#Judiciary Act

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Holly Brewer at The New Republic:

In October 2020, just a few weeks before he would defeat President Donald Trump, Joe Biden made his clearest statement yet on whether Democrats—if so empowered by voters—should expand the Supreme Court. “I’m not a fan of court-packing, but I don’t want to get off on that whole issue,” Biden said. “I want to keep focused. The president would love nothing better than to fight about whether or not I would, in fact, pack the court or not pack the court.” But Republicans had already packed the court. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death handed President Trump the third opportunity to appoint a justice (Amy Coney Barrett) and thereby to create a 6–3 archconservative majority on the court for a generation or more. Many understood then that such a lopsided court could do untold damage to the progressive accomplishments of the past century. But Biden, ever the institutionalist, squashed the notion of rebalancing the court in the unlikely event that Democrats won unified control of Washington. The unlikely did, of course, happen: Democrats took the White House and both chambers of Congress. And still, Biden demurred on court rebalancing. That was a mistake. [...]

Over the past two decades, and especially since 2021, the Roberts court has instead made headlines, overturning federal and state laws, some of them in place for a hundred years or more, and reversing earlier major court decisions. The court has upended the ability of government agencies to do their jobs—to regulate clean air and water, limit the taking of bribes (by this court now redefined as “gratuities”), protect consumers and workers, and so much more. It has redefined human rights, undercutting the right to vote and the right to an abortion. In conversations with law professors across their country, I hear despair: How are they even supposed to teach administrative or constitutional law? There are no standards anymore.

These Supreme Court decisions have been based on tortured originalist readings. While one might disagree with the outcome, and the extent of the intervention, at least one felt there was a certain logic behind these cases, a logic by which the decisions could be engaged and challenged. But the decision in Trump v. United States had no such reasoning, not even a pretense of constitutional interpretation. The sweeping decision, more than any other over the past decade and more, exposed a raw partisanship and lack of principle. It not only set a dramatic new precedent that changes 235 years of understanding about the role of the president but it rewrote the Constitution, unbalancing it in favor of the president—and without apology. It made no pretense of considering the potential costs or risks of its dramatic intervention, as has been the norm for major Supreme Court decisions. It arguably removed most checks on presidential power.

Biden could have tried to stop such judicial overreach in 2021 by pushing to amend the Judiciary Act, which sets the size of the Supreme Court. (In April of that year, House Democrats put forth a bill to do exactly that, expanding the court to 12 associate justices.) He chose not to, opting instead to create a court reform commission, whose members were divided on expanding the court. That group’s final report summarized many of the arguments in favor of expansion, especially the extraordinary actions by then–Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to refuse to consider Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland. But then they listed concerns. Some scholars argued that expanding the court for partisan reasons would merely lead to a cycle of tit for tat, undermining the court’s legitimacy. Ultimately they decided not to recommend it.

[...] Reforming the size of the court has happened many times over the years. Seven times between 1801 and 1869, Congress changed the size of the court, going from a low of five justices in 1801 to a high of 10 in 1863. In most of those cases, as in 1801 and 1863, the size went up and down in order to fix an imbalance or overreach by the Supreme Court. In 1863 and 1867, revisions to the Judiciary Act sought to rein in a Supreme Court that was potentially pro-slavery. Now we need to rein in one that is pro-authoritarian. [...] At this moment, a bill is on the table to expand the size of the court to 12 associate justices, which would match the number of justices to the number of circuit courts, thus giving each justice primary responsibility for decisions from one circuit. Right now, the justices are overloaded, with too much responsibility. Expanding the court makes pragmatic and logical sense, and could happen gradually; Congress could allow the nomination of two justices now and another two in four years.

The concerns of 1937, or of 2020, about increasing the size of the court have now been neutralized by this court’s unprincipled overreach. While the full consequences of all the court’s recent decisions are yet to be seen, they will impact all of us, and increasingly so, given the courts’ essential role in enforcing the laws. Regardless of where one stands on the political spectrum, all should now see that the unprincipled political maneuvering that created the current majority on the Supreme Court has undermined our system of government. We need new, principled judges to keep the extremist justices on the Robert’s court, and now the newly empowered president, in line. Many Democrats in Congress grasp their constitutional responsibility to regulate the judiciary, and are willing to exercise it to rebalance the Supreme Court. Now it needs to become a central part of the Democratic platform. Biden and his team need to wake up. It is not enough to merely dissent, as Biden did after the decision in Trump v. U.S. He needs to help restore the balance. 

The case for expanding SCOTUS has become even more urgent in the wake of several recent rulings (Loper Bright Enterprises and Trump) made by the the 6-3 MAGA majority that have made America worse off. #ExpandSCOTUS

[ivygorgon]

AN OPEN LETTER to THE U.S. CONGRESS

Roe is gone. Expand the Supreme Court before we lose all of our other rights!

7186 so far! Help us get to 10000 signers!

I’m furious and sickened by today's ruling from the Supreme Court. Striking down Roe v Wade is just the latest example of their growing partisanship and religious extremism. We are not safe as long as this court continues to wield their power this corruptly.

Congress needs to institute Court reforms. To start, they should pass the Judiciary Act (S 1141/ HR 2584) to expand the number of judges on the court; they also need to pass the Judicial Ethics and Anti-Corruption Act (S 4177/HR 7706).

This is urgent. Our system of laws rests upon the idea that the Supreme Court is impartial. Ours absolutely is not. Do something about it. Thanks.

�� Created on June 24 2022 by Jess Craven

📱 Text SIGN PXFDAP to 50409

🤯 Liked it? Text FOLLOW JESSCRAVEN101 to 50409

[todaysdocument]

An Act to Establish the Federal Courts of the United States

Record Group 11: General Records of the United States GovernmentSeries: Enrolled Acts and Resolutions of CongressFile Unit: Public Law, 1st Congress, 1st Session, Part 1: United States Judicial Courts. September 24, 1789

In the Judiciary Act of 1789, Congress established with great particularity a limited jurisdiction for the district and circuit courts, gave the Supreme Court the original jurisdiction provided for in the Constitution, and granted the Court appellate jurisdiction in cases from the Federal circuit courts and from the state courts where those courts' rulings had rejected Federal claims. The decision to grant Federal courts a jurisdiction more restrictive than that allowed by the Constitution represented a recognition by the Congress that the people of the United States would not find a full-blown Federal court system palatable at that time. For nearly all of the next century the judicial system remained essentially as established by the Judiciary Act of 1789.

Congress of the United States,

begun and held at the City of New York on

Wednesday the fourth of March one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

[centered heading/title:] An Act to establish the Judicial Courts of the United States.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

That the Supreme Court of the United States shall consist of a Chief Justice and five associate justices, any four of whom shall be a quorum, and shall hold annually at the seat of government two sessions, the one commencing the first Monday of February, and the other the first Monday of August. That the associate Justices shall have precedence according to the date of their Commissions, or when the Commissions of two or more of them bear date on the same day, according to their respective ages.

And be it further enacted, That the United States shall be, and they hereby are divided into thirteen districts, to be limited and called as follows, to wit: One to consist of that part of the State of Massachusetts which lies easterly of the State of New Hampshire, and to be called Main [sic] district; One to consist of the State of New Hampshire, and to be called New Hampshire district; One to consist of the remaining part of the State of Massachusetts, and to be called Massachusetts district; One to consist of the State of Connecticut, and to be called Connecticut district; One to consist of the State of New York, and to be called New York district; One to consist of the State of New Jersey, and to be called New Jersey district; One to consist of the State of Pennsylvania, and to be called Pennsylvania district; One to consist of the State of Delaware, and to be called Delaware district; One to consist of the State of Maryland, and to be called Maryland district; One to consist of the State of Virginia, except that part called the district of Kentucky, and to be called Virginia district; One to consist of the remaining part of the State of Virginia, and to be called Kentucky district; One to consist of the State of South Carolina, and to be called South Carolina district; and one to consist of the State of Georgia, and to be called Georgia district.

 [complete document and transcription at link]

[justinssportscorner]

Mira Lazine at LGBTQ Nation:

A Tuesday hearing on gambling addiction turned awry when Senators John Kennedy (R-LA) and Josh Hawley (R-MO) suddenly turned the conversation towards the issue of transgender inclusion in sports.

In a hearing about the Supporting Affordability and Fairness with Every Bet Act (SAFE Bet Act) — a law that is meant to discourage sports gambling addiction — the two senators barraged NCAA chief Charlie Baker with questions about “allowing biological males” to play games with “biological females.” Kennedy told him to “stand up in front of God and country” and oppose trans women’s inclusion in sports, and to “stand up and take a leadership position,” as well as to “go to Amazon and buy a spine online.” Hawley then jumped in and repeatedly talked over Baker, raising his voice to claim that “there is no federal law” that allows trans women to play against women and to shout “This is your federal policy that you will not defend because it is indefensible.” He also questioned Baker about recent forfeitures against San Jose State University due to them allegedly having a single trans player on their team. Despite Hawley’s claim, the U.S. Constitution and federal law guarantee equal treatment of college athletes. While this should include trans athletes, there have been recent scientific and political debates about whether trans female athletes have biological advantages over cisgender competitors. Republicans have largely opposed trans inclusion in sports and vilified trans athletes and their allies as harming cis female athletes.

Baker was also asked by Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) how many trans athletes there were. Out of 510,000 total athletes, Baker said, there are less than 10 total in NCAA schools (a figure that translates to fewer than 0.002% of all NCAA athletes). Baker also defended trans women, saying it was “debatable” whether they’d always, no matter what have a physical advantage over cisgender women. There is no concrete evidence that trans women have an unfair advantage in sports. A recent study found that trans women have equivalent physical metrics to cisgender women after being on hormone replacement therapy. Few other studies examine trans athletes in comparison to cisgender athletes. Sen. Durbin continued on X, “510,000 NCAA athletes. Ten or fewer transgender NCAA athletes nationwide. Let’s focus on ways to actually improve women’s sports.”

Last week’s hearing that was purportedly about the SAFE Bet Act in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee instead turned into an manufactured temper tantrum session on NCAA policies over trans athletes by GOP Senators on the committee.

NCAA head Charlie Baker testified, and when grilled by Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin (D-IL), Baker stated that there are 10 or so trans athletes in the whole of collegiate sport.

[harriswalz4usabybr]

Remarks Vice President Made at the US Courthouse in Saipan, NMI!

~BR~

[townpostin]

Judiciary Issues Show-Cause Notice to Azadnagar Police OC

Court demands explanation for failure to produce key witnesses in 2017 Arms Act case The Additional District Judge-2 has issued a show-cause notice to Azadnagar police station in-charge over repeated failures to present key witnesses in a 2017 Arms Act case. JAMSHEDPUR – Additional District Judge-2 Aabhas Verma has issued a show-cause notice to the Azadnagar police station in-charge for failing…

[collapsedsquid]

A Lakeland woman was charged Tuesday after police said she ended a call to an insurance company with the words, “Delay, Deny, Depose.” [...] “She’s been in this world long enough that she certainly should know better that you can’t make threats like that in the current environment that we live in and think that we’re not going to follow up and put you in jail,” said Lakeland Police Chief Sam Taylor. [...] However, Boston added that she does not own any firearms and “was not a danger to anyone,” police said.

[...]

Boston was charged with threats to conduct a mass shooting or an act of terrorism, according to the affidavit. “My client is 42, married mother of three. Never had any criminal charges or convictions. May you release her on her own recognizance,” her attorney Jim Headley said to a judge during her first appearance in court. However, the judge set her bond at $100,000, stating, “I do find that the bond of $100,000 is appropriate considering the status of our country at this point.”

Abolish the judiciary

[quotesfromall]

That in all courts of the United States, the parties may plead and manage their own causes personally or by assistance of such counsel or attorneys at law as by the rules of the said courts respectively shall be permitted to manage and conduct causes therein.

John Adams, Federal Judiciary Act

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Last week, the Supreme Court’s far-right majority went home for the summer, but only after a stark reminder that they do not serve the people of this country — they serve Donald Trump and MAGA extremism. They serve wealthy corporations exploiting our communities. They serve whichever right-wing billionaire gives them the most gifts. This term, the same extremist justices who overturned the constitutional right to abortion and ended affirmative action doubled down on the court’s legacy of protecting the interests of wealth and white supremacy. These unelected justices have pulled off a judicial coup on behalf of fascists and billionaires. They have enabled Trump to evade accountability. They have opened the door for the MAGA cult to destroy our rights through Project 2025. They have greenlit the criminalization of homelessness. They have left millions of people in states like Missouri vulnerable to bans on emergency abortions and other attacks on reproductive rights. And they have provided a road map for wealthy corporations to harm our planet and our communities by handcuffing the Environmental Protection Agency, the Food and Drug Administration and countless other agencies from regulating them. The Republican-appointed justices are fighting a war on behalf of far-right extremists against the people of this country, and they are just getting started. Congress has a choice to make: reform the court or bear witness to the death of democracy and the destruction of the communities it should protect. [...] Court reform is personal for me — not just as a member of the House Judiciary and Oversight committees, but as a survivor of gun violence, as someone who has had an abortion, as the daughter of a former union meat cutter, and as a congresswoman representing a community that has been systematically denied the right to vote. And it should be personal to everyone who cares about our democracy and our freedoms. The gavel’s fall should signify justice served, not lives destroyed. Our lives and our communities are worse off because of this unchecked, extremist Supreme Court. The time for reform is now. Congress must remove lawless justices through impeachment — that’s why this week my colleagues and I introduced articles of impeachment against Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito over their multiple ethical conflicts and failures to disclose. Congress must also pass legislation that imposes a binding code of ethics for every justice. We must expand the Court to 13 seats by passing the Judiciary Act, which I proudly co-lead. Congress must enact term limits for the justices. Finally, we must strip the Supreme Court of its power to invalidate federal laws that protect our fundamental rights.

Rep. Cori Bush (D-MO) for MSNBC.com on why the Supreme Court needs significant reforms to dilute the radical right-wing MAGA Majority influence, such as expansion of the court to 13, a binding code of ethics, and term limits (07.11.2024).

Rep. Cori Bush (D-MO) wrote a solid editorial on MSNBC.com calling for judicial reforms to neuter the MAGA Majority on the court, such as expansion to 13, term limits, and a binding ethics code. Hopefully the people in MO-01 vote her again.

[ivygorgon]

AN OPEN LETTER to THE U.S. SENATE

The Senate must prioritize confirming progressive judges ASAP!

170 so far! Help us get to 250 signers!

I’m writing because our federal judiciary matters to me and the time is now to make our courts work for all of us.

The end of the last Supreme Court term was filled with devastating decisions that will have lasting effects on our lives. Gun safety, separation of church and state, the government’s ability to fight climate change, and of course abortion rights were all significantly weakened by the radical decisions of the Trump Court. We need a path forward, and one critical way is to ensure our lower courts are filled with diverse judges committed to equal justice.

There are a number of nominees waiting for the Senate to act. Please prioritize confirming all nominees who are or will be awaiting full Senate action by the end of the 117th Congress. We need judges who protect the rights of all of us, not just the wealthy and powerful. Thanks.

▶ Created on November 15, 2022 by Jess Craven

📱 Text SIGN PEBTUY to 50409

🤯 Liked it? Text FOLLOW JESSCRAVEN101 to 50409

[minnesotafollower]

Introduction of New Proposed Afghan Adjustment Act

On July 13, 2023, U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar (Dem, MN) with five co-sponsoring Democrat Senators and six co-sponsoring Republican Senators introduced a new proposed Afghan Adjustment Act (S.2327). The Democrat co-sponsors are Senators Coon (DE), Blumenthal (CT), Shaheen (NH), Durban (IL) and Menendez (NJ), and the Republican co-sponsors are Senators Graham  (SC), Moran (KS), Mullin (OK),…

[if-you-fan-a-fire]

“COLLEAGUE UPHOLDS STUBBS TAKING FEES,” Toronto Star. January 31, 1933. Page 1.  ---- Winnipeg, Jan. 31.-There is no provision in the statutes to prevent collection by judges of the surrogate court of fees as done for some years by Judge Lewis St. George Stubbs, the commission investigating his alleged judicial misconduct was told to-day by Judge L. F. Roy of St. Boniface.

He said he charged fees only for work performed when persona designata, but for any work which came under the jurisdiction of the surrogate court proper only 50 cents was charged and it went to the provincial treasury. 

In county court he charged for orders under the Child Welfare Act, he said, as there were many matters he investigated persona designata which he would not have done as a judge so he felt entitled to the $5 fee for this extra duty.

[harriswalz4usabybr]

Sunday, September 22, 2024 - Kamala Harris

In Guam to spend some time in the last of the Pacific territories, Vice President Harris accompanied by US Senator Mazie Hirono, Secretary Deb Harland, Governor Jay Inslee, and US Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will be spending two days in the territory hosting two events each day. Below is the 'official' schedule for today.

Event #1 Event Location: Roy's Restaurant Event Type: Lunch with Local Leaders Event Time: 13:00-15:30 ChST *The Governor and all 15 members of the Liheslaturan Guåhan (Guam's Legislature) as well as justices of Guam Judiciary and the lone Chief Judge of the Federal Court were invited to share a lunch with the Vice President and campaign surrogates. This lunch was about listening to what is happening here in Guam and what the Harris-Walz administration could do for the territory once in office.

Event #2 Event Location: Capitol Kitchen Event Type: Dinner with Troops Event Time: 18:00-21:00 ChST *The campaign invited troops stationed in Guam to swing by Capitol Kitchen to have dinner with them. We had several discussions with the troops about their service and what it means for them to be stationed in Guam and what they think a president should be doing to support the US troops.

~BR~

[deadpresidents]

I just hope these next 4 years go by fast

This election isn't just about the next four years. With Trump in the White House and a Republican Senate at his side, the MAGA movement can pick up where they left off when it comes to packing the federal judiciary with right-wing judges who will control the Supreme Court and appellate courts throughout the country potentially for the rest of the lives of everyone reading this right now. It's the perfect recipe for them to continue stripping reproductive rights away from women nationwide and gives them the opportunity to turn their attention to the other issues that they have been dying to attack, from voting rights to gay marriage and every other extension of personal freedom that has been won by minorities and marginalized people in hard-fought battles over the past 60 years. This is the nightmare scenario that people have been warning folks about for the past few elections. It's here. And there isn't going to be a way to put the toothpaste back in the tube.

The consequences of this election will have a direct, negative impact on your life -- possibly on the entire remainder of your life. This country just re-elected a President with authoritarian tendencies who is the willing puppet of a dangerous Christian nationalist movement that figured out exactly how to manipulate him (through flattery) for their aims. They have created the perfect vehicle for a genuine cult of personality that they can use to achieve the goals they have been very clear about striving for over the past few years. And you can't blame anybody other than the American voters because they not only elected Trump, but they gave him a fucking mandate, with a Republican Senate and potentially a Republican House. They already have a right-wing dominated Supreme Court for the next few decades, and now they are going to ensure that the entire federal judiciary is in their control for years to come. And don't forget the fact that a few months ago, the Supreme Court handed down a decision that gave Presidents sweeping immunity for a broad (and conveniently undefined) range of "official" acts, so Trump is going to go into this second term knowing that not only does he not have to deal with the "guardrails" of responsible adults he had around him in his first term (Mattis, Tillerson, Kelly, General Milley, etc), but he knows he can get away with virtually anything and everything that he wants to do this time around. If you thought that Trump's first term was bad, just understand that they are prepared this time and now he's surrounded himself with people who will do his bidding -- people who are perfectly willing to let Trump be Donald Trump.

I wish there was a reason to cry foul, lodge protests, and challenge the election's results. But this wasn't a rigged election. There isn't any confusion about what the voters really wanted. The American people did this. People you know and care about and who say they care about you are the people who did this. We need to recognize that these elections aren't outliers anymore. Trump's supporters aren't simply chaos agents who got lucky on a bad day for the Democrats. That's the country we live in now and we have to find a way to resist it that actually makes a difference because now they have the keys to all the doors and all of the alarm codes. This country has normalized the conspiracy theories and nativism and racism that has powered the MAGA movement since the moment Trump came down the elevator at Trump Tower in 2015. He's given those people permission to be open with their hatred towards people who aren't like them, and it's actually become surprising to see how many Americans have been eager to take advantage of that. I didn't think I had any misconceptions about this country before Donald Trump because I recognized this nation's history, but I clearly had some misconceptions about people I thought I knew until I saw them wearing a red MAGA hat or noticed they had a gigantic flag with Trump's name hanging where their U.S. flag used to hang. Once that happened, it was like a switch went off with them and they started saying things in ways that I'd never heard them speak. I feel like that's happened to the entire country. It breaks my heart and it pisses me off.

For the past few years, I've been warning everybody about how elections have consequences. I imagine that there are hundreds of posts on this blog with that phrase in all caps listed with the tags. Now the elections have happened, and we have to live with real fucking consequences. And we're going to pass these consequences on to other generations because this is the one that you can't get a do-over on. When you give a movement like this the power and the mandate that this country just gave them, there is no easily rolling back the things that they end up doing. They are going to fundamentally change the lives of people in this nation and especially change the way the younger generations of Americans live and love and learn for years to come. And you have people in your life who made that happen. It's another disgusting day in America -- a prelude to another reprehensible four years (at the very least) -- and I'm ashamed of tens of millions of my fellow Americans because this one is on them. They know exactly who the man is that they voted for, and now we know exactly who they are, too.

[metamorphesque]

Considering the blissful ignorance with which Armenia is treated by the foreign press, I’ve taken it upon myself to keep you (those who care) updated on what needs to be known.

BACKGROUND

Following years of violations of ceasefire and intimidation against Armenian civilians, Azeri military forces used massive force in September 2020 to invade and occupy two-thirds of Nagorno-Karabakh. In September 2023, Azeri military forces took over the remaining territory, contradicting previously agreed-to negotiations and statements (OSCE peace negotiations, trilateral statements 2020,2021).

While an ethnic cleansing was taking place, the Azeri government arrested eight former members of the Republic’s government and advocates for the self-determination of Artsakh. Those detained include Ruben Vardanyan, an Armenian businessman and philanthropist who served as the State Minister of the Artsakh government.

Mr. Vardanyan and the seven others join over 50 Armenians arrested during the conflict, some of whom have been held for years by Azerbaijan. The negligible information on the health and well-being of these prisoners is deeply concerning.

Ruben Vardanyan

In addition to being the State Minister of the Artsakh government, Ruben Vardanyan is an influential Armenian philanthropist who in 2024 was nominated for Nobel Peace Prize for the creation and support for around five dozen new and unprecedented educational, charitable, scientific and humanitarian structures not only in Armenia, but also in a number of other countries.

Mr. Vardanyan has been charged with financing terrorism, although the legal situation for him and the others remains unclear and lacks transparency. The charges levied against him are considered completely unsubstantiated and are seen as an act of political retribution.

For this reason, it appears Azerbaijan is holding him as a political prisoner, hindering his ongoing projects and suppressing a voice advocating for progressive and positive change.

��We are gravely concerned about my father’s deteriorating health, though we are not surprised by his bravery," said David Vardanyan, one of Mr. Vardanyan's sons. "Despite our initial relief, my father’s conditions are only worsening. The world has shown Azerbaijan that it is watching the fate of the Armenian prisoners, including my father, and from our family I want to thank everyone for their support at this difficult time. I hope that this growing international attention may lead to his release in the nearest future. We urge the international community to further increase the pressure on Azerbaijan to ensure that at least his trial takes place in May 2024 with international observers.” The State Department’s annual Human Rights Report, released on April 23, corroborated the unjust conditions that Mr. Vardanyan and other political prisoners and detainees face in Azerbaijan. The report on Azerbaijan estimated that the country held approximately 254 political prisoners and detainees as of December 2023. The judiciary was also described as largely corrupt, inefficient, and lacking independence. According to the report, defendants in Azerbaijan were often “denied the right to a presumption of innocence; a fair, timely, and public trial; to communicate with an attorney of their choice; to have adequate time and facilities to prepare a defense; to confront witnesses and present one’s own witnesses and evidence; and not be compelled to testify or confess guilt.”

Today Azerbaijan has extended the detention period of Ruben Vardanyan by 5 months.

HELP FREE RUBEN VARDANYAN Join the international community in calling for Ruben Vardanyan’s release alongside the other Armenians being held in Baku, Azerbaijan.

TAKE ACTION by adding your name to THE LIST of supporters.