Create accountLogin

Recent searches

No recent searches

Search options

Only available when logged in.
med-mastodon.com is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
Medical community on Mastodon

Administered by:

Server stats:

414
active users

med-mastodon.com: AboutProfiles directoryPrivacy policy

Mastodon: AboutGet the appKeyboard shortcutsView source codev4.3.8

#soniasotomayor

1 post1 participant0 posts today
Public
DoomsdaysCW

#SupremeCourt Allows #Trump to Use 1798 Wartime Law to #Deport People

The nation's highest court backed Trump's use of the #AlienEnemiesAct to speed up #deportations

by Charisma Madarang, April 8, 2025

"The Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a massive win on Monday, voting 5-4 to allow his administration to continue rapidly deporting alleged gang members using the Alien Enemies Act.
The law, passed in 1798, gives presidents the authority to remove foreign nationals over the age of 14 from countries where the United States is either engaged in a declared war or subject to “invasion or predatory incursion” by their country of origin. The act has been invoked three times in U.S. history, each time during wartime, and is meant to counter the actions of foreign governments and regimes, not alleged criminals, gangs, or non-state actors. The law was also used to justify Japanese internment during WWII, and now, the Trump administration is using it to justify its deportations.
In an unsigned opinion, the Supreme Court tossed a district court decision that had temporarily blocked President Trump’s attempt to continue using the 227-year-old law after he sent almost 300 Venezuelan migrants to a notorious prison in #ElSalvador, known for human rights abuses.

"All nine justices agreed, however, that anyone the administration is seeking to deport under the Alien Enemies Act must receive notice of deportation and be given the opportunity to challenge the removal through '#habeas petitions' — meaning that migrants have the right to have their detention or deportation reviewed by the federal court, but only for themselves and in the area where they are being detained.

"The court’s three liberal justices dissented from the ruling, while Justice #AmyConeyBarrett, who was appointed by Trump, partially dissented. Barrett joined Justice #SoniaSotomayor’s dissent calling the majority’s legal conclusion 'suspect' and questioning if habeas claims should be the only way to contest deportations under the act.

"'The Court’s legal conclusion is suspect,' wrote #Sotomayor. 'The Court intervenes anyway, granting the Government extraordinary relief and vacating the District Court’s order on that basis alone.'"

Read more:
rollingstone.com/politics/poli

Archived version:
archive.ph/BJSoh
#ICEDetention #IllegalDeportations #SecretPolice #HumanRightsViolations #ConstitutionalRights #HumanRights #SCOTUSIsCompromised #SCOTUSIsCorrupt #USPol #ForcedDisappearances #MemoryHoled #1798AlienEnemiesAct

Rolling Stone · Supreme Court Allows Trump to Use 1798 Wartime Law to Deport PeopleBy Charisma Madarang
Public
DoomsdaysCW

#SupremeCourt blocks order requiring #Trump administration to reinstate workers

By Mark Sherman, April 8, 2025

WASHINGTON (AP) — "The Supreme Court on Tuesday blocked an order for the Trump administration to return to work thousands of federal employees who were let go in mass firings aimed at dramatically downsizing the federal government.

"The justices acted in the administration’s emergency appeal of a ruling by a federal judge in California ordering that 16,000 probationary employees be reinstated while a lawsuit plays out because their firings didn’t follow federal law.

"The effect of the high court’s order will keep employees in six federal agencies on paid administrative leave for now. Justices #SoniaSotomayor and #KetanjiBrownJackson said they would have kept the judge’s order in place.

"It’s the third time in less than a week that the justices have sided with the administration in its fight against federal judges whose orders have slowed President Donald Trump’s agenda. The court also paused an order restoring grants for teacher training and lifted an order that froze deportations under an 18th century wartime law."

apnews.com/article/supreme-cou
#USPol #SCOTUS #SCOTUSIsCompromised #ImpeachClarenceThomas #ImpeachSamuelAlito #ErikPrince #ErikPrinceColonialism #Fascism #Authoritarianism

Public
Rob Pegoraro

This Independence Day feels different from the others. The United Kingdom delivered a reminder today from across the Atlantic that people do not have to subject themselves to sustained misrule, while here in the United States the Supreme Court chose Monday to hold that American presidents deserve a level of lifelong supremacy above the law normally associated with British monarchs.

I have no real stake in U.K. politics, but as a fan of accountability for elected representatives, I enjoyed seeing British people vote by an overwhelming majority to end 14 years of increasingly-chaotic Conservative rule that left the country objectively poorer and more isolated.

When political leaders fail their constituents, they should be held accountable. And if Labour botches its turn in charge, that party should expect no different.

But six members of the U.S. Supreme Court now believe that when it comes to a president’s compliance with the law, accountability gets flushed into the Potomac if a president’s lawbreaking fell under their “official duties.”

The elastic framework Chief Justice John Roberts crafted in his profoundly dishonorable Trump v. United States opinion rules any president “absolutely immune from criminal prosecution for conduct within his exclusive sphere of constitutional authority” and allows “presumptive immunity” for “acts within the outer perimeter of his official responsibility.”

Roberts and his co-conspirators–Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Clarence Thomas signed on with all that absurdity, with Justice Amy Coney Barrett partially concurring while disagreeing that presidents deserve an official-duties excuse to suppress certain evidence of their crimes–created this doctrine despite the text of the Constitution saying nothing about presidential immunity.

Instead, they argue that the Constitution’s support of an energetic executive branch trumps all the other inefficiencies it deliberately creates to bog down abuses of power.

The dissent from Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, correctly observes that the framers of the Constitution knew how to grant limited immunity when they wrote the Speech or Debate Clause protecting members of Congress. They did no such thing for the Executive Branch. And Federalist 69: The Real Character of the Executive has Alexander Hamilton–a prominent advocate of a strong executive–declaring that presidents could end up in court like anybody else.

“The President of the United States would be liable to be impeached, tried, and, upon conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes or misdemeanors, removed from office; and would afterwards be liable to prosecution and punishment in the ordinary course of law,” Hamilton writes.

“Today’s decision to grant former Presidents criminal immunity reshapes the institution of the Presidency,” Sotomayor writes in her dissent. “It makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law.”

Roberts dismisses that with this sneering line: “The dissents’ positions in the end boil down to ignoring the Constitution’s separation of powers and the Court’s precedent and instead fear mongering on the basis of extreme hypotheticals about a future where the President ‘feels empowered to violate federal criminal law.'”

Because July Fourth rightly has me feeling disinclined to comply with respect-my-authority arguments, I must ask: How stupid does the Chief Justice think we, meaning the people who pay his salary, are?

We did, in fact, have a president who felt “empowered to violate federal criminal law” when he became the first president in American history to try to overturn an election he clearly lost by deceit and ultimately force. His name is Donald Trump, and he will be on the ballot this November. If you seriously value the freedom we celebrate today, you had better have all of this on your mind when you vote.

https://robpegoraro.com/2024/07/04/a-strange-fourth-of-july/

A Betsy Ross flag with thirteen stars in a circle for the original 13 colonies, as seen hanging from our front porch, something I've done each July 4 in recent years.
#aboveTheLaw#AlexanderHamilton#ConservativeParty
Public
Daniel M. Reck

Justice #SoniaSotomayor wrote in descent that the #SupremeCourt has "in effect, completely insulated Presidents from #criminal liability…Today’s decision to grant former Presidents criminal #immunity reshapes the institution of the #Presidency. It makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our #Constitution and system of #Government, that no man is above the #law."

The ruling gives #President #Trump absolute immunity for "official acts" but does not define them: npr.org/2024/07/01/nx-s1-50021

ExploreLive feeds
About