Supreme Court’s Momentous Decisions: A Game Changer

Historical – decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Its been a momentous run at the U.S. Supreme Court. Over the last three or so years the current court has systematically upended American rules and standards long lived by certain groups. Groups educated under these rules to thrive in a world that literally no longer exists.

Presidential Immunity, Administrative Agency, Abortion, Second Amendment, Affirmative Action.

1. Absolute presidential immunity for the president of the United States: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Donald Trump cannot be prosecuted for official acts. “We conclude that under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of presidential power requires that a former president have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office,” Roberts wrote. TRUMP v. UNITED STATES.
2. Chevron deference is overruled: The U.S. Supreme Court held: “The Administrative Procedures Act requires courts to exercise their independent judgement in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority, and courts may not defer to an agency interpretation of the law simply because a statute is ambiguous; Chevron is overruled. LOPER BRIGHT ENTERPRISES ET AL. v. RAIMONDO, SECRETARY OF COMMERCE, ET AL.
3. Abortion back to the states: Held: The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives. DOBBS, STATE HEALTH OFFICER OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, ET AL. v. JACKSON WOMEN’S HEALTH ORGANIZATION ET AL.
4. The Second Amendment: In Bruen; In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570, and McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742, the Court held that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual right to keep and bear arms for self defense. Under Heller, when the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution preemptively protects that conduct, and to justify a firearm regulation the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSN., INC. v. BRUEN
5. Affirmative Action: Held: Harvard’s and UNC’s admissions programs violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment…. Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it. Accordingly,the Court has held that the Equal Protection Clause applies “without regard to any differences of race, of color, or of nationality”—it is “universal in [its] application.” Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U. S. 356, 369. STUDENTS FOR FAIR ADMISSIONS, INC. v. PRESIDENT AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE
6. Now we are just waiting on the Section 230 cases.

If you believe in more freedom and individual choice then its been a great run for you. If you want big government then its been a devastating blow. The gist of it is that its been a historical run that wont be easily undone and will surely last decades. American freedom is on the path to restoration. The people who lived by these past cases on are the run and scattered to the wind. They will regroup, but its a steep hill upward and forward.

Now we are at the dawn of the digital rights revolution. Brace yourself. Its going to be precedent setting.

Author: John Q. Public

Citizen: AI-art Monger, Cognitive Dissonance Purveyor, Ant pile kicker, Antagonist, Confabulist, Artist, Truth Spreader, World Traveler, Captain, Scholar, J.D.