conserv rt justice

6 22

creation of trump but ruled against him?

---

CPP SHADOW DOCKET; LEO 3 ACTUALLY KOCH?! MAJOR QUESTIONS GROOMED

1 END LEGIS 2 REGULATION 3 LITIGATION

The Scheme Time to Wake Up | Senator Whitehouse's Speeches Converge

Apr 23, 2026

April 22 | Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) delivers his 306th speech in his Time to Wake Up series, converging with his 36th Scheme speech. The billionaire-backed scheme to capture and control the Supreme Court was developed largely to protect the fossil fuel industry’s free-to-pollute business model. Here’s the proof.

---

---}:

AN 1 26

An extensive new study from a team of Ivy League economists has uncovered just how much the Supreme Court has shifted towards favoring the wealthier side in any given case, with a New York Times report concludingreport concluding that you can "follow the money" to determine how it will in any given case.

The new study, dubbed "Ruling for the Rich," was published on Monday and hailed from the team of Yale's Fiona Scott Morton, Columbia's Andrea Prat and Columbia's Jacob Spitz. Adam Liptak, the leading Supreme Court correspondent for the Times, dug into its findings, noting that "the wealthy have the wind at their backs before the justices," and questioning whether or not they are living up to their oath to "do equal right to the poor and to the rich."

Per Liptak's analysis, the study found that Republican appointees, who have held a 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court since 2020 and an overall majority for much longer, are "far more likely than Democratic ones to side with the wealthy," and adding "that the Supreme Court has become deeply polarized in cases pitting the rich against the poor." This is now in sharp contrast to the court of the mid-20th Century, "when appointees of the two parties were statistically indistinguishable" in terms of favoring wealthier parties.

Specifically, the study found that Republican-appointed justices sided with wealthier parties in cases around 70 percent of the time. By comparison, in 1953, conservative justices sided with them only 45 percent of the time.

Speaking with Liptak about the findings, Adam Cohen, author of the book "Supreme Inequality," noted that the study essentially reiterated ideas about the court's conduct that "some of us have been observing for a long time."

“But it is great to see,” Cohen added. “Respected academics crunching the numbers and producing the data to show that this is exactly what has been going on.”

These findings come as leaders in both political parties are ramping up plans to radically alter their campaign finance plans ahead of an upcoming decision, in which the court is widely expected to lift the limits on how much party committees and campaigns are allowed to coordinate with each other. This, experts argue, would hand even more power to the wealthiest donors and further erode the power of small-dollar donors.

---

https://www.alternet.org/2022/06/stephen-breyer-gun-control-dissent/

no lnx

Stephen Breyer delivers a scathing and ‘ominous’ dissent in Supreme Court gun control ruling

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer with President Joe Biden in January 2022 (Wikimedia Commons).

Alex Henderson June 23, 2022

On Thursday, June 23, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a 6-3 decision in the case New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen — striking down the “proper cause” part of the Sullivan Act of 1911 as unconstitutional. And Justice Stephen Breyer, was especially vehement in his dissent.

The Sullivan Act, passed 111 years ago and named after State Sen. Timothy Sullivan — a Tammany Hall Democrat — has limited licenses for concealed-carry handgun permits to those with specific defense needs. Under the Sullivan Act, a New York State law, anyone applying for a permit to carry a concealed handgun has had to show “proper cause.” And the High Court has ruled that the “proper cause” requirement is a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s 2nd Amendment.

Attorney Neal Katyal, who served as acting solicitor general under President Barack Obama and often appears on MSNBC, described the warning that opened Breyer’s dissent as “ominous.”

The 83-year-old Breyer, who is retiring from the High Court and will be replaced by President Joe Biden’s nominee, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, later this year, wrote, “In 2020, 45,222 Americans were killed by firearms.... Since the start of this year (2022), there have been277 reported mass shootings — an average of more than one per day.... Gun violence has now surpassed motor vehicle crashes as the leading cause of death among children and adolescents.”

Breyer continued, “Many states have tried to address some of the dangers of gun violence just described by passing laws that limit, in various ways, who may purchase, carry, or use firearms of different kinds. The Court today severely burdens States' efforts to do so. It invokes the Second Amendment to strike down a New York law regulating the public carriage of concealed handguns. In my view, that decision rests upon several serious mistakes.”

All three of the dissenters in the High Court’s ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen were appointed by Democratic presidents: Breyer, Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Justice Elena Kagan. After Jackson — who will be the first African-American woman on the Court — replaces Breyer, it will still have a 6-3 right-wing supermajority. And none of the GOP-appointed justices in that supermajority voted with the Democratic-appointed justices in the New York State ruling.

The majority opinion in the case was written by Justice Clarence Thomas, who was joined by three Donald Trump appointees (Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Justice Amy Coney Barrett and Justice Neil Gorsuch) as well as two George W. Bush appointees: Justice Samuel Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts.

FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES

Florida newspaper demands stricter gun control laws following ... ›

Gun control advocates unload on 'baby killer' Ted Cruz: 'Cashing his ... ›

Watch: Fox News host 'goes rogue' — calls for gun control live on-air ... ›