Supreme Court of the United States

Mail-in voting for the midterm elections is underway in some states, including Alabama, North Carolina, and Wisconsin.

This even though the Supreme Court is still deciding whether to allow the U.S.

Postal Service to refuse to deliver mail-in ballots in some states where election officials don't turn over voter lists to the post office and that don't have certain barcodes on the ballot envelopes.

A federal judge blocked those requirements.

Now, I'm a trained lawyer, and I knew that made no sense, but I thought maybe there's something I don't understand.

Well, guess what? The Supreme Court agreed with me, and now, uh, Guantanamo Bay has to employ the, the, you know-

Yeah

... protections under our Constitution.

Uh, I've been there four times.

Uh, I went there when we first put these prisoners in basically cages, in, in wire, um, little square cubicles, and, uh, in orange jumpsuits, and that's when a kind of prison culture was developed, which was, was, is, to the extent anyone's still alive there, very pernicious.

But I mentioned earlier that, uh, there was a Supreme Court decision that said that, uh, the original, uh, idea that this would be beyond the reach of US law was unconstitutional.

And so now these people are entitled to, uh, some constitutional protections, and there are different camps there.

Again, high-end building.

Judges, uh, like Supreme Court judges would lived in it, you know what I mean? And right across the street there was an actually an ex-NFL football player, guy used to play for the Jets.

So every day when I would go there, we, we'd talk football, you know? And we'd talk football, and I said to him one day, I said, "What's the deal with all these, you know, 10-foot fences and killer guard dogs, you know?" And he goes, "You know what, Al?" He goes, "When I first moved in here years and years and years ago," he said, um, "My wife got up one night to use the bathroom.

And at that time we didn't have any dog.

But it doesn't.

In fact, in a filing at the Supreme Court this week, the government conceded that the postal service has quote no role in verifying whether male voters are eligible and no one else has such a list either this has ramifications beyond president trump's executive order of course for example the president just announced at his convention on wednesday that if republicans win the house and senate he will issue a dividend to every adult citizen in the united states for five thousand dollars Whether or not this is a good idea, how can he be sure that he's going to get all those checks only to citizens and to nobody else? In fact, the United States has never had a comprehensive list of its citizens.

That's not an oversight.

It's by design.

A federal judge in Boston, Indira Talwani, has blocked the administration at every step since June, most recently the postal rule itself.

And on Thursday, an appeals court ruled that they would not lift Judge Talwani's preliminary injunction that prevented the post office from carrying out Trump's executive order.

Meanwhile, this week, 23 states and the District of Columbia filed a request urging the Supreme Court to let the judge's opinion stand, and at present, we're awaiting a decision from SCOTUS.

I raised this issue on my SiriusXM radio program this week with Senator Chris Coons of Delaware.

Quoting Jones vs. Rath Packaging Company, 430 U.S., 519, 525, 1977.

As the Supreme Court is directed, whether Congress intended to create a right of contribution is assessed by specificity.

Factors relevant to this inquiry are the language of the statute itself, its legislative history, the underlying purpose and structure of the statutory scheme, and the likelihood that Congress intended to supersede or supplement existing state remedies.

N.W. Airlines Inc. v.

In each, there was a clear congressional objective that would have been undermined by the allowance of contribution claims, for example, Northwest Airlines Supra Equal Pay Act and Title VII and Herman v. RSR Security Services LTD 172F.3D 132 Second Circuit 1999 FLSA.

Both dealt with unemployment claims.

In that context, the Supreme Court has made clear that underlying statutes were expressly directed against employers and that Congress intended to regulate their conduct for the benefit of employees.

Northwest Airlines 451, U.S. at 92.

Hughes Aircraft Company versus U.S. Schumer 520 U.S. 939 1997 does not support J.P. Morgan's argument against retroactivity.

There, the Supreme Court held that the extension of an FCA cause of action to private parties in circumstances where the action was previously foreclosed essentially creates a new cause of action because it materially changed the incentives and stakes of False Claims Act cases.

As a class of plaintiffs, QTAM realtors are different in kind than the government.

They are motivated primarily by prospects of monetary reward rather than the public good and have greater incentives than the public vessel to prosecute claims under the strong stimulus of personal ill will or the hope of gain.

The government has Perrin's Patriot standing under Section 1595D.

J.P. Morgan's wrong that the government does not assert any quasi-sovereign interests sufficient to support Perrin's Patriot standing.

The Supreme Court has long recognized that a state has a quasi-sovereign interest in the health and well-being, both physical and economic, of its residents in general.

The government asserts that interest here.

The 10th Circuit ordered a new trial, and they said that the nondisclosure had cost the plaintiffs a preemptory challenge.

The Supreme Court reversed and laid down the test that still governs juror nondisclosure in this country.

So two things here.

One, you show the juror failed to answer honestly a material question on voir dire.

He was the only Black person on the jury.

Massachusetts has the oldest and strongest rule in the United States against race-based jury strikes.

And it's ours, right? It's not the Supreme Court's.

It's Massachusetts.

The total trade deficit went down 30%.

This is after the Supreme Court cut off the tariffs that Trump had.

Anyway, Trump is right now in this period of the grace of God with his administration turning America into the world's energy powerhouse.

Using abundant oil and natural gas not merely to lower costs at home, but to take markets from Russia and OPEC and supply our allies, strengthen the dollar, turn trade negotiations into long-term demand for American energy.

The

Supreme Court constantly making weird laws in favor of bullies.

I guess I could look this up, but my computer's too slow.

When I was a young boy...