r/scotus

Christa Pike’s Botched Execution Was Even More Gruesome Than We’ve Been Led to Believe
▲ 1.7k r/scotus

Christa Pike’s Botched Execution Was Even More Gruesome Than We’ve Been Led to Believe

slate.com
u/Slate — 5 days ago
▲ 1.6k r/scotus+1 crossposts

Chief Justice Roberts quickly comes through after Trump DOJ slams 'egregious intrusion' that a Reagan-appointed judge called a 'board game'

lawandcrime.com
u/DoremusJessup — 6 days ago
🔥 Hot ▲ 8.3k r/scotus+2 crossposts

Samuel Alito blames marriage equality for America’s ‘decisive’ turn ‘against religious liberty’

advocate.com
u/Buster_xx — 8 days ago
▲ 636 r/scotus+1 crossposts

Alito announces he is considering retiring next year

In August the Justice told WSJ he wasn’t going anywhere. Now, weeks before an increasingly bleak GOP midterm election outlook he reverses course.

Any chance Alito is playing politics and trying to energize GOP midterm voters?

politico.com
u/AdHoc303 — 12 days ago
▲ 66 r/scotus

A Supreme Court Battle Over Climate Change Begins

Nearly a decade ago, the outdoorsy, liberal enclave of Boulder, Colo., sued two oil companies over their role in climate change. Now, the Supreme Court will consider whether the groundbreaking lawsuit can ever go to trial.

Its decision will resonate far beyond the Rockies.

A win for Boulder would likely clear the way for dozens of similar lawsuits nationwide aiming to extract billions of dollars from the fossil fuel industry to fight global warming. But if the court kills Boulder’s case, that could doom the others, handing a major victory to oil companies.

Boulder’s lawsuit says the two oil companies, Exxon Mobil and Suncor Energy, should help pay for the damage to the state of Colorado — such as worsening heat waves and wildfires — caused by climate change, which is driven by the burning of fossil fuels. The companies say Boulder’s lawsuit should be thrown out because it was filed under state law, when federal law should have precedence.

“This is very much the case to watch because it’s at the Supreme Court,” said Michael Pappas, a professor at the University of Colorado Law School. “Is this something that state law can answer, or does federal law foreclose the opportunity?”

A small army of business groups, conservative legal theorists, Republican lawmakers and others have lined up to support Exxon and Suncor, and the Trump administration is also expected to argue before the court in support of the companies.

Among their claims: Letting the case proceed under state law would unleash legal chaos by opening the door to countless similar suits. “Every locality in the country could sue essentially anyone in the world for contributing to global climate change,” according to a brief supporting the energy industry filed by lawyers for the Trump administration. The Justice Department declined to comment for this article.

About three dozen similar cases have already been filed by state and local governments to date. None has yet gone to trial, and some have been dismissed, but about two dozen remain active.

“The U.S. Supreme Court must allow our case to continue, not bail out the oil companies before hearing the facts,” said Ashley Stolzmann, county commissioner for Boulder, in a statement.

Boulder’s lawsuit argues that the defendants caused physical harm to Colorado by selling fossil fuels, and covered up what they knew about the dangers of climate change in order to continue those sales. The lawsuit also alleges that the companies paid for campaigns to undermine the scientific consensus that burning oil, gas and coal is heating the planet.

Access full gift article, NO PAYWALL.

nytimes.com
u/CampaignOrdinary2771 — 10 days ago
▲ 65 r/scotus

Supreme Court heads into new term with one eye on President Trump

cnn.com
u/cnn — 11 days ago