Long a pet peeve of right-leaning jurists, the conservative justices criticized Abood in a pair of cases from 20, effectively inviting lawsuits against agency fee arrangements. The Supreme Court authorized those mandatory dues in a 1977 case called Abood. Janus involved a First Amendment challenge to so-called agency fees non-union members paid to organized labor for collective bargaining. The 2018 Janus decision is a case in point in Whitehouse’s view. He claimed the Court employs several methods to circumvent those safeguards, like stealth-overruling precedents - in which the justices refuse to extend past cases to new contexts - or using subtle language to encourage litigants and influence future cases. Yet Whitehouse believes the contemporary Supreme Court has ignored those concepts and abandoned neutral procedural rules to deliver victories for conservative political interests. The Whitehouse brief urges the Court to follow that course, saying separation of powers principles restrict the courts to deciding real and ongoing controversies, not abstract questions. Thereafter, the city amended its ordinance and asked the justices to dismiss the case as moot, saying the new rules give the plaintiffs everything they sought in court. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the ordinance, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the dispute in January. The plaintiffs are city residents who wish to transport their firearms to vacation homes for self-defense and to shooting competitions outside the five boroughs.
The ordinance authorized licensed gun owners to carry firearms to and from gun ranges, and forbade the removal of firearms from city limits. The case pertains to an ordinance, since amended, regulating gun transportation in New York City. “Particularly on the urgent issue of gun control, a nation desperately needs it to heal.” Perhaps the Court can heal itself before the public demands it be ‘restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics,'” Whitehouse wrote, alluding to court-packing measures that have gained traction in progressive circles.
The brief, which follows back-to-back mass shootings in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio, accuses the justices of delivering partisan decisions for monied Republican interests while warning of lasting damage to the Supreme Court’s legitimacy. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island filed a legal brief before the Supreme Court in a challenge to New York City’s gun transportation regulations, advancing a broad indictment of the Roberts Court itself as he urged the justices to turn away the NRA-backed case. The senator predicted a ruling against the City would inflame progressive efforts to pack the high court.ĭemocratic Sen.The brief includes a withering critique of the Court’s conservative majority, which Whitehouse accuses of judicial activism.Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island filed a legal brief urging the Supreme Court to dismiss a challenge to New York City’s gun regulations.
0 kommentar(er)
