A bipartisan group of lawmakers is calling for an investigation into allegations of ethical improprieties against Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and for reforms to prevent similar violations in the future. The letter, led by Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.), calls for an independent investigative body and an ethics council to provide advice to justices on disclosure requirements, recusal and other ethics issues. The letter comes after reports of Justice Samuel Alito traveling at the expense of another top Republican donor, and is a sign of growing bipartisan concern over ethical issues in the Supreme Court.
Posts tagged as “The Supreme Court’s”
Key takeaways: The Supreme Court rejected the independent state legislature theory proposed by Republicans in the North Carolina legislature. This decision prevents state legislatures from…
The Supreme Court has ruled against Louisiana Republicans in a bid to reverse a lower court ruling that ordered the state to redraw its congressional map, paving the way for a second majority-Black congressional district to be created in time for the 2024 election. The ruling is a victory for civil rights groups, who argued that the current map was a form of racial gerrymandering, and will be drawn with the help of an independent redistricting expert. The Supreme Court’s ruling is a major step forward in ensuring that all citizens in Louisiana have an equal opportunity to elect their preferred candidate and is a reminder that the Supreme Court will not tolerate attempts to circumvent the judicial process.
The Supreme Court has sided with whiskey maker Jack Daniel’s in a trademark dispute with the makers of the Bad Spaniels dog toy. The lower court had ruled in favor of VIP Products LLC, but the Supreme Court overturned this decision and sent the case back for further review. Justice Elena Kagan wrote that the use of the trademark fell within the “heartland of trademark law” and that the lower court should have taken this into account when making its ruling. This decision is a victory for Jack Daniel’s and other companies that rely on trademarks to protect their products.
Key takeaways: The Supreme Court ruled that Alabama violated the Voting Rights Act by diluting the Black vote when it drew new congressional maps. The…
Key takeaways: The Supreme Court’s ruling is a major victory for voting rights, and a major setback for those who seek to dilute the voting…
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case that could potentially overturn a nearly 40-year-old precedent, which could have far-reaching implications for how federal agencies interpret and enforce laws. The case involves a dispute between the Biden administration and commercial fishing companies and has been seen as part of a larger effort by conservative groups and business interests to challenge the federal bureaucracy. The outcome of the case remains uncertain, and the implications of the court’s decision will be closely watched by both supporters and opponents of the “war on the administrative state.”
The Supreme Court has granted the Justice Department's request to leave in place the FDA's approval of the widely used abortion pill mifepristone, preserving access to the drug and reinstating steps that make it easier to obtain. This decision is a victory for abortion rights advocates, who argued that the restrictions on the drug were medically unnecessary. The case is expected to be heard by the full 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in the coming months.