SCOTUS 2022-2023 Term

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/status/1669353159683366916
https://twitter.com/reichlinmelnick/status/1669354566406782979

Given past recent history in tribal cases, I'm surprised Gorsuch didn't have the majority opinion here.

It appears that he wanted to go further than the majority.

He did. He would have upheld the ICWA on the merits on everything; ACB upheld on the merits on some arguments and tossed the rest of the anti-ICWA arguments on standing.

I agree that Kav is the likeliest fifth vote to toss the student loans case on standing because in two prominent cases that have just come down, Brackeen and the VRA one, he wrote concurrences whining about whoever was arguing for the "right-wing" position not bringing up what he thought were the correct arguments (which he TOTALLY would have found for, HONEST!). It seems possible he does so again in Biden v. Nebraska.

ACB, Roberts, and Kagan are the three justices who joined the Brackeen majority but not either of the concurrences.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

If SCOTUS throws out the student loan case and the $10/20K forgiveness goes into effect, could the forgiveness be reversed and the debts be "reinstated" by a future legal challenge next term or later/

I've been wondering the same myself. It seems unlikely. SCOTUS forcing a claw back of billions of dollars that was guaranteed forgiven by the government? I've never heard of anything like it.

Neither have I, but the idea that an injury can be redressed by putting other people in the same injured situation as the plaintiff is already one of the most wacko legal theories I've ever heard, and yet it's a key part of a case that seems to have a roughly even chance of entering our legal canon in the coming days.

What are we going to do? Let society collapse every Sunday over "religion". lmao. Glad I am NOT a Mormon anymore.

Presumably companies will simply pay people more to work on Sundays, if you can always take the day off for sincere religious conviction. (Also, while in theory this shouldn't make it harder for religious people to get jobs at all, in practice it probably will to some extent, just because pursuing a civil rights claim is expensive and difficult in the real world.)

I'd drag them to work in chains kicking and screaming.

Society doesn't stop on "Sundays".

Please explain to me why I shouldn't moderate this post as crass sh**t-stirring against both service workers and devout Christians.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

If SCOTUS throws out the student loan case and the $10/20K forgiveness goes into effect, could the forgiveness be reversed and the debts be "reinstated" by a future legal challenge next term or later/

I've been wondering the same myself. It seems unlikely. SCOTUS forcing a claw back of billions of dollars that was guaranteed forgiven by the government? I've never heard of anything like it.

Neither have I, but the idea that an injury can be redressed by putting other people in the same injured situation as the plaintiff is already one of the most wacko legal theories I've ever heard, and yet it's a key part of a case that seems to have a roughly even chance of entering our legal canon in the coming days.

What are we going to do? Let society collapse every Sunday over "religion". lmao. Glad I am NOT a Mormon anymore.

Presumably companies will simply pay people more to work on Sundays, if you can always take the day off for sincere religious conviction. (Also, while in theory this shouldn't make it harder for religious people to get jobs at all, in practice it probably will to some extent, just because pursuing a civil rights claim is expensive and difficult in the real world.)

I'd drag them to work in chains kicking and screaming.

Society doesn't stop on "Sundays".

Please explain to me why I shouldn't moderate this post as crass sh**t-stirring against both service workers and devout Christians.

Because its not REALISTIC  to essentially shut down businesses on Sundays. No offense.

Okay, yeah, I believe you're advancing that viewpoint honestly, but I don't think it's really on the table here. If we were going to go back to a system of blue laws in this country something for which there are solid left-wing arguments, but we don't have to get into those right now, lots of outwardly very religious people would be among those bellyaching most about how inconvenient it all was.

And even when there were blue laws, emergency services had to be available 24/7. I really doubt Groff would extend any of the protections on the table to, say, firefighters or ER doctors.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Student Loan Executive Order by President Biden will almost certainly striked down by the SCOTUS tomorrow. I'd be surprised if they let that stay.

It's considered a lot more of a jump ball after oral arguments than it had been before, because Kav and ACB seemed skeptical of the idea that the people who want the program voided have standing, but we'll see. Either brucejoel or HSTruman, I forget who, pointed out on Discord that it's remarkable how most people take it as a given that these hacks will void the program if they reach the merits, since traditionally what people sue for when they're left out of a government program is, you know, damages, not a deranged crab-bucket "remedy" of disadvantaging other people the way they've been disadvantaged. I also noted this up-thread.

303 Creative is almost certainly going to be another win for this Court's maximalist free exercise jurisprudence; the question is just how much of a win.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Student Loan Executive Order by President Biden will almost certainly striked down by the SCOTUS tomorrow. I'd be surprised if they let that stay.

It's considered a lot more of a jump ball after oral arguments than it had been before, because Kav and ACB seemed skeptical of the idea that the people who want the program voided have standing, but we'll see. Either brucejoel or HSTruman, I forget who, pointed out on Discord that it's remarkable how most people take it as a given that these hacks will void the program if they reach the merits, since traditionally what people sue for when they're left out of a government program is, you know, damages, not a deranged crab-bucket "remedy" of disadvantaging other people the way they've been disadvantaged. I also noted this up-thread.

303 Creative is almost certainly going to be another win for this Court's maximalist free exercise jurisprudence; the question is just how much of a win.

The Student Loan Programme seems pretty clear cut to me. President Biden doesn't posses the legal Authority to do what he did last 2022. No matter if you like the Plan or not on legal grounds alone it should be struck down.

I think if this were true the majority would have been able to come up with something better than "'any statutory or regulatory provision' means 'some statutory or regulatory provisions'? What a country!"