The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday in Moore v. Harper, a case that turns on the meaning of a key provision in the Constitution outlining the Framers’ structure for congressional elections.
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday in a lawsuit filed by Texas and Louisiana over Biden administration guidelines that severely restricted the Department of Homeland Security’s enforcement of federal immigration law against illegal aliens.
Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which took center stage Tuesday during oral arguments at the Supreme Court, prohibits a state from imposing a “standard, practice, or procedure” that “results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color … .” Courts have found that states violate this provision when they draw new legislative districts that dilute the voting power of minority voters by either packing as many of these voters as possible into a single district or by splitting these voters among various other districts—practices known as “packing” and “cracking” voters.
If you are a private figure and The New York Times or the Southern Poverty Law Center publishes a lie about you, you simply have to prove that the statement was false and harmed your reputation. The fact that the publisher didn’t know or care that the statement was false is irrelevant. But if you are a “public figure,” you not only have to prove that the statement was false and harmed your reputation, but that the statement was made “with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.” And the definition of who is a public figure constantly has expanded since 1964.
The Supreme Court’s important ruling last week on voter ID in North Carolina has been overlooked in the fervor over the high court’s spot-on decisions upholding the Second Amendment and religious freedom and overruling Roe v. Wade. But the court’s procedural decision Thursday in Berger v. NAACP will help prevent state officials from sabotaging the defense of state election laws and other measures being attacked by their political allies and friends.
The Machiavellian left has fully embraced the mantra of "the ends justify the means." For the leftists in America that results in the belief, "by any means necessary."
With U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland and Fairfax County, Virginia, Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano refusing to enforce federal and state laws against the pro-abortion protesters who are intimidating and threatening Supreme Court justices and their families who live in Virginia, it’s time for Gov. Glenn Youngkin and state Attorney General Jason Miyares to step in and use their statutory power to arrest, prosecute, and seek the maximum penalty for every day the protesters are violating the law. The lack of action by Garland and Descano is encouraging the “summer of rage,” leading not only to the arrest of an individual who wanted to assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, but also attacks on pro-life charities and pregnancy resource centers.
The Supreme Court has overturned Roe v. Wade, the notorious 1973 decision that wrote abortion rights into law. Critics of the court’s new ruling overlook a crucial fact: By throwing out one of the most anti-democratic court decisions in the past 100 years, the justices have upheld the democratic process. In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the court finally acknowledged what was readily evident back in 1973: Roe was an illegitimate decision in which seven justices simply created a nonexistent constitutional right to obtain an abortion. Roe was an ideological decision, an exercise in judicial policymaking with no basis in the law. Rather, it was a sad example of the court acting as a super-legislature to override the views of the public and their elected legislators in the states.
In Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the School District violated Coach Joseph Kennedy’s constitutional rights when it disciplined him for praying silently at midfield following football games. It concluded that both the Free Exercise Clause and the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment protected Kennedy’s conduct. The Court further rejected the School District’s assertion that it feared an Establishment Clause violation if it allowed Kennedy to continue with his private prayers.
The American Constitutional Rights Union (ACRU) applauds the recent decision of the Supreme Court in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association (NYSRPA) vs. Bruen striking down the state’s abhorrent “may issue” scheme. “May issue” rights are no rights at all. Such policies are an abomination under the Bill of Rights of this Constitutional Republic.
