(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court, nearing the end of its term, is poised to soon deliver rulings in high-profile cases on everything from presidential power to abortion access.
The justices will release opinions on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday this week. It will mark the first time in at least a decade the justices have done three opinion days in a row.
The timing means key decisions, some with enormous consequences for the 2024 campaign, could be handed down just before President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump meet on stage in Atlanta for their first debate.
Blockbuster cases still to be resolved include whether Trump is immune from criminal prosecution on charges stemming from his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss; whether hundreds of Jan. 6 rioters were improperly charged with obstruction; and whether a federal law protecting emergency care overrides a state abortion ban.
Here is a deeper dive into the some of the dozen cases pending before the nation’s high court.
Presidential immunity
In what is likely the most consequential case before the court this term, the justices will decide whether a former president is shielded from criminal liability for “official acts” taken while in the White House.
In Trump v. United States, Trump is seeking to quash the federal election subversion case brought by special counsel Jack Smith by claiming immunity.
Lower courts flatly rejected Trump’s argument, but the justices appeared open to the idea of some level of immunity for former presidents when they heard arguments in April. Their questioning largely focused on what types of official acts would be protected and which would not.
How the justices make that determination will set a new standard for presidential power, and will affect whether Trump stands trial for his unprecedented actions in the aftermath of the 2020 election.
Jan. 6 obstruction charges
A felony obstruction charge used by federal prosecutors against alleged Jan. 6 rioters is being put to the test in Fischer v. United States.
A former Pennsylvania police officer charged for his alleged participation in the U.S. Capitol attack is challenging the government’s use of a 2002 law enacted to prevent the destruction of evidence in financial crimes. The law includes a sweeping provision for any conduct that “otherwise obstructs, influences or impedes an official proceeding.”
The Supreme Court appeared divided on whether the government’s broad interpretation of the law should stand or be narrowed, with conservatives on the bench questioning the lack of prosecutions under the law for matters unrelated to financial or documentary crimes.
The court’s decision could upend hundreds of Jan. 6 cases, including Trump’s. Felony obstruction is one of the four charges the former president is facing in his federal election subversion case.
Idaho abortion ban and emergency care
In Moyle v. United States, the question before the court is whether a federal law requiring emergency rooms to provide stabilizing care to all patients overrides Idaho’s strict abortion ban.
Idaho’s law prohibits nearly all abortions, with exceptions in cases of rape, incest or when the mother’s life is at risk.
The Biden administration argues the law is conflict with the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, or EMTALA, which requires hospitals receiving Medicare funds to provide “necessary stabilizing treatment.”
The case marks the first time the court is evaluating state-level abortion restrictions passed after the fall of Roe v. Wade. Since the court’s conservative majority struck down Roe, 21 states have successfully enacted restrictions or bans on abortion and 14 of those states have total bans with few exceptions.
Homeless encampment ban
In the most significant case on homelessness in decades, the justices are weighing whether a local ordinance to bar anyone without a permanent residency from sleeping outside amounts to “cruel and unusual” punishment under the Eighth Amendment.
Officials in Grants Pass, Oregon argue the ordinance is necessary to protect public spaces and encourage a growing tide of unhoused residents to seek shelter. A lower court ruled that punishing homeless people with fines and the possibility of jail time for public camping when they have nowhere else to go is unconstitutional.
A majority of Supreme Court justices seemed to favor the city’s arguments when it heard the case in April.
Social media regulation and free speech
The Supreme Court will determine whether state laws restricting how social media companies moderate content violate the First Amendment.
The measures from Florida and Texas seek to place limits on how the private companies can manage user accounts and feeds on their platforms. Both were passed amid conservative concerns that Facebook and X, formerly known as Twitter, were censoring viewpoints on their site based on politics.
In another case, Murthy v. Missouri, the justices will decide if the Biden administration went too far in communicating with social media companies about misinformation on their sites about COVID-19 and the 2020 election.
Republican-led states argued the government’s conduct amounted to illegally coercion, while the administration argued their contact with the companies was aimed at protecting national security and public health.
The justices appeared likely to reject the states’ challenge and side with the Biden administration when it heard arguments in March.
(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court, nearing the end of its term, is poised to soon deliver rulings in high-profile cases on everything from presidential power to abortion access.
The justices is releasing opinions on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday this week. It will mark the first time in at least a decade the justices have done three opinion days in a row.
The timing means key decisions, some with enormous consequences for the 2024 campaign, could be handed down just as President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump meet on stage in Atlanta for their first debate.
Blockbuster cases still to be resolved include whether Trump is immune from criminal prosecution on charges stemming from his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss and whether alleged Jan. 6 rioters were improperly charged with obstruction.
Here is a deeper dive into the some of the remaining cases pending before the nation’s high court.
Presidential immunity
In what is likely the most consequential case before the court this term, the justices will decide whether a former president is shielded from criminal liability for “official acts” taken while in the White House.
In Trump v. United States, Trump is seeking to quash the federal election subversion case brought by special counsel Jack Smith by claiming immunity.
Lower courts flatly rejected Trump’s argument, but the justices appeared open to the idea of some level of immunity for former presidents when they heard arguments in April. Their questioning largely focused on what types of official acts would be protected and which would not.
How the justices make that determination will set a new standard for presidential power, and will affect whether Trump stands trial for his unprecedented actions in the aftermath of the 2020 election.
Jan. 6 obstruction charges
A felony obstruction charge used by federal prosecutors against alleged Jan. 6 rioters is being put to the test in Fischer v. United States.
A former Pennsylvania police officer charged for his alleged participation in the U.S. Capitol attack is challenging the government’s use of a 2002 law enacted to prevent the destruction of evidence in financial crimes. The law includes a sweeping provision for any conduct that “otherwise obstructs, influences or impedes an official proceeding.”
The Supreme Court appeared divided on whether the government’s broad interpretation of the law should stand or be narrowed, with conservatives on the bench questioning the lack of prosecutions under the law for matters unrelated to financial or documentary crimes.
The court’s decision could upend hundreds of Jan. 6 cases, including Trump’s. Felony obstruction is one of the four charges the former president is facing in his federal election subversion case.
Idaho abortion ban and emergency care
The Supreme Court on Thursday issued a ruling that will allow emergency abortion access in Idaho, for now, despite the state’s near-total ban on the procedure.
In Moyle v. United States, the question before the court was whether a federal law requiring emergency rooms to provide stabilizing care to all patients overrides Idaho law prohibiting nearly all abortions except in reported cases of rape, incest or when the mother’s life is at risk.
The Biden administration argued the law is conflict with the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, or EMTALA, which requires hospitals receiving Medicare funds to provide “necessary stabilizing treatment.”
The court dismissed the case without considering the core issues, instead sending it back to the lower courts for further proceedings.
The case marked the first time the court heard arguments about state-level abortion restrictions passed after the fall of Roe v. Wade. Since the court’s conservative majority struck down Roe, 21 states have successfully enacted restrictions or bans on abortion and 14 of those states have total bans with few exceptions.
Homeless encampment ban
In the most significant case on homelessness in decades, the justices are weighing whether a local ordinance to bar anyone without a permanent residency from sleeping outside amounts to “cruel and unusual” punishment under the Eighth Amendment.
Officials in Grants Pass, Oregon argue the ordinance is necessary to protect public spaces and encourage a growing tide of unhoused residents to seek shelter. A lower court ruled that punishing homeless people with fines and the possibility of jail time for public camping when they have nowhere else to go is unconstitutional.
A majority of Supreme Court justices seemed to favor the city’s arguments when it heard the case in April.
Social media regulation and free speech
The Supreme Court will determine whether state laws restricting how social media companies moderate content violate the First Amendment.
The measures from Florida and Texas seek to place limits on how the private companies can manage user accounts and feeds on their platforms. Both were passed amid conservative concerns that Facebook and X, formerly known as Twitter, were censoring viewpoints on their site based on politics.
In another case, Murthy v. Missouri, the justices on Wednesday rejected a challenge to the Biden administration’s communication with social media companies about misinformation on their sites about COVID-19 and the 2020 election.
Republican-led states and five individual users had argued the government’s conduct amounted to illegally coercion, while the administration argued their contact with the companies was aimed at protecting national security and public health.
The justices struck down the challenge, stating the plaintiffs did not have legal standing to sue the government because they could not show the government outreach directly resulted in censorship of their views.
Anderson .Paak is bringing a taste of Malibu to the rest of the U.S., and we’re not talking about the city. He’s set to embark on a 14-date tour in the fall that will support his second studio album, released back in 2016. Fans can expect to hear the whole album played in full, and see performances from special guests Maurice Brown and GAWD.
The tour kicks off on Sept. 18 in Bend, Oregon, and comes to a close on Oct. 13 in Atlanta. Other cities on the trek include LA, Las Vegas, Chicago, Philadelphia and Columbia, Maryland.
Tickets for the Malibu shows go on sale to the public on Friday at 9 a.m. local time via andersonpaak.com, with presales starting as early as Wednesday at 9 a.m. local time.
— A Boogie wit Da Hoodie has earned his first-ever Diamond certification with “Drowning” featuring Kodak Black, which has successfully sold 10 million copies. He was presented with a plaque during his sold-out hometown show at New York’s Madison Square Garden on Monday. He brought 50 Cent, Fabolous, Cash Cobain, Mary J. Blige and more artists onstage to perform.
— Ready, Set, Love! Gunna is considering adding a few love songs to his new album. “I might do this love album,” he told Spotify’s A Day In The Life. “Not all love songs but just a pocket of songs that’s more intimate,” Gunna clarified. “I think that’s going to be the next album for me.”
–Speaking of albums, Metro Boomin may release just one more on streaming services. He explained why via a shared tweet that read, “A fan needs to stream an artist’s music 20 times a day for a whole year for that artist to make $25 from a fan.”
— Toni Braxton has added more dates to her Love & Laughter tour with Cedric the Entertainer. The six new dates at The Chelsea at The Cosmopolitan of Las Vegas are: Aug. 9 and Aug. 10, Oct. 18 and Oct. 19, and Dec. 20 and Dec. 21. Tickets for the added shows will go on sale Wednesday at 10 a.m. PT.
— Rapper Julio Foolio, born Charles Jones, has died at age 26. WTVG reports he was killed in a shooting Sunday in Tampa, Florida, where he’d gone to celebrate his birthday. A law firm representing Julio says he was ambushed following his involvement in an accident that took place in his hotel’s parking lot. He was known for his song “Voo Doo.”
(WASHINGTON) — With only days to go until he faces off against President Joe Biden in Thursday’s CNN debate, former President Donald Trump is escalating his demands that Biden take a pre-debate drug test, something the Biden campaign rejected as “desperate.”
That’s in addition to a growing list of complaints Trump and his campaign are making about CNN, accusing the network and its moderators of being biased.
“DRUG TEST FOR CROOKED JOE BIDEN??? I WOULD, ALSO, IMMEDIATELY AGREE TO ONE!!!” Trump wrote on his social media platform Monday afternoon and later fundraising off his call.
Trump has called for Biden to be drug-tested as early as April, saying he would debate Biden “anytime” and “anywhere” if the president takes a drug test. He has escalated such attacks since he and Biden agreed to debate in May, citing Biden’s strong showing in his State of the Union address in March.
At his recent rally in Philadelphia on Saturday, Trump continued to push the baseless claim that if Biden did well on Thursday night, it would be because he was taking performance-enhancing drugs.
“So, a little before debate time, he gets a shot in the ass — they want to strengthen him up so he comes out, he’ll come out, okay, I say he’ll come out all jacked up, right? All jacked up,” Trump told the crowd.
The Biden campaign quickly dismissed Trump’s demand, saying he would not submit to a drug test.
“Donald Trump is so scared of being held accountable for his toxic agenda of attacking reproductive freedom and cutting Social Security that he and his allies are resorting to desperate, obviously false lies,” a Biden campaign spokesman said.
“Trump’s going to talk trash like that all the time because that’s what he does. The other day you may remember he was trying to question our president’s mental acuity and he could not remember the name of his own doctor so tell President Trump, bring whatever he’s got — President Biden will be standing there, ready for him,” Biden campaign adviser Mitch Landrieu said on CNN. (Trump had referred to his White House physician Ronny Jackson as Ronny Johnson at a campaign rally.)
Calling for drug tests has been a tactic Trump has used repeatedly for years. He previously called on Biden to take a drug test before their 2020 debates, suggesting without evidence that Biden must have been on “performance-enhancing drugs” during that year’s Democratic primary. In 2016, Trump made similar unsubstantiated claims about Hillary Clinton.
At the same time, Trump and his campaign also are continuing to level accusations that CNN will favor President Biden on Thursday, a charge fueled by Trump’s national press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, during an appearance on CNN that was cut short Monday.
On “CNN This Morning,” anchor Kasie Hunt attempted to get Leavitt to answer questions about the Trump campaign’s debate preparations and expectations.
Leavitt, instead, tried to attack CNN and debate moderator Jake Tapper.
She was quickly cut off twice by Hunt who said she wouldn’t give Leavitt a platform to criticize her colleagues. After Leavitt continued her attacks against the CNN debate moderators, she was dropped from the segment.
“You come on my show, you respect my colleagues. Period. I don’t care what side of the aisle you stand on, as my track record clearly shows,” Hunt posted on X after the show wrapped.
“You cut off my microphone for bringing up the debate moderator’s history of anti-Trump lies,” Leavitt responded on X. “This proved our point that President Trump will not be treated fairly on Thursday. Yet he is still willing to go into this 3-1 fight to bring his winning message to the American people, and he will win.”
In a statement to ABC News, a CNN spokesperson called Jake Tapper and Dana Bash “well respected veteran journalists” with extensive experience moderating major political debates.
“There are no two people better equipped to co-moderate a substantial and fact-based discussion and we look forward to the debate on June 27 in Atlanta.”
On the campaign trail, Trump also has complained about the debate being hosted by CNN as well as about the rules he and his campaign agreed to, including not having an audience and the mics being muted when it’s not the candidate’s turn speaking.
“You know, I agreed to the debates. They came up to me and they said, ‘We’re going to do a debate. We’d like to challenge you to a debate.’ But they didn’t want me to accept. So, they gave me something that I couldn’t accept,” said Trump at a rally in Racine, Wisconsin, last week.
“They thought I would say, no, I don’t want to do because CNN is so, you know, it’s fake news. But I think maybe they’ll be honest,” Trump said. “I think fake Tapper would really help himself if it were honest. But you’ll see immediately if it is or not.”
(WASHINGTON) — With only days to go until he faces off against President Joe Biden in Thursday’s CNN debate, former President Donald Trump is escalating his demands that Biden take a pre-debate drug test, something the Biden campaign rejected as “desperate.”
That’s in addition to a growing list of complaints Trump and his campaign are making about CNN, accusing the network and its moderators of being biased.
“DRUG TEST FOR CROOKED JOE BIDEN??? I WOULD, ALSO, IMMEDIATELY AGREE TO ONE!!!” Trump wrote on his social media platform Monday afternoon and later fundraising off his call.
Trump has called for Biden to be drug-tested as early as April, saying he would debate Biden “anytime” and “anywhere” if the president takes a drug test. He has escalated such attacks since he and Biden agreed to debate in May, citing Biden’s strong showing in his State of the Union address in March.
At his recent rally in Philadelphia on Saturday, Trump continued to push the baseless claim that if Biden did well on Thursday night, it would be because he was taking performance-enhancing drugs.
“So, a little before debate time, he gets a shot in the ass — they want to strengthen him up so he comes out, he’ll come out, okay, I say he’ll come out all jacked up, right? All jacked up,” Trump told the crowd.
The Biden campaign quickly dismissed Trump’s demand, saying he would not submit to a drug test.
“Donald Trump is so scared of being held accountable for his toxic agenda of attacking reproductive freedom and cutting Social Security that he and his allies are resorting to desperate, obviously false lies,” a Biden campaign spokesman said.
“Trump’s going to talk trash like that all the time because that’s what he does. The other day you may remember he was trying to question our president’s mental acuity and he could not remember the name of his own doctor so tell President Trump, bring whatever he’s got — President Biden will be standing there, ready for him,” Biden campaign adviser Mitch Landrieu said on CNN. (Trump had referred to his White House physician Ronny Jackson as Ronny Johnson at a campaign rally.)
Calling for drug tests has been a tactic Trump has used repeatedly for years. He previously called on Biden to take a drug test before their 2020 debates, suggesting without evidence that Biden must have been on “performance-enhancing drugs” during that year’s Democratic primary. In 2016, Trump made similar unsubstantiated claims about Hillary Clinton.
At the same time, Trump and his campaign also are continuing to level accusations that CNN will favor President Biden on Thursday, a charge fueled by Trump’s national press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, during an appearance on CNN that was cut short Monday.
On “CNN This Morning,” anchor Kasie Hunt attempted to get Leavitt to answer questions about the Trump campaign’s debate preparations and expectations.
Leavitt, instead, tried to attack CNN and debate moderator Jake Tapper.
She was quickly cut off twice by Hunt who said she wouldn’t give Leavitt a platform to criticize her colleagues. After Leavitt continued her attacks against the CNN debate moderators, she was dropped from the segment.
“You come on my show, you respect my colleagues. Period. I don’t care what side of the aisle you stand on, as my track record clearly shows,” Hunt posted on X after the show wrapped.
“You cut off my microphone for bringing up the debate moderator’s history of anti-Trump lies,” Leavitt responded on X. “This proved our point that President Trump will not be treated fairly on Thursday. Yet he is still willing to go into this 3-1 fight to bring his winning message to the American people, and he will win.”
In a statement to ABC News, a CNN spokesperson called Jake Tapper and Dana Bash “well respected veteran journalists” with extensive experience moderating major political debates.
“There are no two people better equipped to co-moderate a substantial and fact-based discussion and we look forward to the debate on June 27 in Atlanta.”
On the campaign trail, Trump also has complained about the debate being hosted by CNN as well as about the rules he and his campaign agreed to, including not having an audience and the mics being muted when it’s not the candidate’s turn speaking.
“You know, I agreed to the debates. They came up to me and they said, ‘We’re going to do a debate. We’d like to challenge you to a debate.’ But they didn’t want me to accept. So, they gave me something that I couldn’t accept,” said Trump at a rally in Racine, Wisconsin, last week.
“They thought I would say, no, I don’t want to do because CNN is so, you know, it’s fake news. But I think maybe they’ll be honest,” Trump said. “I think fake Tapper would really help himself if it were honest. But you’ll see immediately if it is or not.”
