FireTower

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/17027148

In a major ruling, the Supreme Court on Friday cut back sharply on the power of federal agencies to interpret the laws they administer and ruled that courts should rely on their own interpretion of ambiguous laws.

Quick explanation for those too lazy for links, and haven't see the posts with different coverages.

What's Chevron?

• Chevron was a judicial doctrine where upon review courts would have to accept any reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous law from gov agencies.

What's the Impact of it Being Gone?

• These agencies can still issue ruling but courts don't have to accept them in cases when there is another reasonable interpretation.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-451_7m58.pdf

In a major ruling, the Supreme Court on Friday cut back sharply on the power of federal agencies to interpret the laws they administer and ruled that courts should rely on their own interpretion of ambiguous laws.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-451_7m58.pdf

Considering I made the post Yesterday about the Thursday & Friday rulings, I felt obliged to share that they added another additional day of opinions (July 1st).

MONTPELIER, Vt. (WCAX) - A Vermont man arrested in 2018 for allegedly flipping off a trooper has settled a lawsuit against the Vermont State Police.

In a lawsuit later filed by the ACLU, the group says that after he was detained and questioned, Bombard cursed and did give the trooper the finger. The trooper arrested him for disorderly conduct, a charge that was dismissed a year later.

...the 6-pounder weapon capable of firing a devastating round of chain-shot—two cannonballs connected by a length of chain. The idea was both barrels would fire simultaneously, sending the chain-shot hurtling among enemy combatants. Unfortunately, the first field test of the prototype proved a disaster. The barrels did not fire at exactly the same time, causing the chain-shot to fly wildly off target or the chain to break.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation warned of a rise in scams linked to Mexican Cartels targeting older Americans and timeshare owners.

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy

Issue(s): (1) Whether statutory provisions that empower the Securities and Exchange Commission to initiate and adjudicate administrative enforcement proceedings seeking civil penalties violate the Seventh Amendment; (2) whether statutory provisions that authorize the SEC to choose to enforce the securities laws through an agency adjudication instead of filing a district court action violate the nondelegation doctrine; and (3) whether Congress violated Article II by granting for-cause removal protection to administrative law judges in agencies whose heads enjoy for-cause removal protection.

Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P.

Issue(s): Whether the Bankruptcy Code authorizes a court to approve, as part of a plan of reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, a release that extinguishes claims held by nondebtors against nondebtor third parties, without the claimants’ consent.

Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce

Issue(s): Whether the court should overrule Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, or at least clarify that statutory silence concerning controversial powers expressly but narrowly granted elsewhere in the statute does not constitute an ambiguity requiring deference to the agency.

Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo

Issue(s): Whether the court should overrule Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, or at least clarify that statutory silence concerning controversial powers expressly but narrowly granted elsewhere in the statute does not constitute an ambiguity requiring deference to the agency. [Sic]

Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

Issue(s): Whether a plaintiff’s Administrative Procedure Act claim “first accrues” under 28 U.S.C. § 2401(a) when an agency issues a rule — regardless of whether that rule injures the plaintiff on that date — or when the rule first causes a plaintiff to “suffer[] legal wrong” or be “adversely affected or aggrieved.”

Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency

Issue(s): (1) Whether the court should stay the Environmental Protection Agency’s federal emission reductions rule, the Good Neighbor Plan; and (2) whether the emissions controls imposed by the rule are reasonable regardless of the number of states subject to the rule.

*Moody v. NetChoice, LLC"

Issue(s): (1) Whether the laws’ content-moderation restrictions comply with the First Amendment; and (2) whether the laws’ individualized-explanation requirements comply with the First Amendment.

NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton

Issue(s): Whether the First Amendment prohibits viewpoint-, content-, or speaker-based laws restricting select websites from engaging in editorial choices about whether, and how, to publish and disseminate speech — or otherwise burdening those editorial choices through onerous operational and disclosure requirements.

Fischer v. US

Issue(s): Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit erred in construing 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c), which prohibits obstruction of congressional inquiries and investigations, to include acts unrelated to investigations and evidence.

City of Grants Pass, Oregon v. Johnson

Issue(s): Whether the enforcement of generally applicable laws regulating camping on public property constitutes “cruel and unusual punishment” prohibited by the Eighth Amendment.

Moyle v. US

Issue(s): Whether the Supreme Court should stay the order by the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho enjoining the enforcement of Idaho’s Defense of Life Act, which prohibits abortions unless necessary to save the life of the mother, on the ground that the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act preempts it.

Trump v. US

Issue(s): Whether and if so to what extent does a former president enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/16958292

...the state Supreme Court ruled against allowing what would have been the nation’s first taxpayer-funded, state-sponsored religious public charter school.

Linked article mostly just covers the bare bones and a comment from the state AG.

If you want more flavor here's some different coverages:

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/06/25/oklahoma-high-court-rejects-religious-charter-school-contract-00164843

https://apnews.com/article/public-religious-catholic-charter-school-unconstitutional-oklahoma-e4ef414605094313331a39cc645ede8a

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2024/06/25/oklahoma-state-funded-religious-charter-school-unconstitutional/74205802007/

https://okcfox.com/news/local/oklahoma-supreme-court-rules-st-isidore-charter-school-contract-unconstitutional-public-religious-funds-statewide-virtual-charter-school-board-constitution-establishment-clause-freedom-religious-practice

Direct link to the opinion:

https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/oag/documents/news-documents/2024/june/1058190300-20240625-085757-.pdf

the gun was loaded with 3 drams (0.187 oz or 5.315 grams) of powder to fire a 3 pound (1.36 kg) Bomb Lance for an effective range slightly farther than one could throw a hand lance.

As the name implies, it explodes once it has embedded itself into a whale. The conditions of whale hunting in the arctic led to the invention of the bomb lance. There, the presence of ice floes provide cover for whales to dive under, making it nearly impossible to execute a hand lance kill before the whale can escape. With bomb lances, a well directed shot assures a quick kill.

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/04/30/whaling-gun-bomb-lance/