The Next Court Term: Five Cases That May Make News- Part 1

[Draggingtree]

RedState: The Next Court Term: Five Cases That May Make News- Part 1

By: davenj1 (Diary) | July 17th, 2014 at 10:11 AM

Thus far, the United States Supreme Court has accepted a little more than 35 cases for the October 2014 term. If recent terms are any indication, this represents about half their docket. There are several jurisdictional and patent cases in the upcoming term. In this entry, I would like to highlight four cases of interest.

 

The first case is Alabama Democratic Conference vs. Alabama, a case involving redistricting in Alabama. Specifically, it addresses the retention of so called majority-minority districts. This involves state legislative districts. In 1990, a court-drawn map established 27 state house districts and 8 state senate districts which had a black majority population. After the 2000 census, these districts were basically retained. However, after the 2010 census reacting to a state law requiring basically identical populations in all districts, the new boundaries, in effect, created black supermajorities in several districts. Some of the percentages reached as high as 75%.

[Draggingtree]

The Court Next Term: Three More Potential Blockbusters- Part 2

By: davenj1 (Diary) | July 18th, 2014 at 08:06 AM

Making their way to the US Supreme Court are three cases that have the potential to become blockbuster cases. It is difficult to see the Court denying them. They involve Guantanamo detainees, the potential fate of Obamacare, and gay marriage.

 

Recently, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting en banc (but with only seven justices) ruled that the convictions of three Guantanamo detainees were invalid. It involved the charges of aiding and abetting a terrorist organization. Another charge- that of conspiracy- was upheld on separate grounds. One of the detainees was Osama Bin Laden’s communications director who released videos and messages in support of terrorist actions (including 9/11) before and after the attack. After their capture, they were transferred to Guantanamo.

 

While appeals were pending in other cases, Congress in 2006 established the use of military tribunals to try detainees for specified crimes of which these three were convicted. The DC Court ruled that under the Ex Post Facto Clause of the Constitution, trial for those crimes were invalid- including the convictions and ultimate life sentences. The DC Court asserted that the

http://www.redstate.com/diary/davenj1/2014/07/18/court-next-term-three-potential-blockbusters-part-2/

[Draggingtree]

The Sharia Supreme Court

 

By ROD DREHER • July 19, 2014, 10:43 AM

 

Did you know that the five Supreme Court justices who voted in a limited way to protect the religious liberty of the Hobby Lobby owners are in the same category as Boko Haram and ISIS? I read it in this New York Times op-ed by Timothy Egan. Excerpt?:

 

It’s not true that all wars are fought in the name of religion, as some atheists assert. Of 1,723 armed conflicts documented in the three-volume “Encyclopedia of Wars,” only 123, or less than 7 percent, involved a religious cause. Hitler’s genocide, Stalin’s bloody purges and Pol Pot’s mass murders certainly make the case that state-sanctioned killings do not need the invocation of a higher power to succeed.

 

But this year, the ancient struggle of My God versus Your God is at the root of dozens of atrocities, http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/the-sharia-supreme-court/

[Draggingtree]

Lyle Denniston Reporter

Posted Thu, October 2nd, 2014 1:04 pm

 

Fate of non-partisan redistricting on the line

 

The Supreme Court, taking on new controversy on the eve of opening a new Term, on Thursday stepped into an Arizona case that may settle the future of attempts to take the redrawing of congressional districts out of the hands of legislatures to make that effort non-partisan.

 

If the Court does reach the core issues in the case of Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, and it gave itself a couple of options not to do so, it could make a major difference in the degree to which future membership in the House of Representatives is politically polarized. In recent years, state legislatures dominated by one or the other major political party have carved up districts in ways to help their party’s candidates.

The Arizona case was one of eleven that the Justices added to their docket for decision in the Term that formally opens next Monday.

 

However, in 2000, the voters of the state-approved “Proposition 106,” an amendment to the state constitution assigning that task to an independent, five-member body

http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/10/fate-of-non-partisan-redistricting-on-the-line/