Today in Supreme Court History: June 28, 2010

6/28/2010: McDonald v. City of Chicago is decided.

Comments

[Dan Schiavetta]

More than the usual 8 cases today. End-of-term rush!

McDonald v. City of Chicago, (decided June 28, 2010): Second Amendment right identified as to federally administrated areas in District of Columbia v. Heller also applied to states (i.e., incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment)

National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 567 U.S. 519 (decided June 28, 2012): upheld the Affordable Care Act's mandate for everyone to buy insurance as exercise of Congress's taxing power (which can be used to provide for country's "general welfare")

United States v. Alvarez, 567 U.S. 709 (decided June 28, 2012): Stolen Valor Act (criminalizing false statements about one's military decorations) struck down on First Amendment grounds (though shame still has an effect: remember Admiral Boorda who committed suicide after he was caught in a lie about just one medal on his "fruit salad"?)

United States ex rel. Brown v. Lane, 232 U.S. 598 (decided June 28, 1914): upheld Secretary of the Interior's right to remove "for good cause" all the members of a tribal council elected by tribe members without notice or hearing or right of appeal (i.e., in reality it could be "for bad cause" or "for no cause at all")

Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (decided June 28, 1971): First Amendment not violated by statute allowing public funding of religious schools of secular subject textbooks and materials; established the "Lemon test", where the statute has to 1) have a secular purpose 2) not have the effect of advancing or inhibiting religion and 3) not result in excessive entanglement with religion

North v. Russell, 427 U.S. 328 (decided June 28, 1976): Equal Protection not violated when lower criminal courts in small towns could have nonlawyer judges when in city courts judges had to be lawyers; first level of appeal in small towns was to courts with lawyer judges

Nixon v. Administrator of General Services, 433 U.S. 425 (decided June 28, 1977): Nixon could not deny request for records created while he was President (might have been a different result if he could argue self-incrimination, but he had been pardoned by Ford)

Regents of University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (decided June 28, 1978): race can be used as factor in admission to public university (here, the University of California, Davis Medical School) but quotas are impermissible

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (decided June 28, 1993): expert opinions in federal court (even as to state law claims) have to be based on reliable principles reliably applied; this holding was later encoded as amendment to Fed. R. Evid. 702

Mitchell v. Helms, 530 U.S. 793 (decided June 28, 2000): First Amendment not violated by government loans to religious schools for secular programs

Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914 (decided June 28, 2000): struck down Nebraska statute making "partial birth abortion" illegal even if mother's life endangered; this was held inconsistent with Roe (but is the Nebraska statute really revived under Dobbs?)

Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507 (decided June 28, 2004): U.S. citizen can be detained as an "enemy combatant" but has the right to habeas corpus with due process; effectively superseded by the Military Commissions Act of 2006 which stripped federal courts of jurisdiction

[Syd Henderson]

McDonald seems like a logical extension of Heller. I've always thought these were Ninth Amendment cases as much as Second Amendment cases. (The right to self-defense is surely protected by the Ninth Amendment, even if you defend yourself with a karate kick rather than a gun.)

[Dan Schiavetta]

It surely is, and the Heller decision assumes that ownership of a gun is important to self defense (though most people living in high crime areas disagree). So you're correct about that.

[Dan Schiavetta]

The Nebraska statute was an example of the pro-life lobby's essential cruelty. Late-term abortion is a tragic situation where the fetus is destined to be either stillborn or in a vegetative state. It is a tragedy for the woman from which she will never recover. One can imagine the tearful meeting in which the doctor tells the woman what the situation.

Into the room bursts the Nebraska Republican Party saying "slut!!" "baby killer!"

I don't expect any sympathetic responses here in the comment section either. Pro-lifers are simply cruel, knee-jerk haters.

[Mr. Bumble]

This is lame, even for you.
Only teenage victims?
Never understood the rape and incest characterization. Unless the incest was between consenting adults it was rape.
How do you carry a zygote to term? Do you deliver a single cell?
Zygote stage lasts about 30 hours after which the single cell begins to divide an differentiate.

[Bob from Ohio]

kaw kaw "rape and incest" "eptopic pregnancy" "rape and incest" kaw kaw

Libs are so pathetic, no originality. Herds mewing together.

Its all fear mongering based on a tiny fraction of cases. You would not back a law that banned all abortions except "rape and incest".

[Mr. Bumble]

Didn't realize you also had a medical degree.

[Brett Bellmore]

I see you're still peddling that lie about all late term abortions being medically necessary. You do realize that even the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute doesn't claim that, right?

For later term abortions they show 21% over concerns about fetal health, (Which can include eugenics abortions unrelated to viability.) and 10% personal health. That leaves almost 70% for reasons unrelated to health.

[Dan Schiavetta]

And those 21% which include the situation I’m talking about? That’s the cruelty.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

And those 79% which don't include the situation you're talking about? That's your cruelty.

[Mr. Bumble]

My personal position is irrelevant to the question since I have not yet been proclaimed Supreme Ruler. Further, notwithstanding Dobbs I know of no state which completely bans abortions so what are you arguing for?

[Mr. Bumble]

So glad you feel that MY opinion is important but I am not dodging anything. Dobbs did not ban abortions and so far neither has any state (if one does it will surely be subject to a legal challenge. As for my vote, even if I practiced Democrat multiple voting it woud make no difference since my state is firmly in the pro abortion camp.

[Mr. Bumble]

You are such a judgemental harpy. Sorry that you need me to validate your position.

[Mr. Bumble]

As well you should be. About the only claim "your party" hasn't made re Dobbs is that it's Putin's fault.

[Mr. Bumble]

Queen almathea
June.28.2022 at 10:43 am
Flag Comment Mute User

You’re really embarrassed by your party here aren’t you? I can’t blame you, but if I were reduced to such pathetic cowardice (not being able to answer a straightforward question) I would rethink whatever brought me to that sorry state.
Not embarrassed about anything, especially advocating the murder of helpless zygotes. But enough of that. can't play any longer. Have to go raise my Trump/DeSantis 2024 flag.

[David Nieporent]

Further, notwithstanding Dobbs I know of no state which completely bans abortions so what are you arguing for?

Unless you're employing the "Actually in those states you can still get an abortion to save the mother's life" dodge, this is pretty wrong.

[Dan Schiavetta]

Yes, and I'm sure those same pro-lifers in the Nebraska legislature, having protected those babies, have provided funding for prenatal and postnatal care so that they grow up healthy, or maybe special disabled programs for those born with Down's syndrome . /s/