•   
  •   
  •   

Politics Potential Biden Supreme Court pick joins fray over Trump Jan. 6 subpoena

16:05  28 november  2021
16:05  28 november  2021 Source:   thehill.com

This member of Congress wants everyone to know about the 'dark money scheme' that's 'captured' the Supreme Court

  This member of Congress wants everyone to know about the 'dark money scheme' that's 'captured' the Supreme Court "Democrats have been overlooking the Supreme Court for a long time and are now getting a wake-up call," Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse said."Our Supreme Court is awash in dark money influence," the Rhode Island Democrat said on the Senate floor on Tuesday. "The American people may not be able to see all of the rot, but they can see enough to know that something is rotten over there across First Street at that court.

Ketanji Brown Jackson, seen by Democrats as a top contender for a future Supreme Court vacancy, is one of three judges assigned the weighty task of reviewing former President Trump's bid to block a congressional subpoena for records related to the Jan. 6 attack.

Ketanji Brown Jackson wearing glasses and smiling at the camera: Potential Biden Supreme Court pick joins fray over Trump Jan. 6 subpoena © Getty Images Potential Biden Supreme Court pick joins fray over Trump Jan. 6 subpoena

For Jackson, who has served on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals just six months, her vote in the potentially landmark constitutional case would likely figure as the most distinguishing feature of her judicial record if she ultimately runs the gauntlet of a polarized Supreme Court confirmation process.

Mike Pence joins conservative groups in jumping into abortion debate at Supreme Court

  Mike Pence joins conservative groups in jumping into abortion debate at Supreme Court Mike Pence’s group is one of dozens filing briefs in the most significant abortion case to come become before the Supreme Court in decades.Pence’s group, Advancing American Freedom, is one of dozens of anti-abortion organizations to file briefs in recent days supporting Mississippi’s ban on most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. Nearly 230 GOP lawmakers also filed a brief Thursday, calling on the high court to release Roe's "vise grip on abortion politics.

"Judge Jackson's role in the executive privilege fight will no doubt play a prominent spot in a nomination hearing if, as anticipated, she is ultimately selected as the next nominee for the Supreme Court by President Biden," said Bradley Moss, a national security law expert and partner in the Law Office of Mark S. Zaid.

Jackson is widely considered a leading prospect to replace Justice Stephen Breyer, 83, should he choose to retire during Biden's presidency. On the 2020 campaign trail, Biden vowed to nominate the first Black female Supreme Court justice, and many court watchers see Jackson, a former Breyer clerk, as a fitting successor to the court's oldest justice.

If Jackson, 51, were ultimately seated on the Supreme Court, she would be the youngest member of the minority three-justice liberal wing, along with Justices Sonia Sotomayor, 67, and Elena Kagan, 61.

Mike Pence joins conservative groups in jumping into abortion debate at Supreme Court

  Mike Pence joins conservative groups in jumping into abortion debate at Supreme Court Mike Pence’s group is one of dozens filing briefs in the most significant abortion case to come become before the Supreme Court in decades.Pence’s group, Advancing American Freedom, is one of dozens of anti-abortion organizations to file briefs in recent days supporting Mississippi’s ban on most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. Nearly 230 GOP lawmakers also filed a brief Thursday, calling on the high court to release Roe's "vise grip on abortion politics.

Court watchers who spoke to The Hill said the battle lines over her potential nomination would likely reflect her handling of the clash over Trump administration records.

The upcoming dispute that will be heard by Jackson and two other appellate judges is freighted with political significance: The first-of-its-kind court fight pits congressional Jan. 6 investigators against Trump, a former president and de facto leader of the Republican Party, and could create a key precedent for delineating the political branches of government.

The dispute arose from a subpoena, issued by the House select committee probing the attack on the Capitol, for records related to Trump's time in office, including telephone records and visitor logs.

Earlier this month, Trump's bid to block the request was rebuffed by a federal judge in Washington, D.C. Among the former president's arguments was a claim of executive privilege over the records - an assertion that was seriously weakened by President Biden's refusal to endorse it.

Supreme Court backs Tennessee in water rights dispute with Mississippi

  Supreme Court backs Tennessee in water rights dispute with Mississippi Mississippi sought at least $615 million in damages in a case that could have ramifications for drinking water supplies shared by other states.The case, which yielded the first decision of the Supreme Court's 2021-2022 term, came to the court when Mississippi claimed Tennessee was pumping hundreds of billions of gallons of water from the Middle Claiborne Aquifer located under Mississippi's borders.

Trump promptly appealed to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. His case, Trump v. Thompson, was then randomly assigned to Jackson and two other Democrat-appointed judges, Patricia Millett and Robert Wilkins.

The case, which the court will hear Tuesday, has enormous implications both legally and politically.

"If the courts allow Trump to undermine that investigation, they will have sharply curtailed congressional authority to investigate an effort to thwart one of the most important functions in our constitutional system, and, in that way, they will have effectively put the presidency above and outside the Constitution itself," said Steven D. Schwinn, a professor at the University of Illinois Chicago Law School.

It's not the first time Jackson has been handed a stick of political dynamite.

As a federal district judge in Washington, D.C., she presided over a dispute concerning a congressional subpoena to compel the testimony of Trump's former White House counsel Don McGahn.

In what was the most consequential opinion of her career up to that point, then-U.S. District Judge Jackson sided with the Democratic-led House committee pursuing McGahn, ruling that Trump could not bar his testimony on the basis of absolute testimonial immunity.

Leaders of pro-Trump groups Oath Keepers, Proud Boys subpoenaed in Jan. 6 Capitol riot probe

  Leaders of pro-Trump groups Oath Keepers, Proud Boys subpoenaed in Jan. 6 Capitol riot probe The bipartisan House panel is probing the facts and causes of the riot, when hundreds of former President Donald Trump's supporters stormed the Capitol. © Provided by CNBC Proud Boys members Enrique Tarrio, left, and Joe Biggs march during a December 12, 2020 protest in Washington, D.C. Tarrio was later arrested for acts committed at the protest and Biggs was later arrested for his involvement in the storming of the U.S. Capitol building in Washington. D.C., U.S. Picture taken December 12, 2020.

In a blistering 120-page ruling that rejected Trump's claim, Jackson held that McGahn must cooperate with congressional investigators who were looking into whether Trump had obstructed justice by pressuring McGahn to fire special counsel Robert Mueller as he probed Russian interference in the 2016 election.

"Stated simply, the primary takeaway from the past 250 years of recorded American history is that Presidents are not kings," Jackson wrote in her November 2019 ruling in a circuitous case that would eventually lead to McGahn testifying last June.

But while the two biggest cases of her judicial career share some similarities, the Jan. 6 subpoena is far weightier, legal experts said.

"Trump's sweeping claims in both cases - as to executive privilege and congressional authority to investigate - threaten to fundamentally reshape the balance of powers between the White House and Congress, and threaten core tenants of our constitutional system," Schwinn said. "Although the McGahn case was - and is - quite significant, the case involving congressional efforts to investigate the January 6 insurrection overshadow it."

During her confirmation hearings to the D.C. Circuit last spring, Jackson faced a grilling from Senate Republicans, some of whom trained their fire on her decision in the McGahn case. The Trump case could play an even bigger role if she eventually faces a Supreme Court nomination.

Court watchers who spoke to The Hill emphasized that Jackson has a reputation as a fair, balanced and serious judge, and that the case's political dimensions would not sway her one way or the other.

Still, if Jackson votes against Trump in the pending case, they said, it's a near certainty that Republicans would use it against her if she is eventually tapped for the High Court.

"The chance is 100 percent that Republicans will use her vote against her," said Mark Tushnet, a law professor at Harvard. "The only interesting question is how they would spin a vote for Trump against her - probably to say that it shows that she casts her votes with an eye to how it's going to benefit her."

3 lawyers readying arguments in high court abortion case .
WASHINGTON (AP) — Leading up to Wednesday's major abortion case at the Supreme Court, the justices have heard from thousands of people and organizations urging the court to either save or scrap two historic abortion decisions. But on Wednesday they'll hear from just three lawyers: one representing the state of Mississippi, another representing Mississippi's only abortion clinic and the last representing the Biden administration. For each, it’s a chance to be part of what is likely to be a historic case. The three are scheduled to appear before the justices for just over an hour's worth of arguments in Dobbs v.

usr: 3
This is interesting!