USCapitol via Wikimedia Commons

Coming soon!

USCapitol via Wikimedia Commons

Another consequential Supreme Court session looms and nominee Amy Coney Barrett could affect the biggest rulings we’re awaiting by cementing a decisive conservative majority if she’s appointed in time.

Barrett is prohibited from voting until she’s confirmed. So far, these are the most likely cases that’ll capture public attention and it goes without saying that the rulings may be affected dramatically if Barrett is confirmed:

The Fate of the Mueller Grand Jury Material

The Supreme Court lies poised to become the final judge in deciding whether congressional Democrats receive permission to see secret grand jury materials from the Mueller probe.

The Trump administration asks the Court to overturn a lower court’s ruling that the Democrat-led House Judiciary Committee receives the grand jury’s classified records and exhibits.

Likewise, the Justice Department is arguing that granting the Democrats request would not only violate grand jury secrecy but set a dangerous precedent.

The Constitutionality of Obamacare

Once again, Obamacare’s fate will come before the Court with the third major challenge to the law’s existence since its passage.

The plaintiffs (at least one dozen Republican-led states) argue that President Trump’s signature tax cuts made a key provision of Obamacare unconstitutional and thus invalidates the law in its entirety.

The Hill has more:

The GOP challengers note that the law’s original design depended on a requirement that most people purchase insurance, and set up a tax penalty for noncompliance. But the Trump tax cuts zeroed-out the penalty, which, according to the litigants, should cause the whole ObamaCare structure to collapse.

Court watchers say that even if Republicans convince the justices that the health requirement provision is now illegal, they may face difficulty convincing the court to strike down the law in its entirety, rather than simply lop off the so-called individual mandate that makes the purchase of coverage compulsory.

Arizona’s Miscast Ballot Rules

Joe Ravi via Wikimedia Commons

Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich and the Arizona GOP successfully petitioned the Court to review the Grand Canyon State’s ballot-collection law.

Simply put, they want the Court to reinstate prior voting restrictions, which a lower court deemed racially biased.

The controversy revolves around how Arizona election administrators handle ballots cast at the wrong polling place. According to the old rules, administrators were compelled to discard entire miscast ballots.

Religious Rights Versus LGBTQ Nondiscrimination

Phil Roeder via Wikimedia Commons

Another case pitting religious liberty against nondiscrimination laws protecting LGBTQ people has made its way to the Court.

A Catholic social services organization aims to resolve its lawsuit with Philadelphia after the city ended its foster-care partnership with the organization upon learning that it didn’t place foster children in the homes of LGBTQ couples. The organization alleges the city unfairly targeted it over its sincere objection to gay marriage.

Reining in Regulatory Power

Erich Salomon via Wikimedia Commons

One month after the election, the Court will decide the fate of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), an agency created in the wake of the Great Recession to mitigate the likelihood of a similar financial crisis in the future. (The Hill)

The agency oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two government-sponsored entities that Congress set up to help expand the U.S. housing market. Among other activities, Fannie and Freddie buy mortgages from private banks and sell them as mortgage-backed securities to investors.

Sitting atop its regulator, the FHFA, is a single director whom the president of the United States cannot fire at will, but only for neglect or misconduct. At issue in the case is whether the director’s relatively insulated status unlawfully usurps the president’s authority over the executive branch, in violation of the Constitution.

EDITORS NOTE: We at AAN appreciate you and your support of our work to counter the mainstream media narrative. Please share our news with your friends and family and encourage them to sign up for our newsletter.

Advertisement
Help President Trump Stop Joe Biden [ACT NOW]



Michael Brigham has written for American Action News since the summer of 2019. His areas of expertise include foreign affairs, government, and politics, but regardless of the subject matter, he has a nose and an insatiable appetite for news. In his free time, he enjoys reading nonfiction, watching a mix of comedies and true crime documentaries, and spending time away from the swamp hiking in the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains.

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *