Another Attempt To Change Election Results Goes To SCOTUS
December 21, 2020
AND THEY JUST KEEP COMING
|The Trump administration filed a new petition with the Supreme Court yesterday, asking justices to reverse a trio of Pennsylvania supreme court cases relating to mail-in ballots. The lawsuit asks SCOTUS to ignore the will of the voters and seeks all “appropriate remedies” including allowing the state’s legislature to pick its own slate of electors.
ALL FOR ONE, AND ONE FOR ALL
|Fix the Court notes every federal appeals court — including SCOTUS! — will livestream their arguments in 2021 due to the pandemic. The organization applauds the efforts to apply added transparency to the Supreme Court, which had resisted making its arguments available to the public prior to the public health crisis. Fix the Court’s GABE ROTH said in a statement, “Recalling the third branch’s renowned opacity, it wasn’t a given that the pandemic would yield increased access to federal court proceedings. But the proof of whether our courts are affirmatively making strides towards greater transparency won’t occur until life returns to normal. In the meantime, we’ll encourage them to make this newfound live access permanent.”
SCOTUS VIEWS
If Supreme Court Rules Against NCAA Athlete Compensation, The Fight Must Not End
Los Angeles Times“What makes someone a professional? Is it the mere distribution of a paycheck or are there other factors, such as the person’s unique level of expertise or their contributions to a company or enterprise? It makes sense that a multibillion-dollar industry is only a multibillion-dollar industry because of the competency of professionals and not a collection of ‘amateurs.’ This the moral, and economic, question at the heart of the NCAA’s longstanding reluctance to pay student-athletes.”
The Supreme Court Might Be Finding Its Way To Overturning 'Qualified Immunity'
USA Today“This month, the United States Supreme Court issued a remarkable opinion that could pave the way to repealing qualified immunity. That doctrine — which shields government workers from accountability when they violate the constitution — relies on the policy that government workers should rarely be subject to lawsuits for money damages. But in Tanzin v. Tanvir, a unanimous Supreme Court said that it is not its business to do policy. In addition, it held that damages are not only an appropriate remedy against government workers who violate the Constitution, but that ‘this exact remedy has coexisted with our constitutional system since the dawn of the Republic.'”