for by outside sources.

Over 100 Former Clerks of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas Unite to Defend His “Integrity” and “Independence

Over 100 former clerks of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas have signed a letter defending his "integrity" and "independence" in response to reports of unethical gift-giving. The signatories argue that the reports are part of a "larger attack on the Court" and its "legitimacy", and include high profile circuit court judges and John C. Eastman, who is now criminally indicted in Georgia. The letter focuses on defending Justice Thomas' "integrity, character and ethics" without addressing Eastman's involvement.

South Carolina Supreme Court Reverses Stance on Abortion, Upholds Ban on Most Procedures After Six Weeks of Pregnancy

The South Carolina Supreme Court has reversed its stance on abortion, upholding a law that bans most such procedures after about six weeks of pregnancy. This decision has been met with criticism from abortion rights advocates, who argue that the law is unconstitutional and violates a woman's right to privacy. The 4-1 ruling departs from the court's own decision months earlier striking down a similar ban, and could potentially be overturned if it is found to violate the constitutional right to privacy.