Illustrated crowd of workers and organizers raising fists and carrying placards beneath a rising sun
The People’s Editorial DirectorateEvery struggle requires an approved interpretation.
The U.S. Supreme Court building at dusk, October 2011; contextual panorama.
The U.S. Supreme Court building at dusk, October 2011; contextual panorama. Joe Ravi / CC BY-SA 3.0.

Missouri’s Republican Map Loses a Round. America’s Survival Is Questioned.

The Supreme Court stayed a federal order requiring Missouri to use its new Republican-favored congressional map, leaving the state court’s direction to use the 2022 map in place while litigation continues. Voters had petitioned for a referendum on the replacement. Conservative commentator Seth Keshel responded by portraying the judiciary as a threat to America’s survival; other right-wing commentators accused the justices of helping Democrats. The Court had not outlawed Republicans or finally settled the redistricting case. It had interrupted a plan to secure another favorable district. Some defenders of the Republic apparently found that distinction difficult to appreciate.

documented reactions, Democracy Docket, September 10 · Supreme Court docket

Judges Compare Notes. Homeland Security Sees a Conspiracy.

Minnesota’s federal judges used discussions, reference materials and templates to manage the flood of detention challenges generated by the Trump administration’s immigration operation. DHS general counsel James Percival characterized their collaboration as conspiring against enforcement, while DOJ questioned whether judges who discussed their experience should recuse themselves. Chief Judge Eric Tostrud said each judge decided cases independently and that their conclusions sometimes differed. The internal materials have not been released, so the ethical questions cannot be settled from the interviews alone. What is public is an administration generating extraordinary judicial work, then treating the judges’ efforts to handle it as evidence against them.

Court Requires ICE to Follow Arrest Law. DHS Defends Its Practices.

ICE enforcement operation, June 11, 2019; contextual photograph, not the California litigation.
ICE enforcement operation, June 11, 2019; contextual photograph, not the California litigation. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement / Public domain.

A federal judge has told immigration agents in California’s Central District that skipping an arrest warrant requires an individualized basis for believing the person will escape before one can be obtained. Being in the country unlawfully does not establish that risk by itself. DHS answered that its arrests are lawful and that the Supreme Court has vindicated its practices; Fox emphasized the Biden-appointed judge imposing the restriction. The preliminary injunction does not end immigration enforcement. It insists that agents satisfy the legal condition for a warrantless arrest. For an administration elected on law and order, being told which law applies has become another confrontation with the courts.

amended injunction

Gas Initiative Violates Constitution; Backer Blames Biased Court

Washington’s Supreme Court struck down Initiative 2066 because the natural-gas measure bundled distinct subjects in violation of the state constitution. Environmental advocates welcomed the decision, which removes restrictions on efforts to reduce fossil-fuel use. Initiative backer Brian Heywood called the ruling “biased and one-sided,” arguing that the measure protected consumers from higher energy costs. The court did not order anyone to surrender a stove. It applied the constitutional rules governing initiatives. That was sufficient to turn a defeat for an anti-climate measure into another accusation that the judges had taken sides.

Read original ↗Axios Seattle

court opinion

Filed under: reality, corrected for public consumption.