Tell me about these attractions

[webfact]

Once in office, Trump can quickly alter Supreme Court agenda

By MARK SHERMAN

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — Even before Donald Trump chooses a Supreme Court nominee, the new president can take steps to make several contentious court cases go away.

 

Legal challenges involving immigration, climate change, cost-free contraceptive care and transgender rights all could be affected, without any help from Congress.

 

The cases turn on Obama administration policies that rely on the president's pen, regulations or decisions made by federal agencies. And what one administration can do, the next can undo.

 

It is not uncommon for the court's docket to change when one party replaces the other in the White House. That change in direction is magnified by the high-court seat Trump will get to fill after Senate Republicans refused to consider President Barack Obama's nomination of Judge Merrick Garland.

 

"We were hoping we'd be looking forward to a progressive majority on the Supreme Court. After the election results, there is a new reality," said Elizabeth Wydra, president of the liberal Constitutional Accountability Center.

 

The Supreme Court already is set to consider a case involving a transgender teen who was born female, but identifies as a male and wants to use the boys' bathroom at his Virginia high school. When the federal appeals court in Richmond ruled in student Gavin Grimm's favor this year, it relied on a determination by the U.S. Education Department that federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in education also applies to gender identity.

 

The new administration could withdraw the department's guidance, which could cause the justices to return the case to the lower courts to reach their own decision about whether the law requires schools to allow students to use bathrooms and locker rooms based on their gender identity.

 

"It is possible, maybe even likely, that if the first question went away, then the court would send case back to the 4th circuit" in Richmond, said Steven Shapiro, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, which represents Grimm.

 

Trump already has pledged to undo Obama's plan to shield millions of people living in the country illegally from deportation and to make them eligible for work permits. The Supreme Court, down to eight members after Justice Antonin Scalia's death in February, split 4 to 4 in June over the plan. The tie vote effectively killed the plan for Obama's presidency because lower federal courts had previously blocked it.

 

But the issue remains a live one in the legal system, and supporters of the Obama plan had hoped that a new Clinton administration would press forward.

 

Now, though, all Trump has to do is rescind the Obama team's actions, which would leave the courts with nothing to decide.

A similar fate may be in store for the current administration's efforts to get cost-free birth control to women who are covered by health plans from religiously-affiliated educational and charitable organizations. The justices issued an unusual order in the spring that directed lower courts across the country to seek a compromise to end the legal dispute. The groups already can opt out of paying for contraception, but they say that option leaves them complicit in providing government-approved contraceptives to women covered by their plans.

 

The new administration could be more willing to meet the groups' demands, which would end the controversy.

 

Women's contraceptives are among a range of preventive services that the Obama health overhaul requires employers to cover in their health plans. All of that now is at risk, since Trump has called for repeal of the health care law.

 

Obama's Clean Power Plan, calling for cuts in carbon emissions from coal-burning power plants, also could be rolled back once Trump is in office.

 

The federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., is considering a challenge by two-dozen mostly Republican-led states that say Obama overstepped his authority. The Trump team could seek to undo the rules put in place by the Environmental Protection Agency and it could seek a delay in the litigation while doing so, said Sean Donahue, a lawyer for the Environmental Defense Fund. Trump's EPA would have to propose its own rules, which allow for public comment and legal challenges from those who object, Donahue said.

 

Environmental groups effectively fought rules that they said eased pollution limits during George W. Bush's presidency.

 

As some issues pushed by Obama recede in importance, others that have been important to conservatives may get renewed interest at the court. Among those are efforts to impose new restrictions on public-sector labor unions and to strike down more campaign-finance limits, including the ban on unlimited contributions to political parties.

 

-- © Associated Press 2016-11-14

[kamahele]

But will he actually get to fill the vacancy?

[pookiki]

48 minutes ago, kamahele said:

But will he actually get to fill the vacancy?

With the Republicans in control of the House and Senate, I'd say the Vegas odds are overwhelmingly in favor of Trump.  As why hard, eh bruddah?

[kamahele]

10 minutes ago, pookiki said:

With the Republicans in control of the House and Senate, I'd say the Vegas odds are overwhelmingly in favor of Trump.  As why hard, eh bruddah?

One would think that but in the Senate they need a super majority of 60, which they do not have. They would need several Democrats to cross over and vote in favor. 

[atyclb]

31 minutes ago, kamahele said:

One would think that but in the Senate they need a super majority of 60, which they do not have. They would need several Democrats to cross over and vote in favor. 

 

given all the obama/dem transgender rights actions a bit of  "cross over" should not be a problem

[pookiki]

46 minutes ago, kamahele said:

One would think that but in the Senate they need a super majority of 60, which they do not have. They would need several Democrats to cross over and vote in favor. 

Basically, you are saying that you want the Democrats to act like they are Republicans and block any nominee that Trump puts forward.  There might be some minor wheeling and dealing, but a Trump nominee will be eventually approved.  And the 60 vote requirement is to end a filibuster.

Edited November 14, 2016 by pookiki
forgot something

[zaphod reborn]

Trump has a single item litmus test for appointing SCOTUS justices:  Will you rule in my favor on every lawsuit in which I am a party?  Trump cares about nothing but himself.  He has hundreds of lawsuits percolating through the judicial system, some for non-payment of contractual obligations, others for fraud.  He needs to cleanse that debt, because, in reality, he isn't that wealthy, probably only being worth the same money that he inherited, and not the billions that his star-struck fans believe.

[Grubster]

2 hours ago, zaphod reborn said:

Trump has a single item litmus test for appointing SCOTUS justices:  Will you rule in my favor on every lawsuit in which I am a party?  Trump cares about nothing but himself.  He has hundreds of lawsuits percolating through the judicial system, some for non-payment of contractual obligations, others for fraud.  He needs to cleanse that debt, because, in reality, he isn't that wealthy, probably only being worth the same money that he inherited, and not the billions that his star-struck fans believe.

Who cares, He be the boss now bro.

[sgtsabai]

Hopefully the Democrats will apply the same resolve and policy the Republicans have for the last 8 yrs. Nothing passes if it comes from the fascist or his "party". While in seemingly good health, much depends on the only real justice on the used to be Supreme Court, Ruth Ginsburg.

[TonyClifton]

What a ridiculous article.  Of course he can alter the Supreme Court, and that is exactly why I voted for him.  

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies removed. 

[Andaman Al]

4 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

His star-struck fans and Forbes magazine. There is no doubt at all that he is worth billions and will choose who is on the Supreme Court for the next 4 to 8 years.

Why are you so confident that Trump will be choosing who is on the Supreme Court? The Republicans filibustered everything Obama did, don't you think the Dems will now return the favour? It takes 60 votes in the senate to stop a filibuster. I reckon that by the time Trump leaves there will be nobody new in the Supreme Court and nothing will be achieved for the USA that is positive in any way over the next 4 years.

[Ulysses G.]

13 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

Why are you so confident that Trump will be choosing who is on the Supreme Court? 

 

Read it and weep. One way - or the other - Trump will get his Supreme Court picks.

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/gop-supreme-court-filibuster-nuclear-option-231582

[Daryle]

Why are you so confident that Trump will be choosing who is on the Supreme Court? The Republicans filibustered everything Obama did, don't you think the Dems will now return the favour? It takes 60 votes in the senate to stop a filibuster. I reckon that by the time Trump leaves there will be nobody new in the Supreme Court and nothing will be achieved for the USA that is positive in any way over the next 4 years.

Republicans now control the presidency, the Senate, and the House. So times are changing. No change of a filibuster stopping them this time around.

Sent from my SM-T530 using Tapatalk

[Andaman Al]

1 hour ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Read it and weep. One way - or the other - Trump will get his Supreme Court picks.

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/gop-supreme-court-filibuster-nuclear-option-231582

 

Well that does not have me weeping, there are way to many 'if' and 'buts' and 'maybes' in that. IF the Republicans went 'Nuclear' and change the 60 vote rule on the filibuster then that could come back to bite them very badly as the Republicans will pay for Trumps incompetency at the mid terms, of that I have no doubt. It is WAY to risky. So unless Trump is going to have someone 'terminate' (that's funny, think about it) the 3 old guys on the SCOTUS then its not an option that they will take. It would be like the Sword of Damocles !

 

 

55 minutes ago, Daryle said:

 

 

Republicans now control the presidency, the Senate, and the House. So times are changing. No change of a filibuster stopping them this time around.

Sent from my SM-T530 using Tapatalk
 

 

 

 

It does not matter what they have. Don't you understand. When the Democrats in the Senate filibuster a Republican bill it will take 60 votes in the Senate to cancel the Filibuster. ANY single Senator can filibuster a bill. The Republicans do not have those 60 votes. So you guys watch and weep and see what it is like for the opposition to make your Government sterile, just as the Republicans did to Obama on EVERY bill he tried to pass. In the last 8 years the Republicans have been a national disgrace.

 

This is the type of immoral slug you currently have representing your Government.

 

 

Not fit to lick my boots. But hey go-ahead if this is the type of guy you admire, be my guest, we all have a moral compass, some are just much better quality than others.

 

 

Edited January 9, 2017 by Andaman Al

[Daryle]

 
It does not matter what they have. Don't you understand. When the Democrats in the Senate filibuster a Republican bill it will take 60 votes in the Senate to cancel the Filibuster. ANY single Senator can filibuster a bill. The Republicans do not have those 60 votes. So you guys watch and weep and see what it is like for the opposition to make your Government sterile, just as the Republicans did to Obama on EVERY bill he tried to pass. In the last 8 years the Republicans have been a national disgrace.
 
This is the type of immoral slug you currently have representing your Government.
 

 
Not fit to lick my boots. But hey go-ahead if this is the type of guy you admire, be my guest, we all have a moral compass, some are just much better quality than others.
 
 

Take a chill pill Al, neither of us will have any say in how this is going to work out!

Sent from my SM-T530 using Tapatalk