All posts tagged: Supreme Court of the United States

Temple Law Faculty Reacts to the Trump v. Mazars USA and Trump v. Vance Decisions

On July 9, 2020, Chief Justice John Roberts delivered a 7-2 opinion in Trump v. Mazars USA, refusing to enforce congressional subpoenas that sought President Trump’s tax returns and other financial records about himself, his children, and affiliated businesses. On July 9, 2020, Chief Justice John Roberts delivered a 7-2 opinion in Trump v. Vance, allowing state prosecutors to subpoena financial records concerning President Trump and his businesses. Craig Green Professor of Law Trump v. Mazars USA: Just months before the presidential election, the Supreme Court declined to enforce subpoenas that could have publicly revealed President Trump’s tax returns and financial conduct. Congressional committees demanded various financial records using their “legislative power,” seeking to investigate the need for possible statutory reform about corruption, terrorism, money laundering, or election interference. One committee also claimed oversight power to investigate executive misconduct. Mazars is the first time that any Supreme Court examined a congressional subpoena for a President’s personal information. The majority created a new “balanced approach” that tried to respect the long history of congressional subpoenas without …

The Supreme Court of the United States

The 2016 Election’s Effect on the Supreme Court

Insulation from the winds of political change. Protection of minorities from the majority’s tyranny. Such is the jargon describing the United States Supreme Court’s role in government. Once a judge ascends to our highest court, firmly seated to exercise life-long power, the judge is expected to embrace a duty of impartiality, rendering decisions reflecting “neutral” legal principles, not partisan politics. The reality of judging presents something quite different from this pristine vision. Even in uneventful presidential elections, entanglements emerge between the Supreme Court and politics. But the current election season has produced an alchemy that promises the presidential election extraordinary influence on the Court’s membership and decisions. What makes for special circumstances? Answer: a particularly polarized electorate, the presumptive selection of an outsider candidate for the Republican Party, Justice Antonin Scalia’s death, an aging Court, and the Republican Senate’s unusual success in avoiding confirmation hearings to fill the Scalia vacancy. Assuming, as appears most likely, that the general election will present Donald vs. Hillary, let’s consider how these candidates will approach judicial appointments. We should …

The Supreme Court of the United States

Garland deserves a fair hearing, Sen. Toomey

U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey recently wrote an op-ed to explain why he opposes Chief Judge Merrick Garland’s U.S. Supreme Court nomination. Any senator has the right to oppose judicial nominations, but it is flatly irresponsible for Toomey to deny Garland a hearing or vote until the next president takes office in January 2017, or later. Toomey supports this long wait for the political goal of maintaining a conservative majority on the court, and that is unprecedented. It is bad enough that an eight-justice court cannot resolve the country’s hardest legal problems for a year or longer. However, the long-term impact of Toomey’s position for future nominees could be much more destructive. No Supreme Court nominee in history has been rejected – much less denied a hearing – simply because a Senate majority used its muscle to demand nominees that fit its ideological preference. Toomey’s op-ed described Garland as “a pleasant man with impressive legal training and experience.” “President Obama could have chosen dozens of nominees who would be more politically liberal than Garland, but no …

AUDIO: The Supreme Court’s Loaded Gun

Professor Craig Green joins the Decode DC podcast to talk about the 1944 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Korematsu v. United States, which validated putting American citizens in internment camps during wartime, based on their race or ethnicity. The court has never overturned the Korematsu decision, and as the 2016 presidential election approaches, the debate over the case has new life. Listen to the Podcast

Craig Green Radio Times Merrick Garland

LISTEN: President Obama’s Supreme Court Nomination: A Look at Merrick Garland and Reaction Across Capitol Hill

On March 16th, President Obama announced his nominee for the Supreme Court, Judge Merrick Garland. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has repeatedly said that the next president will decide the next supreme court justice. Professor Craig Green joined WHYY’s RadioTimes to discuss Obama’s selection, its implications, and any potential impact on the 2016 campaign. Listen to the Episode