35 Burst results for "Alito"
Texas Abortion Ban One of Dozens Intended to Challenge Roe v. Wade
"Let me explain about the texas law. It is the texas heartbeat act. The case is whole women's held their whole woman's health versus jackson. The abortion providers in texas sued texas judge in county court clerk and others in an attempt to cast is widen it possible to challenge the texas Heartbeat law that bans abortion when a fetal heartbeat is detected. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the case. It was denied. They appealed to the fifth circuit court of appeals. The fifth circuit denied the abortion providers requests to hold a quick hearing on the law before it can take effect. The result is that they had to file an emergency application. Sam alito sam alito chose to do nothing. The result is that the texas law goes into effect. There will be court hearings. I'm sure a judge will a progressive judge will issue an injunction of some kind but right now in texas abortions mussi's when a child's heart develops in utero now a bunch of states. Have these bills. They've been blocked by court. Georgia where i am be bill. A federal judge blocked it. I'm reading now from the l. C. the ethics religious liberty commission explainer. The texas law takes a novel legal approach to limit abortions by taking enforcement of the measure exclusively through private selections essentially. The law allows any private citizen to bring a civil lawsuit against any individual who performs or induces an abortion or knowingly engages in conduct that aides were abets abortion including the payment foreign reimbursement of the costs for an abortion individuals who prevail in their lawsuit will be awarded statutory damages in the amount of not less than ten thousand
Clinics Ask High Court to Block Texas 6-Week Abortion Ban
"Abortion providers in Texas are asking the US Supreme Court to block a new state law that would allow private citizens to sue anyone who helps a woman get an abortion abortion providers filed an emergency appeal with justice Samuel Alito after a panel of appellate judges refused to block enforcement of the law before it takes effect Wednesday the plaintiffs say the new law would rule out eighty five percent of abortions in Texas and forced many clinics to close the Texas law bans abortion after a fetal heartbeat can be detected that can be as early as six weeks and can be before a woman even though she's pregnant instead of setting criminal penalties this long encourages private citizens to bring lawsuits against doctors or anyone who helps a woman gets an abortion at that early stage at least twelve other states have enacted similar bans but all have been blocked from going into effect Jackie Quinn Washington
"alito" Discussed on WIBC 93.1FM
"If the state of California regulators were able to scoop up information on made your donors for every entity that does every tax exempt entity that does business in California, which is almost everybody, and so basically the chilling effect this would have it was brought by a conservative group, but it actually crossed party lines ideological lines. Lot of left wing groups didn't like this California policy either. And so the Supreme Court struck it down. Now this policy would have applied to whomever a donor. Maybe. But it was taken to the idea that since this is a state so heavily run by Democrats that the Democratic Party would be using this to see who donates to conservative causes, and then possibly the state would be utilized as a cudgel as a bit of retribution against those people, But this could have gone. Either way. So what was the argument of the state? You know, in wanting this to happen? The state's argument was that they had a legitimate law enforcement and regulatory need for this information to prevent fraud in charities. But the Supreme Court and this came out in oral argument also basically eviscerated that said, You almost never used this information as part of an investigation. It's just the names of donors. That's well, that's all they're getting, and you're going to collected on several 1000 entities. For something you almost never used. And if there is a real investigation, then you can obtain this information. But on a key thing here was that it routinely had to be filed with the state of California. I think the number was 8000 different entities a year and the opportunity for things to be leaked out. Whether deliberately or not deliberately was so great that a lot of people didn't want to donate to conservative causes because they were afraid if it was leaked out by somebody in the bureaucracy in California, that all of a sudden they'd have protesters at their doorstep of their business, or they'd be cancelled in some way, And so it really did. And I do believe this had a chilling effect. On donors ability to donate. Remember, these were only made your donors. Um, if you donated $50, you would not be disclosed on the form 9 90. That's the I R s form anyway, you had to. I think it's $5000 or A certain percentage of the entities revenue. So this was for larger donors, but nonetheless, it had a killing effect. Talking to William Jacobson, Cornell Law professor. The mind behind legal insurrection dot com. This brings us to the bigger one where the Supreme Court upholds Arizona ballot harvesting restrictions. That's how you wrote in a 63 ruling. The opinion by Samuel Alito. This was all about the Arizona Attorney General Mark Burnett, Bitch and his support of this legislation. What did the Arizona law say? How do you know we can talk about ballot harvesting and and is worthy of definition? And what was the argument that Alito made to this not being in violation of the Voting Rights Act? Well, the what the law did is severely restricted. Who could turn in a ballot for somebody else? And so it basically eliminated all non family members. I'm not sure how much more limited it was. But you could not have the short of operation that ran in the last election cycle and has run another election cycles where you have activists paid activists running around to nursing homes, collecting ballots from people and, of course You don't know if there's pressure reply. You don't know whether they all get turned in. If somebody suspects that the Republican vote because they see the person fill out the form, and they might just tossed the ballot. Also, I mean, that's where a lot of concerns about fraud coming, so this essentially put a stop to that practice, and the argument was From the other side that this would somehow desperately impact non white or minority communities, and therefore it was at a racial motivation and therefore violated the Voting Rights Act because it was was meant to suppress, you know, minority votes, and basically, one of the hero said is one. It doesn't do that on its face and two there's no evidence. That this was racially motivated or would have any to spring impact. And so they, you know, basically said it was a legitimate anti fraud measure that a state can adopt. Now. One of the people who was who voted against this was was Elena Kagan, Justice Kagan. I always find her to be a little more interesting. Let's say a son Sotomayor, because I have never accepted the most rarest instances when they go nine. Nothing. I rarely find Justice Sotomayor to engage in adjudication. Rather, I see her somebody who votes Elena Kagan. I think, actually, even though I may disagree with her on a great number of things actually spends time. It seems to me, um, looking at the merits of the case and one of the things that she stated here and that she descends that this is really chipping away at the pillars of the Voting Rights Act that argument that to allow to not allow ballot harvesting. And to allow states to say, Hey, we've got rules and regulations about voting to ensure as little fraud as possible. And they put this in this category of somehow being bigoted. Is there anything that You see from this type of legislation from the state like Arizona or a state like Georgia or state like Delaware, that nobody is willing to talk about that chips away at the rights of the people, regardless of the color of their skin to vote. No all of these arguments that it's racist or violates the voting Right back Rights Act start from a actually bigoted assumption. The assumption being that you know, non whites have more trouble forgetting it, and I'd non whites have more trouble turning in their ballots. I mean all of the stereotypes negative stereotypes. Our advanced by the people who claim to want to protect those communities, and there's just no evidence of that. There's no evidence of that. And so every eight a facially neutral Restriction on ballot harvesting. It doesn't say you can harvest them, but not in cities. Okay? If you did that, you could say, Well, maybe cities have a higher percentage of minorities, and therefore there's some, you know, biased there or intent there, But this applies everywhere that you, you know, and really what it's meant to do is to do away. With the worst abuses. Now the Democrats don't like it. But for reasons having nothing to do with race, the Democrats have very highly organized ballot harvesting operations in any place that it's Legal, and they also have things that are close to ballot harvesting in places where ballot harvesting is is not legal, So this is that this is just politics here. I mean, you know, Democrats think it's going to hurt their get out the vote, but not but that doesn't make it racist..
Conservative High Court Upholds Arizona Voting Restrictions
"The Supreme Court is up holding voting restrictions in Arizona the vote was six to three the court reversed a decision by a federal appeals court that said the measures disproportionately affect black Hispanic and native American voters in violation of a part of the landmark voting rights act justice Samuel Alito wrote for the conservative majority Arizona's interest in the integrity of elections justified the measures and the changes don't affect minority voters enough to prove a violation of law in a scathing dissent justice Elena Kagan wrote the court has re written in order to weaken a statute that stands as a monument to America's greatness this will set off new calls by Democrats to pass federal voting rights legislation A. Donahue Washington
Supreme Court in 7-2 Ruling Rejects Challenge to Obamacare
"Despite worries by Democrats that it might be overturned. The U. S Supreme Court ruled that the affordable Care act better known as Obamacare remains valid, rejecting a claim by a group of conservative states that a recent change to the law made it unconstitutional by 7 to 2 vote. The court said challengers did not have legal standing to sue because they did not make us strong enough showing that the law harm them in their descent. Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch said the court should have taken the case and declared it unconstitutional. The law's challengers 18 Red States, led by Texas Urged the court to rule that Obamacare's requirement for nearly all Americans to obtain health insurance or pay an income tax penalty, known as the individual mandate was unconstitutional. And for that reason, they said, the entire law must be
The Obamacare Decision by SCOTUS Shows They Are Cowards
"The obamacare decision by the Supreme Court today is expected. And I'll tell you why not, for reasons so called legal analysts have to say. Because once these unconstitutional laws take hold They're almost impossible to undo. So the Supreme Court by 5 to 4 with Justice Roberts, the chief justice, flipping Wasn't 12 years ago. Turning into a tax case. He wrote The, uh, really the the law into, uh And for two forever Ville. And so no challenge will ever upset it. And Justice. Alito's dissent was brilliant. Gorsuch joined with him. We got all this head counting going on on T V. You know what? But they don't get at any of the substance, of course. This was a tax case. That's what the Supreme Court turned it into. And then when the tax issue Was repealed on the individual mandate by Congress. Suddenly, it's not a tax case anymore. Suddenly it's a standing case. So the Supreme Court turned itself three times. Now on this law, Obamacare into a pretzel. And those lawyers who really are not constitutional lawyers, but maybe their former federal prosecutors or former defense lawyers. Maybe I don't know. Former bankruptcy laws or whatever this is how they use their green eyeshades. And so that's that's not what's going on here. These justices are demonstrating over and over and over again. What a bunch of cowards there. Comey Cavanaugh really, so far disasters. Hopefully, that will change over
Johnson and Johnson Asks Supreme Court to Void $2B Talc Verdict
"A major drug company wants the nation's highest court to review a verdict over it's talc products. The Supreme Court could decide tomorrow whether or not to get involved in a nearly $2 billion lawsuit against pharmaceutical giant Johnson and Johnson. Johnson and Johnson wants a verdict in Missouri review that initially resulted in a nearly $5 billion verdict in favor of 22 women who developed ovarian cancer refereed using talc products. An appeals court cut that verdict in half but upheld findings about the products containing a specialist lace talc. Johnson and Johnson says that verdict is at odds with decades of scientific evaluations. Just the Samuel Alito is expected to recuse himself from consideration after reporting he owned Johnson and Johnson stock. Cox is Jared Helper, and Johnson and Johnson has faced hundreds of lawsuits across the country over tell products with mixed results.
Google Ultimately Prevails Over Oracle in Java API Case
"The. Us supreme court has ruled in google's favor in that big. Copyright dispute with oracle over the use of java api is basically with a six two two vote the justices overturn what had been a big oracle lawsuit victory coating cnbc. The case concerned about twelve thousand lines of code that google us to build android that were copied from the java. Application programming interface developed by sun microsystems which oracle acquired in two thousand. Ten oracle sued google over the use of its code and one. Its case twice before the specialized. Us court of appeals for the federal circuit the supreme court reversed. the federal. circuit's decision justice steven brier. Who wrote the majority opinion. In the case reason that google's use of the code was protected under the copyright doctrine of fair use quote. We reached the conclusion that in this case where a user interface taking only what was needed to allow users to put their accrued talents to work in a new and transformative program google's copying of the sun java. api was a fair use of that material. As a matter of law brier wrote brier was joined by chief. Justice john roberts and justices sonia yar elena kagan neal gorsuch and brett cavenaugh justices clarence thomas and alito descended and quote so this is huge huge news in terms of software and coding law basically. Api's to some degree are now fair. Use and therefore not copyright -able
Biden Signs Executive Order Aimed at Expanding Voting Rights
"So biden marks the fifty six anniversary of bloody sunday by signing executive order to make voting easier and he takes aim at trump over. Voter fraud claims that unprecedented insurrection in our capital on january six. Now we know. It wasn't an insurrection. Nobody was armed. Nobody had a weapon. Nobody's been arrested for having a weapon. The only shooting that took place was a capitol hill. Policemen shooting at and she died a veteran. How do you have an insurrection. Without weapons was never an insurrection. It isn't an insurrection. And i'll continue to say that it was violent and it was an attack on the capitol building. That's what it was but it was not an insurrection. But they can't stop and they won't stop because the media are propaganda even in the midst of a pandemic he said the judge appointed upheld the integrity of the vote. We have a corrupt majority now on the supreme court intellectually corrupt and politically left. They're cowards and the leading cowardice. John roberts i hate to tell you this amy coney barrett and brek having in on it. They've had multiple opportunities including today to clean up this mac and uphold the constitution of the states. And make it very clear. What needs to be done clarence. Thomas has said so over and over again. Sam alito said so over and over again no gorsuch said so over and over again. The barretts already a huge disappointment and cavenaugh is. And i knew he would be now. Let's get back to this insurrection. They talk about the democrat party strategically and meticulously went into the battleground states and destroyed. Their voting systems violated the federal constitution. What around the republican state legislatures not to protect minorities but to protect joe biden and the democrat party. That's what they're about.
Arizona’s Katie Hobbs calls Trump’s call to Georgia counterpart ‘appalling’
"Right now. Arizona's Secretary of state Katie Hobbs, says she's appalled at phone call President Trump had with Georgia's secretary of state about the election results. Along the call President Trump said he needed to find about 12,000 votes. Secretary Brad Rafts Burger dismissed and debunk all the president's allegations of voter fraud in Georgia. The state Republican Party is part of a case aiming to get to give Vice President Mike Pence the ability to overturn an electoral college vote, and that case is on his way to the Supreme Court. Chairwoman Kelli Ward says they sent emotion directly to justice Alito, which she hopes speeds up the process. That case was dismissed
"alito" Discussed on WIBC 93.1FM
"This brings us to this video that's been making what's way around from a Texas elector who tells a story blind. The talks of it was written by someone who's a current staffer for one of the Supreme Court justices, and this was just describing report E that I read and you can make of it what you will, he said. That justice is they always do went into the closed room to discuss Cases. They're taking her to debate. There's no phones, no computers, no nothing. No one else is in the room. Except for the my justice is it's typically very civil. They usually don't hear any sound. They just debate what they're doing. But when the Texas case we brought up, he said, he first screaming through the walls. As Justice Roberts and the other will. Justices were insisting that this case not be taken up on do reason with words that were going through the wall when Justice Thomas and Justice Alito for citing Bush versus score from John Roberts were I don't give a about that case. I don't want to hear about it at that time. We didn't Have riots. So what he was saying was that he was afraid of what would happen if they did the right thing. I believe that is here safe. He's telling a story about something he did not himself here that is hearsay. My problem. I absolutely believe it. You bring me three other people who heard the same thing. Then we're on to something. But until that happens This. Is hearsay..
"alito" Discussed on WIBC 93.1FM
"It was written by someone who's a current staffer for one of the Supreme Court justices, and it's very proud just described really important that I read and you can make of it what you will. Um he said that Jesse's as they always do, went into the closed room to discuss cases. They're taking her to debate. There's no phones, no computers, no nothing. No one else is in the room except For the nine justices. It's typically very civil. They usually don't hear any sounds. They just debate what they're doing. But when the Texas case was brought up, he said, he heard screaming through the walls. As justice Roberts and the other liberal justices. Were insisting that this case not be taken out on do reason with words that were going to the wall. When Jeff just Thomas suggested for Alito for citing Bush versus scored. From John Roberts were I don't give up about that case. I don't want to hear about it. At that time. We didn't have riots. So this electors making the argument that the story was told that John Roberts, the chief justice wouldn't take up the case, because There were no riots. He's worried about riots taking place that they take up the case now. Do I believe this? Mm hmm. Not really. One.
"alito" Discussed on KTAR 92.3FM
"Lee, Justices Thomas and Alito said the court should consider the merits. We're out voted by the others. ABC News chief White House correspondent Jonathan Karl the Supreme Court, including all three justices nominated by President Trump flatly rejected the Texas case wouldn't even bring it up. This is a case that just today the president called the most important case in history. This on a day when the president also took aim at his own Food and Drug Administration. Supreme Court handed what could be the final legal court system blow to President Trump's efforts to overturn the election. Chuck Secrets in the ABC News time Now to take a look at your money from ABC News Wall Street Now stocks closed lower his prospects for another covert 19 aid package from Washington faded as a surgeon cases continues to inflict more damage on the economy. The Dow closed up 47 points, but the S and P 500 gave up five And the NASDAQ fell. 27 oil prices closed down 21 cents at $46.57 a barrel. Investors have been hoping for another financial lifeline to help cushion the latest blow from the virus to people, businesses and state governments. However, an emerging $900 billion package from a bipartisan group of lawmakers has essentially collapsed because of continued partisan bickering. Endure. Donning restrictions are being reinstated in New York City over the objection of the restaurant industry Governor Cuomo announcing that only take out orders and outdoor dining will be allowed starting Monday. Public health experts have repeatedly warned that dining in restaurants is high risk. Daria.
Computer Crime Law Scrutinized at Supreme Court
"Finally today there was an interesting tech related case that was argued before the. Us supreme court yesterday it involves a nineteen eighty-six computer crime law that has been used ever since to prosecute hackers and internet activist than the like people have been arguing strenuously that the law is outdated and indeed as justice gorsuch said in yesterday's court hearing the us government's interpretation of the law risks quote making a federal criminal of us all and quote. And yes if you're wondering this is indeed the so called. Aaron swartz law quoting politico. The supreme court on monday indicated serious reservations about the ambiguity and scope of the nation's only major cybercrime law hinting. It may narrow the law's applicability to avoid criminalising acts such as checking social media at work during arguments in a case involving a georgia police officer convicted of violating the nineteen eighty-six computer fraud and abuse act by accessing a license plate database. The justices pushed a justice department. Lawyer to explain how a ruling in the government's favour wouldn't open the door to prosecutions of innocuous behavior those could include browsing instagram on computer or performing public-spirited security research to test a system for vulnerabilities as the first see. Faa challenge to reach the high court. The van buren case generated amicus briefs from a wide range of technology privacy and cyber security experts. Most of them on van buren side a group of cybersecurity. Experts described the faa a sword hanging over the head of researchers who probe computers for weaknesses with the goal of helping their owners fix the flaws. The most controversial ever see faa case never reached a verdict. In two thousand eleven federal prosecutors indicted the prominent internet freedom activists aaron sorts on hacking charges for downloading millions of journal articles using a subscription provided by mit swertz. Then twenty four face thirty five years in prison. He by suicide in january twenty thirteen while awaiting trial. The justices sounded alarm. Monday about the broader reading of the cfe. A justice neal gorsuch suggested that the van buren case was the latest example of the government. Trying to broaden the scope of criminal laws incontestable ways several justices expressed uncertainty about the definitions of key terms in the law such as authorization and they spent a significant amount of time asking both lawyers about the meaning of the word so in one part of the statute quote. What is this statute talking about. When it speaks of information in the computer justice samuel alito asked finding in at one point. All information that somebody obtains on the web is in the computer in a sense. I have a feeling. That's not what congress was thinking about when adopted this law. I don't really understand the potential scope of the statute without having an idea about exactly what all those terms mean li added. The justices also sought more clarity about the consequences. That fisher argued would result from abroad. Reading of the faa alina. Ask fisher to explain how the would criminalize one of his example scenarios. Wait on dating website. Fisher responded that by receiving interested messages from potential romantic partners based on falsified. Wait the user would be obtaining information from a computer in violation of the websites terms of service and also thus these cf a similarly fisher told justice elena kagan checking instagram at work constituted obtaining words and pictures from ones instagram feed and if a company prohibited social media browsing on computers obtaining that information would also violate the cf a bike contravening the employers policy and quote
Amy Coney Barret Tilts The Balance in Divisive Ruling
"A lot for being with us on this day after Thanksgiving. It was right before Thanksgiving late Wednesday. When the U. S Supreme Court The majority said, even in a pandemic You can't put away the Constitution. Now. In New York governor Cuomo says that he issued these restrictions on places of worship. Based on science. And safety. And so this is a fascinating ruling. In many regards number one. It's a big plus for religious freedom. Number two. It was just this past summer. That the Supreme Court ruled basically the opposite. In a case and there's some other cases that are being considered. I believe some cases California, New Jersey, Louisiana, So this is all about the Supreme Court blocking New York's governor from enforcing 10 and 25 person occupancy limits On religious institutions. Courts, the restrictions would violate religious freedom. And are not neutral because they single out houses of worship or especially harsh treatment. Or said there's no evidence that the organizations that brought the lawsuit have contributed to the spread of cove in 19. And this was one of those 54 decisions. With Chief Justice John Roberts. Going along with Justices Stephen Bryer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. And in their descent. Chief justice. Roberts said he saw no need to take this action because New York had revised the designations of the affected areas. Governor Cuomo essentially Said the same thing. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court did rule on it and also in the sending opinion. Justice Sonia Sotomayor said this unlike religious services, Bike repair shops and liquor stores generally don't feature customers gathering inside to sing and speak together for an hour or more. She went on to say justices of this court play a deadly game in second guessing the expert judgment of health officials. About the environments in which a contagious virus now infecting a million Americans each week. Spreads most easily. Those are the words and the dissenting opinion from Justice. Sonia Sotomayor, your Down the majority, and this may be the new power five and this is one of the key developments out of this ruling. A new power five on the Supreme Court. Barrett Gorsuch. Thomas Alito. And Cavanaugh. Three of whom, of course, were Appointed By President Donald Trump in the Majority opinion. Justice, Gorsuch said this, he noted that Governor Cuomo had designated among others, the hardware stores acupuncturists. Liquor stores and bicycle repair shops as essential businesses. That were not subject to the most strict limits. Like these places of worship work. Gorsuch said. We may not shelter in place when the Constitution is under attack. Things never go well. When we do So it Zbig deal for the Supreme Court. It's a big deal for I mean, let's face it all those evangelicals that voted for President Trump. They've got to be doing a victory lap today, right? Maybe you are a swell 51283605 90. If you'd like to be a part of the program here, you give us a call or send us a text on K. O. B. J. It is because Amy Barrett just got on the court. Right, So it's really The first significant indication Of a rightward tilt to the court. And I mentioned this and may and July Supreme Court rejected challenges. Virus related restrictions on churches in California and Nevada. At that time, the Chief Justice John Roberts, Joined the courts Democratic appointees, which of course, then included Ruth Bader Ginsburg. And those rulings they stress that state and local governments required flexibility to deal with a dangerous and evolving pandemic. So The New York Times, Right said. This is just One example of how profoundly President Trump Has transformed the Supreme Court. This New York Times P, says Justice Bharat Help the chief justice of body blow. Casting the decisive vote in a 5 to 4 ruling. On religious services in New York. And New York Times says this is most certainly a taste. Of things to come. About this 51283605 90 here on Caleb E. J. It is an interesting question, right? In the summer time. Even the Supreme Court said, Look You may not like it when these local officials are trying to close the church. But You're dealing with health and safety issue. And there are rights. Given to local officials in the event. Of health and safety issues. Well, not in this case, the governor there in New York, Andrew Cuomo. He criticized the Supreme Court. Or overturning their restrictions. He said It was Morrell Astrit Ivo of the Supreme Court than anything else. He called the ruling irrelevant. Said it would have any practical impact because restrictions Are not in place and had been dialed back well. You know, it's interesting that even in the Opinion. That was written by Sonia Sotomayor, right? When she was talking about The court plays a deadly game and second guessing the expert judgment of health official. Let's stop right there.
"alito" Discussed on 860AM The Answer
"Gallagher read the Federalist Papers. America reads the book called The Federalist Papers, read the Federalist Papers. It's all in there and what it's being taken away from us by the Communists. Dictators called US State governors. Well, this is what Justice Alito gave a speech to the Federalist Society before I take John here on line, one who does agree with the governor's mandates on restrictions in your own home. Um, Justice Alito made it very clear that we're facing a stress test on the Constitution because of Cove it creating a new ranking order of fundamental rights as Jonathan Tobin rights over the New York Post. On Tobin is a editor in chief of J UN Estado or Democrats. A love the fact that these lockdowns Yeah. Widespread. The justice made clear that he's not diminishing the severity of Corona viruses threat to public health. Nor even saying anything about whether lockdown rules are good public policy. But the pandemic, he said, has resulted in previously unimaginable restrictions on individual liberty. This has happened by executive Fiat rather than legislation. Justice. Alito pointed out that in Nevada, the courts deferred to the judgment of the governor of that state about how to halt the spread of the virus. The result was a rule that aloud casinos to operate. While severely restricting the right to attend Ah house of worship. A Salido noted, Treating the rightto Wender worship to God as being as important as the right to gamble shouldn't have been a tough call. If you look in the Constitution, you will see the free exercise clause of the First Amendment that protects religious liberty. But is, the leader pointed out in his speech? You will not find a craps claws or a blackjack claws or a slot machine claws. And yet the courts let those restrictions stand. Just as they have all throughout the country. Including New York, where the state in the city of crack down hard against believers for violating covert 19 rules, while cheering other events like Black lives, matter, riots or Biden victory celebrations, barely even bothering to hide that political or theological content. Is the deciding factor. You may not want to attend a church, a synagogue or a mosque during a pandemic. You don't have to agree with the little sisters of the poor about birth control. It's going to be alarmed about how they're losing their rights because their faith is out of fashion. Rather than gear. Justice Alito's warnings decent Americans, he writes, whether they're people of faith or unbelievers, conservative or liberal. Should be cheering him. Let's start with John. Hey, John. Welcome in. Let's talk a little bit about these. These mandates as and we'll start there with what this article refers to Ah, ban on going to church. But casinos in Nevada You can stay wide open. Does that does that trouble you at all? That that does trouble me. But what is more troublesome is that everyone on the right seems to be up in arms about a mask, Mandy. Which is a health issue, and I'd ask you a simple question. You wear a seat belt? I do. You have the speed limit? I do. Yeah, I try to and those air those their government. Regulations based on the safety of the people right because there are some governors like in South Dakota, who said we're going to depend on people to make good decisions. People have proven time and time again that they make bad decisions. So your show the show. The problem, though, with your equation is that you're going to make the government say all right. If you make bad decisions, we're gonna make a good decision for you. How about washing your hands? Do you favor a mandate that says you better wash your hands for a least 20 seconds or we're going to give you a fine She have far we can go down that slippery slope, John I understand that there's a slippery slope. But how many people? You know, South Dakota didn't do anything in there an epidemic. They're having major issues right now. They ignored they ignored common sense. People ignore common sense. Look how many people get arrested for D U I I understand that, but to equate not wearing a mask on a beach, I watched the lady yesterday by herself in the middle of nowhere on a beach. There wasn't anybody within two miles of her wearing a mask walking down the beach. And listen, John, That's her, right. I defend her right to do that. But I truly believe these mandates and I listen, I don't think there's a right or wrong. I'm not trying to show shoot down your position. But we're in uncharted waters here. But do you understand that too many Americans being told you better wear a mask. Any time you walk out the front door, your house strikes a lot of people as a as government overreach. I understand that and hopefully it would only be temporary because the vaccines air coming and of course, according to Dr Fauci, even with the vaccines, we still have to have a have to wear masks even after you're vaccinated. You.
"alito" Discussed on 860AM The Answer
"Welcome back to the show didn't have a chance to get into much of Judge justice. I should say Alito's comments from last week's Federalist Society lawyers Convention as I wanted to earlier in the program, so let's get to them. Spoke a little bit with Steven Hayward about a leader's comments as it pertained to one of the first freedoms. That's freedom of speech. But he was this more generally about the culture specifically about Cove. It And what has transpired in 2020. Because of the outbreak and the choices we made in terms of the policy response to the outbreak, Justice Alito had this to say, I'm not going to say something that I hope will not be twisted or misunderstood, but I have spent more than 20 years in Washington. So I'm not overly optimistic. In any event here goes The pandemic has resulted in previously unimaginable restrictions on individual liberty. Now notice what I am not saying or even implying. I am not diminishing the severity of the viruses threat to public health and putting aside what I will say shortly about a few Supreme Court cases. I'm not saying anything about the legality of covert restrictions. Nor am I saying anything about whether any of these restrictions represent good public policy. I'm a judge, not a policymaker. All that I'm saying is this and I think it is an indisputable statement of fact, we have never before seen restrictions as severe. Extensive and prolonged as those experienced for most of 2020 and as justice leader predicted those words were immediately distorted beyond recognition. On and the qualifications that were included. They're not underestimating the severity of the virus. Not making a comment on the public policy choices were, you know, immediately discarded, suggesting that it is justice Alito, who is being myopic rather than his critics, he is talking about the restrictions that have been imposed. Mainly by executive Fiat and the complete absence of balancing the interests of individual rights with the interests of the public's health. Calling this a constitutional stress tested Alito the covert crisis has served as a sort of constitutional stress test. And in doing so, it has highlighted disturbing trends that we're already present before the virus struck. One of these is the dominance of lawmaking by executive Fiat rather than legislation. The vision of early 20th century progressives and the new dealers of the 19 thirties was the policy making would shift from narrow minded elected legislators to an elite group of appointed experts in a word. Policy making would become more scientific. That dream has been realized to a large extent. Every year. Administrative agencies acting under broad delegations of authority churn out huge volumes of regulations. A dwarf the statutes enacted by the people's elected representatives. And what have we seen in the pandemic sweeping restrictions imposed for the most part under statutes that confer enormous executive discretion? That's right. And so this gets into that other freedom that we talked a little bit less about with Steven Hayward, another first freedom, freedom of conscience, religious liberty and what has transpired. With respect to people's First Amendment Religious Liberty rights during the pandemic had apparently concluded that Marylanders could safely engaged in all sorts of activities outside the home. Such is visiting an indoor exercise facility, a hair or a nail salon and the state's casinos. If difference was appropriate in the California and Nevada cases, then surely we should have deferred to the federal Food and Drug Administration on an issue of drug safety, But no. In this instance the writing question was the abortion, right? Not the right to religious liberty. And the abortion right prevailed. The rights of the free exercise of religion is not the only ones cherish freedom that is falling. In the estimation of some segments of the population. Support for freedom of speech is also in danger. And covert rules have restricted speech in unprecedented ways. As I mentioned attendance at speeches, lectures, conferences, conventions, rallies And other similar events has been banned or limited. And some of these restrictions are alleged to have included discrimination based on the viewpoint of the speaker. Even before the pandemic, there was growing hostility to the expression of unfashionable views. That's right, and which we did talk about with Hayward. But here's the point is making my religious liberty in the case he started with this is Theobald shin Pill, not having to come in to get your abortion pill, the state of Maryland that had previously been required And yet there are other outdoor activities that were deemed safe by the state of Maryland. So that you could go get some typical pick up something to eat and so forth, go to a health club but for the abortion pill Was okay the male that even though the state required you to pick up in person for the purple, obvious purposes of verification consultation with pharmacists about the taking of medicine, the medicine taking of a pill. That that has such profound implications, starting with health of the individual taking it, perhaps being able available to answer questions, But no that was discarded because, as leader said it was the abortion right in quotation marks that was at bar in Nevada. Casinos versus churches. Casino State Open churches were restricted. It seems sort of dynamic and California So treating institutions of faith less favorably than favored institutions of commerce, whether to medical marijuana dispensary and California or a casino in Nevada becomes a problem and oh, by the way, there is something worth noting, too. In this era of discussions of national lockdowns national mask requirements because we need a national policy. So say the experts, the Tony Fauci is of the world to say. People are resistant. Listen to a permanent ruling class. Tell them what to do. But this is the time where you should basically do what they tell you to do. Well, Alito providing perhaps indication the Supreme Court will be a backstop on your individual liberties, which would be a nice change of pace, thanks to the seating of Amy Cockney Barrett on the case of Jacobson versus Massachusetts, that those proponents of national lockdown national Mask requirements have hung there. Jurisprudential hat on. It's important to keep Jacobson in perspective. It's primary holding rejected a substantive due process challenge to a local measure that targeted a problem of limited scope. It did not involve sweeping restrictions imposed across the country for an extended period. And it does not mean that whenever there is an emergency executive officials have unlimited unreviewable discretion. Yes. Oh, be careful reading too much from a policy instituted in Cambridge, Massachusetts, to deal with smallpox. To something that the federal government would try and improve. Imposed as a one size fits all national policy,.
"alito" Discussed on KNST AM 790
"It was very clear from the outset that what the governor did and what the state Supreme Court did was utterly unconstitutional, so it's a lawless act. And at this stage, the Supreme Court has a solemn duty in light of the nature of the issue, and the stakes at hand has to take the case and I think, by the way The earlier determination by Justice Alito to call a halt to any county. If that had begun of these set aside, balance, the ones that I view is illegal. They're just illegal. They don't and should not count his determination to do that is a signal. It's not insurance. But it's a signal that a majority of the Supreme Court would uphold what justice Alito has done. Now you might someone How do we know that? What? We don't know that, But But there are assumptions that if Justice Alito is going to rule as he did, he's got to be somewhat confident that there is a majority of support the court for it. Those air just factors that are that are taken into account by judges, a cz they they rule on matters like this, where further Requests of participation for full membership of the court may be thought. Bottom line is that Judge star here is convinced that illegality occurred in Pennsylvania with 700,000 votes. Wants to get to the bottom of it. For the sake of the integrity. Of our electoral system. That must have the end of all this. Regardless who wins folks, that has to be what happens here. We cannot go forward with the presidential election system. Being doubted by the losing side every time I mean, they're going to be people have doubted, but we can't have what we have now. We've lost all the integrity. And the thing is, the left doesn't care. Doesn't matter to them. They've demonstrated this throughout this entire process. Don't care. Well, somebody has to care. Somebody has to care for the future of the country, The future, the Constitution, the future of the rule of law, the future of the integrity of the rule of law, The Constitution and our election system, and that's what this Attempt to get to the truth is now before we go to the break. I want to remind you of something. I told you back on October 15th. Of receiving a phone call from an elite member of the drive by media. She has a question for me. Will I urge my listeners to remain calm? While the vote returns are being counted on election night, she is assuming that the results might not be available on election night. We're in the first few days because drive byes have gotten himself believing that the results were not gonna be counted because all the mail in ballots and because of all of Ah Absentees and so forth. They've got themselves convinced that Trump is going on Election night may end up winning in a landslide. By the time they count all these other things, Trump's going to lose. So she wants to talk to me about whether or not I'm going to urge you to be adults whether I'm going to urge you to remain calm. And to not raise hell. Like I've done so many times. When is the last time I urged any mass behavior on the part of anybody in this audience? Answer. It doesn't happen. I don't do it. We won an insulting question turned out it was Lesley Stall and she wanted this was for her interview with the president is a pre interview before the election had won with the Biden won with Trump. And she wanted me to answer the question. Will I urge my listeners to stay calm? On election as though You all are going to be raising hell out there, and it's all going to be part of the effort to get Trump elected, but but it will be dishonest and all that is what I do the right thing and urge you to remain that there's attempt. To intimidate and of course it failed because we don't take these people seriously. I got to go quick timeout much more when we get back. Rush Limbaugh the network right after Rush.
Philadelphia - Supreme Court Justice Alito Orders Pennsylvania Mail-In Ballots That Arrived After Election Day Be Kept Separate
"In a brief order, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito said mail in ballots in Pennsylvania must be kept separate in case the high court has to weigh in on them. At Pennsylvania State Judge also allowed observers closer access to vote counters. Trump team has not been successful. So far with other cases. Judges in Georgia, Michigan, Nevada and Pennsylvania have denied motions to temporarily stop the count. In a statement, President Trump said, We will pursue this process through every aspect of the law to guarantee that the American people have confidence in our government.
Justice Alito temporarily grants Pennsylvania GOP request to enforce segregation of ballots that arrived after Election Day
"News. Meanwhile, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito has gotten directly involved in a legal dispute over ballot county. Pennsylvania. Fox's Shannon Bream explains county boards of election there were supposed to be segregating ballots that they got after eight PM on election day securely, locking them down separately for the time being. While the fight over whether those vote should be counted continues with the Pennsylvania GOP asked the Supreme Court for an emergency order after it was unable to get at least 25 of the county boards to confirm They've actually been segregating those votes. Alito has ordered every county election board in Pennsylvania to segregate out and secure those late arriving ballots for now the Pennsylvania GOP. It also asked the county board to be ordered not to do anything further with the ballots like tally them. Alito's said he wants a response from the
Supreme Court orders separate count of late-arriving Pa. ballots
"Elections officials should keep late arriving mail in ballots separate from other ballots. Pennsylvania's secretary of state has already ordered officials to do that. Justice Samuel Alito says it's not known that all ballot counting centers are complying with that guidance. Late arriving balance in Pennsylvania could number in the thousands. George's Fulton County
Justice Alito orders Pennsylvania officials to set aside late-arriving ballots
"Supreme court justice samuel alito in an emergency order as told the board of elections in every pennsylvania county segregate and hold every mail in ballot that was received after eight o'clock election night that's the deadline set by state law state elections officials unilaterally extended by a week the gop's lawsuit says they don't have the power to do that.
Supreme Court orders separate count of late-arriving Pennsylvania ballots
"Supreme Court says that the state of Pennsylvania should be keeping late arriving mail in ballots separate from the other balance. The Commonwealth Secretary of State has already ordered just that. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito says it's not known that all ballot counting centers are complying with that guidance. Those late arriving ballots could number in the thousands.
Potential legal challenges over late-arriving mail ballots
"With so many Americans voting by mail this year. There are concerns that ballots may not arrive on time when you have some states that don't require a postage mark on there, so we don't know when they were filled out. They don't require signature verification, and some states say they'll be counting nine or 10 days after the election, I think is the most industrialized country in the world. We can do better than that. Corey Lewandowski, a senior advisor with the Trump campaign on Fox News Sunday. As legal challenges abound, the Supreme Court has already weighed in on ballot disputes in Pennsylvania and North Carolina. At issue a three day extension for mail in ballots in Pennsylvania, something Republicans oppose Justice Samuel Alito wrote in a statement. There's simply not enough time to issue a pre election decision. In North Carolina Republicans have been fighting a nine day extension for mail in ballots. In that case, the Supreme Court allowed a lower court ruling permitting the extension to stand. The newest justice Amy Cockney. Barrett, did not participate in the cases, citing a lack of time to review
"alito" Discussed on WTOP
"Run, call now and save big on your new mortgage. A refund. 805 101 hit 805 114 48 equal opportunity Lender rate subject to change and sometimes credit approval. Call 805 114 40 for information, All right. I gave you something to ponder. Before we hit that commercial break. Did you figure it out? It's LGBTQ voters who are expecting a big turnout at the polls in November. 2019 1 in five LGBTQ adults were not registered to vote. Compared to 88%, who are registered this year. Glad President and C E O. Sarah Kate says People are focused on the fact that this administration has leveled more than 180 attacks against our community. She points to the Supreme Court, where Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito wrote this month of the 2015 decision giving same sex couples the right to marry has ruinous consequences for religious freedom. There is concern Sara Kate ABS. We've lost rights and we I've been the victim of some severe rhetoric coming out of this administration. Alison Keys. CBS News Pope Francis has become the first pope to endorse same sex civil unions. A DC based church analyst says the pope is not endorsing gay marriage but reaffirming his general support for gay people. The pope's remarks have come in a documentary premiering in Rome. What he's doing here is advocating that civil society recognized the rights of gay people to civil union. Since Jesuit priest Reverend Thomas Race of D. C. An analyst for Religion News Service says the pope expressed a similar view when he was archbishop of Buenos Aires. And while the pope's remarks go further than those of any other pope, Reverend Ri says they don't go AST faras the views of a majority of US Catholics, 70% of Catholics in the United States support gay marriage. Let alone civil unions Dick Uliano w T o p News, traffic and weather straight ahead on w T O P. It's 6 37 Somethings air Just true. Like your local Geico agent could save you hundreds and also clowns make terrible hairstylists..
The Supreme Court Allows More Time For Pennsylvania's Mail In Voting
"The Supreme Court allows extra time for Pennsylvania's mail in ballots by Marc Sherman and Mark Levy. Washington. The Supreme Court will allow Pennsylvania to count mailed in ballots received up to three days after the November third election rejecting a Republican plea in the presidential battleground state. The justices divided four four on Monday an outcome that upholds a state Supreme Court ruling that required county election officials to receive and count mailed in ballots that arrive up until November sixth. Even if they don't have a clear postmark as long as there is not proof it was mailed after the polls closed Republicans including President Donald Trump's campaign have opposed such an extension arguing that it violates federal law that sets Election Day as the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November and that such a decision constitutionally belongs to lawmakers not the courts. The State Republican Party Chairman Lawrence Tavis said the party disagrees with the decision and noting the four four decision. It only underscores the importance of having a full supreme court as soon as possible to be clear. The Supreme Court decided not to grant stay which does not mean the actions of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would withstand a legal challenge to their judicial overreach. Should the court hear the case tape said? Nancy Patty. Mills Chairwoman of the Pennsylvania Democratic Party accused Republicans of trying to sow confusion and disenfranchise eligible voters. This is a significant victory for Pennsylvania voters. Mills said in a statement, the Democratic majority on the state's High Court had cited warnings that postal service delays could invalidate numbers of ballots and surging demand for mail-in ballots during the coronavirus pandemic to invoke the power used previously by the state's courts to extend election deadlines during a disaster. Chief Justice John Roberts joined with the three liberal justices to reject Pennsylvania Republicans call for the court to block the State Court ruling. Justices Samuel Alito Neal Gorsuch Brett. Cavanaugh and Clarence Thomas would have required the state to stop accepting absentee ballots when the polls close on November third. There were no opinions accompanying the order. So it is impossible to say what motivated either group of justices the conservative justices have been reluctant to allow court quarter changes to voting rules close to an election. The court also is weighing a similar issue from Wisconsin but in that case, the ruling being challenged comes from a federal appeals court and the Democrats who are asking the justices to step in. Most states make election day the deadline, but eighteen states half of which backed trump the twenty sixteen election have a post election day deadline with nearly a million votes already cast in Pennsylvania, we support the court's decision not to meddle in our already working system Pennsylvania's Attorney General Democrat Josh Shapiro said in a statement. On, a separate track Republicans in the State House have pressed Governor Tom Wolfe a Democrat to agree to eleventh-hour legislation to eliminate or limit the three days under the court's order. The case is one of many partisan battles being fought in the state legislature and the courts primarily over a male in voting. In Pennsylvania amid concerns that a presidential election result will hang in limbo for days on a drawn out vote count in the battleground state. And Pennsylvania the State Democratic Party and a liberal group the Pennsylvania Alliance for retired Americans had salt an extension of the election day deadline to count mailed ballots. About two point eight, million mail in ballots requested and approximately nine hundred thousand returned democratic registered voters are requesting mail ballots at a nearly three to one ratio over Republicans, and it's September seventeenth ruling the divided state Supreme Court said ballots must be postmarked by the time polls close and be received by county election boards at five pm on November six, three days after the November third election it also said that ballots lacking clear postmark could be counted unless there was evidence that they were mailed after the polls closed.
"alito" Discussed on 860AM The Answer
"I hear Alito and I hear Scalia if you just wrote the words down, but it's a different tone. It's a different and the tone does matter with a judge. It's it's so it's tougher for these Democrats to not look absurd, but the line. I mean, that's their biggest problem with her is you said something was radical. And then and then it wasn't even there. So Blumenthal lies again. But this is a guy who, literally he's lied about his entire life. Probably so he never fact checks anything right, including his own vile, Absolutely All right. We get back. Jordan's taken over. There's also going to be a police, other guests coming in or going out. We're gonna come sit in here. Harry Hutchinson is going to be sitting out there and check out the working the gate. A C L J dork. Thanks for dealing with me. And you gonna find each and every day at the Logan, secular reprogrammed again. That's on YouTube. Find me there subscribe. All season, which balance of nature's fruits and vegetables in a capsule changing the world one life at a time. Your product's great brought up seriously. Haven't been sick in over two years, and I can't even tell you the greatest thing that ever happened to me. Your products a great absolutely, You know, general aches and pains. I have They work outside a lot. Go on its eyes. Almost magic. It's almost too hard too good to be true, You know, But it is very true, Doctor. How is that a fantastic service by creating What I'm putting into my body is the good stuff. You know All this energy is shifting and changing, and my system is happy with what's coming down the pike. And it's kind of like a fun thing, and I look forward to it. It's not like Oh, no, I need to take this again. It's more like Oh, I can't wait to take it. That's a big difference. I had total knee replacement than it was about 10 days out after surgery on the doctor When I went to the visit, he said, You know, I didn't know that I did the surgery on that day. There is no way I believe you had that range in motion already. Well, my range of motion is ahead of where most people are at this point. I work in health care, and I haven't gotten even a runny nose. I'm walking more. I'm exercising more. I'm doing more yoga. I'm pretty convinced that this is something to do with it. And you know what? I will never be without it because this was.
"alito" Discussed on AP News
"In the dissent, Justice Alito on Justice Thomas said that things need to change that They were basically hinting that they want to return. Oh felt and not necessarily allow same sex marriages. Clear about that. Here I go. 32 and one Corona virus Update. I'm Jackie Quinn with an AP News Minute President Trump Pack of the White House after being hospitalized for Cupid 19 and has touched off a firestorm with this message on Twitter for others. The president took off his mask standing and still The president took off his mask, standing and saluting at the South Portico, prompting rebukes for potentially in fact, ing others as he is possibly still contagious. So how far can cove in 19 spread through the air? The CDC says 6 ft, but says it's rare Our Ed Donahue reports. Other experts think it's common and more precautions are needed. Michigan's Health Department has issued a new mask requirement even though last week the state Supreme Court struck down the governor's emergency power to make such a mandate. Vermont officials say 26 migrant workers and a large apple orchard inshore, um, are now positive for covert 19. Vermont had one of the nation's lowest infection rates. I'm Jackie Quinn. The mood within the White House remain somber, with staff fearful they may have been exposed to the virus. Many learned about positive tests from media reports, and several were exposed without their knowledge to people the White House already knew could be contagious. Trump Still contagious has made it clear that he has little intention of abiding by best containment practices as he arrived back at the White House last night. The president defiantly removed his facemask and stopped to pose on a balcony within feet of a White House photographer. The White House says it's taking every precaution necessary to protect every staff member working on the complex. I'm Julie Walker. AP News I'm to McGuire.
"alito" Discussed on News Talk 1130 WISN
"And as I say, I believe the end result was Alito who don't want to be a key? Yeah, Alito Because of that, Yeah. We had a little because of Harriet Myers. And he's brilliant. Yes s O. That was in the case of conservatives who put our foot daughters and I don't know we got to get this right. That was a good thing. Because Harriet and Who knows maybe Harriet Myers would have turned out to be a strong A Samuel Alito was, But there wasn't the same background that she had had that would lead you to know that she was somebody that was simply close to Bush and That wasn't enough. Grounding here. In terms of the impact on the election campaign. It's certainly again means the next nomination to the court is going to determine. The direction of the court and the presidential election. I mean, when you consider the age of this cord There could be three vacancies easily. I repeat a Ginsburg. I didn't You got it. You got to give her her due. I mean, she's supposed to kill it over forever and ever and ever, and she's hanging in there. It's almost like she's got this will that she's not going to let Donald Trump either one It replaces her, but that's true. She's not the only one that that is up there. That is up there in years off, you know Clarence Thomas's over 70 years old right now is so Alito might be pushing it. What which other liberals off the to the Tok'ra briar? Ah! So the way aren't que ganar relative. But and then there's the other thing, you know, just being foolish. I mean, Stephen, anyway, and I, you know, and so on. But, you know, imagine three, given a court that's as close as this. What is to the point that John Roberts Khun Wobble it either way, depending which way he goes if the next president has three appointees That keeps the court maybe for 15 to 20 years. And people need to remember that. Trust me. The liberals are on this. Those of us on the right have been fried to drill this into their heads. Some of our people in office. I said for the longest time, I think half the people get it and we see it now at the state of Wisconsin, but next vacancy on the court is filled by a Tony Eva's appointment. And that means that just aside from the fact that best case scenario goes toe for three if you still can't Hagen on is one of the four conservatives at August 1st, the moment that one of those four leaves Evers fills it buy. It feels it by Appointment and that person serves until the next year in which there is no state Supreme Court. Election and, depending on the calendar plays out that could be a matter of years with the Supreme Court is filled by election. But when there's a vacancy, the governor appoints until the next year in which there's no Supreme Court race on the ballot, and for the people that were so willing you on their way away to Scott Walker Losing we see again the point. I mean, imagine if we lose the states of Prime Court. And right now, the United the United States Supreme Court is not reliable. It's a coin flip end. It's just a matter guessing game, which way as John Roberts going to go in, there's nothing even in the nature. For instance, people are handicapping the Louisiana well, We know how we ruled in the Texas case. It's the same thing you'll go down the opposite. Argument with himself. All right, it's now 603 news talk 11 30. W. As this reporter is sponsored by ever stream, the business only fiber network that ever stream the business only.
"alito" Discussed on WBZ NewsRadio 1030
"Chuck Alito WBZ's traffic on the threes IOTA's official website for deals by a Toyota dot com sponsors the four day WBZ accu weather forecast let's check in with meteorologist dean devore all right you were having a pretty good morning here I think of the early sunshine is going to fade behind clouds look I couldn't rule out a shower to pop in some spots here especially I think west of town this afternoon temperatures getting up to a high in the mid upper sixties city low seventies some inland spots a mid sixties in the Cayman Islands today upper fifties with a couple of showers tonight and then more humid with an afternoon or evening shower thunderstorm tomorrow I think will ramp up to a high almost eighty city then one closer to seventy at the cave in the islands the warmth remains humidity is down a bit on Thursday our temperatures in the city about eighty one low eighties again city in England on Friday more humid late the thunderstorms and then the sun settled Saturday Jefferson showers and thunderstorms upper seventies low eighties it looks cooler and drier for Sunday back up into the low to mid seventies I'm accu weather meteorologist need to board WBZ Boston news radio fifty seven in Boston and WBEZ at seven oh five AM twelve thirty five and five thirty five PM for tomorrow's technology today brought to you by Toyota learn the latest news from leading experts on cutting edge innovations hybrid and safety technology Toyota eight twenty six P. or Boston sponsors New England business this time around of the state's ban on real estate evictions is being challenged at the state Supreme Court the moratorium put in place in April as a protection to tenants hurt financially by the loss of jobs during corona virus to real estate lawyer say the move is unconstitutional the state level as well as the federal level two represents an essential seizure of real estate without proper compensation if successful the challenge could bait pave the way for the eviction process to resume immediately cocktails to go anyone hundreds.
"alito" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Ten have to change their systems and they have some convictions called into question justice Alito said that there was a real reliance interests that there are thousands of cases that could potentially be up and it or at least affected by this ruling and that notion of it here and the president started decides this is something that is one of the most important issue for the court coming forward very interesting to me that that was how they divided in this case justice Kagan has been sort of talking up the importance of precedence for a while but seeing the chief and a leader agreeing with her about precedent does that bode well for some of the cases the court is going to decide involving for example abortion rights at least a marker it very very interesting justice Kagan is really the court's champion of storage devices right now she consistently says let's not overturn precedents let's not return president this is a legal is somebody who has been willing to overturn precedents you may recall he wrote the ruling a couple years ago in a case called Janice that said that you're a government employee you have a constitutional right not to pay any fees to your union to cover the cost of representation and that overturned an earlier Supreme Court decision and then chief justice Roberts is somebody who you can proceed justice Kagan often trying to persuade to bring over onto her side he is somebody who also doesn't want to overturn more presence in the court really needs to so it's a bit of a motley collection there but definitely something worth watching going forward now justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the opinion for the court and he said that story decisis isn't supposed to be the art of methodically ignoring what everyone knows to be true interesting yeah he made the point that nobody was really defending this nineteen seventy two ruling it was a bit of an odd one is a case call up a daca for the ruling was four one four and the one was justice Lewis Powell who adopted an approach that really nobody else agreed with and over the coming decades accord pretty clearly as a whole I didn't agree with his approach and yet the president still stood letting states allow non unanimous jury verdicts are difficult to begin the point that look nobody agrees that they should still be the law here you know we shouldn't do some mechanical application of of storage devices and stick with it we should do what's right and and overturned so no only two states Louisiana and Oregon have this kind of a rule so what does this mean on the ground yeah and and they don't even have it for everything Deanna for example requires unanimity for crimes committed in twenty nineteen or later so this only applied to previous crimes one issue the Supreme Court left open is whether it will apply retroactively to convictions that have already gone up on appeal and been finalized justice Gorsuch suggested pretty strongly that it would not apply retroactively and justice cabin on a concurring opinion flat out said we would not apply retroactively the dissent by justice Alito said but why I'm not so sure about that president it might apply retroactively and that's what I'm really worried about is this prospect that thousands of convictions will be overturned respect that in the controversial cases that are coming up we're going to see a lot of opinions really doesn't bode well for for the court speaking with type of opinion they were all over the map we haven't even talked about how to so many other opinions that justice Thomas justice certainly your you know a lot of people want to say something this court has it yes Sir should his rhythm in terms of having the justices agreeing with one another on large numbers of points we're still at the point with the score or we have a lot of different gases going off in different directions and we saw that into this opinion to which justice did not write a concurring opinion well let's see Joe dissenting I get that right just as prior didn't right they just went along with what justice Gorsuch said one of the interesting dynamic processes that's what exception justice Kagan the more liberal justices were with justice Gorsuch in the majority part perhaps because this is an issue that a lot of people think including dozens of course we can all end up hurting racial minorities that hurts black defendants in jurors because it means that there's only one or two black jurors on the jury and they take a different view from the majority that they may not be able to stop it from going forward thanks Frank that's number new Supreme Court reporter Greg store coming up next on Bloomberg long everybody wins a little in a Supreme Court.
"alito" Discussed on 790 KABC
"Welcome back this is the ben shapiro show justice alito also dissented from this idiotic decision from the supreme court led by justice john roberts who has been just a massively disappointing justice between obamacare in decisions like this one roberts has proved himself to basically be a kennedy esque figure who swings to the left whenever it is convenient for him politically to do so you cannot detect any sort of through line in his initial thinking he is in 'institutionalised for the supreme court that's basically what he claims to be his certainly not anyone with a predictable sense of interpretation of law i said this back in two thousand fourteen years ago when roberts was first appointed by president george w bush i have checked it i said he would not be good justice i rarely say i told you so well that's why i told you so a lot in this case i really did tell you so justice alito descends to this idiot grueling suggesting that it is somehow illegal for the commerce department to ask whether people are citizens of the united states in the census just utter nonsense justice alito says quote it is a sign of our time at the inclusion of a question about citizenship on the census has become a subject of bitter public controversy and his leads today's regrettable decision well the decision to play such a question on the twenty twenty cents questionnaire is taxes racist there is a broad international consensus that enquiring about citizenship on a senses is not just appropriate but advisable no one disputes that it is important to know how many inhabitants of this country our citizens when the most direct way to gather this information is to ask for it in a sense it's the united nations recommends that a census inquire about citizenship many countries do so asking about citizenship on the census has a rich history in our country says alito every census from the first one in seventeen ninety the most recent and twenty ten has sought not just of the number of inhabitants but also varying amounts of additional demographic information in eighteen hundred thomas jefferson as president of the american philosophical society signed a letter to congress asking for the inclusion on the sensitive questions regarding quote the respective numbers of native citizens citizens of foreign birth and of aliens for the purpose of more exactly distinguishing the increase of population of by birth and immigration in eighteen twenty john quincy adams the secretary of state was responsible for conducting the census and he instructed the marshals who are in charge with gathering information to ask about citizenship the same thing happened in eighteen thirty the same thing happened pretty much every census up through two thousand with the exception of eighteen forty at that point the question was moved to the american community survey which is sent only to a small fraction of the population all these census to increase were made by the executive pursuant congressional authorization not one was reviewed by the courts now says alito for the first time the court has seen fit to claim a role with respect to the inclusion of a citizenship question on the census and in doing so the court and set a dangerous precedent with both regards the census itself and with regards judicial review of all other executive agency actions he says this case is taking a model any one of the approximately one thousand district court judges in this country upon receiving information that a controversial agency decision might have been motivated by some unstated consideration may or the questioning of cabinet officers and other high ranking executive branch officials and the judge may then pass judgement on whether the decision was protect jewel what bismarck is reputed to have said about laws and sausages comes to mind laws making sausages you don't actually want to know what went into the sausage that goes for decision making by all three branches to put the point bluntly the federal judiciary has no authority to stick its nose into the question whether it is good policy to include citizenship question on the census or whether the reasons given by secretary ross for that decision whereas only real reasons or israel reasons of course we may determine whether the decisions constitutional but under the constitution the typically guide this court in the exercise of its power of judicial review we have no authority to decide whether the secretary's decision was rendered in compliance with the administrative procedure act in other words this was done with authority everyone has acknowledged this was done with authority the only question is whether you believe that this was sincere or not well the court is not in the business of deciding sincerity the court is in the business deciding whether to act is constitutional or not the fact that the court decided to move beyond its own boundaries to decide this i mean you could literally see this happening in virtually every case so to take an example in the hobby lobby case in which the obama administration promulgated a regulation that specifically targeted closely held religious corporations corporations held by religious people you could have just said that this was motivated by animus what you pretty clearly was and then struck down but that wasn't the question hobby lobby the question was whether the government had the power to do that as soon as you give the judiciary the power to determine motivations like this even other motivations that are reasonable and have precedent and the and certainly government has power to do it if you move beyond does the government have the power to is the government well-motivated judiciary becomes came coming up we'll be joined by clay travis commentator on sports talk about the n._b._a.'s new decision on ownership is the bench hero show Seven million. k._a._b._c. news live and local it's four thirty i'm liz warner another guilty plea from a former u._s._c. official caught up in the nationwide college admissions cheating scandal a former u._s._a. women's soccer coaches admitting he took part in the scam to help get the children of the rich and powerful into elite colleges how russia and pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit rocketeer in also pleading guilty to the charges steve sarah he was the bookkeeper for rick singer the admitted mastermind behind the scheme kevin trip k._a._b._c. news california lawmakers have sent a bill to the governor that would make the state the first in the nation to protect african american hairstyles against discrimination the afro is already protected hairstyle but democratic senator holly mitchell says other styles that work best for the texture of black hair like braids twists locks and corn rose have long been considered inappropriate for school work or even in public where is the justice when black men and women are denied access economics dance -ment because of the way they choose to wear their hair bill is expected to be signed into law the city council tomorrow's expected to consider spending millions of dollars on an.
"alito" Discussed on WAFS Biz 1190
"Alito pitched into the southern for his ninth straight win. Eloy Jimenez hit two three run homers in the White Sox. Pound the Yankees ten to two g Alito the majors I ten game winner gave up a solo Homer to Luke void in the first, then shut down the keys to win his eighth consecutive start the right hander gave up one run on four hits for his eleven th straight outing without a laws event is as fine homers in his past six games. He connected against losing pitcher. See savannah at a four run first and drove a rock to center against reliever. Luis Sessa in the sixth getting three multi Homer games this season two against the keys. The keys fall out of first place with the laws combined with the raise leaping over the Yankees after a win over the angels. Dexter fowler. Had a go ahead. Three run Homer moments. After Paul diong telling shot in the eighth inning. And the cardinals beat the Mets nine to five to sweep on double feature at city field earlier, too. Young helped the cardinals complete or rally that started the night before grounding than our. Single against reliever. Edwin Diaz in the tendon of the five to four win the series opener Thursday was suspended following eight and a half innings because of rain in the regularly scheduled game, young time the game at five with a leadoff Homer against losing pitcher, Jairus familia after a double by ear Molina at a walk by baiter Fowler. Drove a ball into the visiting bullpen and center familiar gave events. It's major league leading sixteenth blown save met starter Stephen Matt's. Homered and also singled, the left hander pitched six innings allowing four runs and three hits while striking out. Six Gary woodland is taking a two-stroke advantage into the weekend as he leads the US open after two rounds, woodland shot six hundred in the second round to push total tonight under four. The servant Tiger Woods made the cut and is at even par longtime Broncos owner Pat Bowlen his dying from complications of Alzheimer's disease. Just two months before he was to be enshrined in the pro football hall of fame. He was seventy five the Bloomberg sports update. I'm Tom Rogers. This is Bloomberg daybreak weekend. Our level looked at the top stories in the coming week from our daybreak anchors all around the world trade, head of the program. The biggest banks face stress tests from the fed. I'm Bob moon in New York and Miller in Berlin where we're looking ahead to the fifty third international Paris, air show and discussing whether the grounding the Boeing seven thirty seven max will dominate the industry conversation. I'm Amy Morris in.
"alito" Discussed on KQED Radio
"Well, remember, this is a man who in one of the public and debates for reasons, I don't remember called upon to defend the conservatism of his sister. A federal judge doing Richie said my sister has signed some of the same bills that Justice Alito assigned now this man who thinks judges signed bills, this amend, their for who would flunk sixth grade civics exam. Now he has control executive branch of government. It's you laugh that you may not weep he's also said that if he is impeded, he will sue. It shows a great deal of Cassidy to I've just wondering, though, since I brought up Peterman, you had an article in, I should say, George will syndicated about three hundred newspapers. You had an article about impeachment, and you said, maybe as an aesthetic consideration. But all that incessant lying all that contemptible coarseness that has been certainly described by you, and others where the president is concerned, doesn't necessarily impeachment and shouldn't necessarily to peach. Well, two purposes of impeachment. One is to punish actions are undertaken, and that was the Nixon's impeachment retrospective impeachment, and I don't know how you impeach Donald Trump. For safe firing James Komi. You have to a that was an exercise of a core. Presidential power to staff, the executive branch, they can say, well, he did it with a corrupt motive which might be true, but the corrupt motive was to prevent the investigation into an offense that the investigation actually preceded. Id to find didn't occur. So that's a pretty thin read on which to overturn a presidential election. A prospect of use of impeachment of prophylactic measure, if you will, which is to prevent additional damage to this public good..
"alito" Discussed on 77WABC Radio
"Lucas g Alito you can rise up like the White Sox with balance of nature's fruits and veggies. Vows of nature provides real nutrition of over ten servings of thirty one to fruits and vegetables every day bounce of nature provides you a health coach. No charge to you to guide you with any questions you have. Take steps to give yourself better overall health, as I do. Call them now. Eight hundred two four six eight seven fifty one that's eight hundred two four six eight seven fifty one or go to balance of nature dot com. Make sure to let them know you heard it here by using discount code, John. J O H. That's me for a special discount. That's balanceofnature dot com. Use discount code John. Introducing the flex collection from van Heusen from the brand that brought you the revolutionary flex collar shirt comes a whole range of innovative sport. Shirts Holo fleece, zip up sweaters and pants all that gives them the freedom to move whether it's three sixty natural stretch fabric, flexing, waistband, or a caller that stretches up to half an inch one thing is certain on comfortable clothing just became history. Experience expandable comfort from van Heusen shop the collection. Now, Kohl's JC Penney Amazon Affleck's collection from van Heusen, your welcome. Slayton. And I've been performing prolotherapy for almost twenty years this natural treatment that stimulates healing and ligaments tendons and joints, stay away from steroid shots void surgery. Instead heal naturally would prolotherapy with more than twenty five years of clinical studies with successful outcomes research has proven prolotherapy works for many pain conditions. Call Dr Slayton today to a one eight to fifteen hundred to a one eight to fifteen hundred to one eight to fifteen hundred or nj Prollo.