Today I have the honor of speaking to the judges and lawyers in the 2022 Ohio Judicial conference on the Supreme Court in Columbus, Ohio. I will be discussing the last year of cases and controversies for the Court from leaks to threats as well as the recent and upcoming decisions.
The Court is coming off one of the most historic and impactful terms in its history. Yet, the coming docket is already packed with new blockbuster cases including:
303 Creative v. Elenis: A web designer challenging Colorado’s public accommodations law after declining to provide services for the marriages of same-sex couples.
Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College/Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina: Challenges to the use of race as a criterion in college admissions.
Moore v. Harper: A challenge to the right of state courts to strike down or change legislation governing congressional and presidential elections under the “independent state legislature doctrine.”
Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith: An appeal concerning what constitutes a “transformative” work under the fair use doctrine when it contains a dissimilar meaning or message from an original source like a photo of Prince.
Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency: A challenge to the test for what is considered “water of the United States.”
Haaland v. Brackeen: A constitutional challenge to the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 in the use of race for placement preferences for children.
FAR TOO MUCH EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE BRANCHES
FAR TOO LITTLE JUDICIAL BRANCH
Professor Turley, please inform the judicial branch that it must not wait for cases to be brought and that, after 233 years, it is time for the judicial branch to perform its sworn oath and constitutional duty to support the Constitution and to review all acts of the executive and legislative branches to assure compliance with the clear and evident, meaning and intent of fundamental law. Since 1860, it hasn’t. Secession must have been declared constitutional, and suspension of habeas corpus by the executive branch, failure to enforce extant immigration law on January 1, 1863, and corruptly and improperly ratifying, not one but three nearly impossible-to-ratify amendments under the duress of brutal post-war military occupation and oppression must have been declared unconstitutional. The Fed, Social Security, Medicare, Depts of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, Transportation, The “Great Society,” Obamacare, illegal alien invasion, affirmative action, forced busing, “non-discrimination” and “fair housing” laws, market manipulation by abuse of the tax code, “Quantitative Easing,” etc., are similarly unconstitutional, and each and every one of these acts must have been declared such under the power of judicial review.
JUDICIAL REVIEW
________________
Marbury v. Madison
The U.S. Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison (1803) established the principle of judicial review—the power of the federal courts to declare legislative and executive acts unconstitutional. The unanimous opinion was written by Chief Justice John Marshall.
– Library of Congress
_________________
Judicial Review in the United States
Annotation
The legitimacy of judicial review and the judge’s approach to judicial review are discussed.
Abstract
The doctrine of judicial review holds that the courts are vested with the authority to determine the legitimacy of the acts of the executive and the legislative branches of government.
– DOJ, Office of Justice Programs
___________________________
THE MANIFEST TENOR – NOT ARBITRARY “INTERPRETATION”
“…courts…must…declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void.”
“…men…do…what their powers do not authorize, [and] what they forbid.”
“[A] limited Constitution … can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing … To deny this would be to affirm … that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”
– Alexander Hamilton
How is “ it must not wait for cases to be brought” consistent with constitution?
Suggestion: Read.
_______________
Marbury v. Madison
The U.S. Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison (1803) established the principle of judicial review—the power of the federal courts to declare legislative and executive acts unconstitutional. The unanimous opinion was written by Chief Justice John Marshall.
– Library of Congress
_________________
Judicial Review in the United States
Annotation
The legitimacy of judicial review and the judge’s approach to judicial review are discussed.
Abstract
The doctrine of judicial review holds that the courts are vested with the authority to determine the legitimacy of the acts of the executive and the legislative branches of government.
– DOJ, Office of Justice Programs
Key words that are not “adjudicate”:
– Declare
– Determine
Seriously? I have to tell you? If it’d been a snake, it woulda bit you.
Yeah declare and determine when there is actual case or controversy.
In that case, the appropriate term would have been “try.”
The American thesis is Freedom and Self Reliance.
Not Dictatorship of the Proletariat.
You don’t like freedom and prefer dictatorship, fine.
It’s your choice, comrade.
_____________________
Again, read, at some point, the facts enlighten the shadows of doubt.
Please do review “Judicial Review” and the associated descriptions.
A previous determination and declaration sans “case”:
“The clause in the Constitution which authorizes the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is in the ninth section of the first article. This article is devoted to the Legislative Department of the United States, and has not the slightest reference to the Executive Department.”
“I can see no ground whatever for supposing that the President in any emergency or in any state of things can authorize the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, or arrest a citizen except in aid of the judicial power.”
“I have exercised all the power which the Constitution and laws confer on me, but that power has been resisted by a force too strong for me to overcome.”
– Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, May 28, 1861
It’s not.
That will never happen… They r hellbnt o. Destroying america …..no doubt they will be suesing desntis…to enjoin. Him from shipping illegal migrants to me vinyeard. But read Arizona v us 567 , x 2012. State t
Tua!my do have the right to exclude. ! I hope design ha lawyers to for the I and the tee…of a they are going to hit him with trfficking….he ready to vote. Going ugly!
Will it be available to view on YouTube, C-Span, etc.?
Hope it is. I’m an attorney 30 miles south of Columbus and would have liked to have attended but was unable. YouTube would be perfect.
Estovir your reply to the article on “Clinton” is a breaker and you were spot on with Sonia. A laugh now days is good for the soul.
Congrats and good luck, Professor Turley.
Congrats for growing your business as a well sought out speaker. Nothing wrong with putting your intellect and skillsets to work for you. May your efforts land you a seat on SCOTUS when a vacancy occurs again, to rectify the damage done by Kagan, Sotomayor and the non-biologist.
It appears the SCOTUS leaker has been found!
Source Of SCOTUS Leak Found To Be Swedish Supreme Court Janitor Hildur Clintonheim
“Our elite team of court investigators did phenomenal work catching Clintonheim,” said Chief Justice Roberts while simultaneously checking Twitter to get a read on which way he should rule regarding Roe v. Wade. “And to think this whole time we gave this janitor access to our documents, our offices, and Justice Kavanaugh’s keg den.”
Roberts said investigators caught Clintonheim in the nick of time as he was trying to replace Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s real, wooden gavel with a fake gavel that made a squeaking sound when hit. Experts believe that had the janitor pulled off this second heist, the nation would have plunged into depravity and chaos, full of parents killing unborn children and adults openly grooming and drugging school kids.
Shock and dismay have reportedly rippled through the halls of the highest – and now most vulnerable – court in the land. Justice Sonia Sotomayor expressed particular surprise at the source of the leak, stating she didn’t know Sweden was a real country.
The investigative team who caught Clintonheim could not be reached for comment as they had all mysteriously killed themselves.
https://babylonbee.com/news/source-of-scotus-leak-found-to-be-swedish-supreme-court-janitor-hildur-clintonheim