SCOTUS scores a victory for the People

[scruffy]

This is an important case. Not sure anyone knows what it means yet, but the ramifications could be long term and very important.

The issue is whether Congress can bypass juries and assign cases to "administrative law judges".

The Supreme Court just lit a match and tossed it into dozens of federal agencies

SEC v. Jarkesy could render much of the federal government unable to function.

www.vox.com

The Supreme Court just ruled 6-3 that in many cases administrative law is inappropriate and violated the 6th Amendment.

The lefties seem to disagree.

 

[pknopp]

The dispute in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy turns on whether a hedge fund manager accused of defrauding investors is entitled to a jury trial to determine whether he violated federal securities law, or whether the government acted properly when it tried him before an official known as an “administrative law judge” (ALJ).

The charges against this hedge fund manager, George Jarkesy, are civil and not criminal,

Right there is the real issue. They should be criminal not civil. It's a sad statement on the country where a man can be put in prison for stealing $80 from the local 7/11 but another can defraud people out of millions and only have to pay a fine.

 

[j-mac]

The dispute in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy turns on whether a hedge fund manager accused of defrauding investors is entitled to a jury trial to determine whether he violated federal securities law, or whether the government acted properly when it tried him before an official known as an “administrative law judge” (ALJ).

The charges against this hedge fund manager, George Jarkesy, are civil and not criminal,

Right there is the real issue. They should be criminal not civil. It's a sad statement on the country where a man can be put in prison for stealing $80 from the local 7/11 but another can defraud people out of millions and only have to pay a fine.

Who’s being imprisoned today for stealing? Not anyone I’ve seen…

 

[kyzr]

Good for the USSC

The "Deep State" lost its teeth.

 

[wamose]

This is an important case. Not sure anyone knows what it means yet, but the ramifications could be long term and very important.

The issue is whether Congress can bypass juries and assign cases to "administrative law judges".

The Supreme Court just lit a match and tossed it into dozens of federal agencies

SEC v. Jarkesy could render much of the federal government unable to function.

www.vox.com

The Supreme Court just ruled 6-3 that in many cases administrative law is inappropriate and violated the 6th Amendment.

The lefties seem to disagree.

I agree. Assigning judges like Engeron, Merchan and Lewis should have cured our habit of letting parties assign biased judges to convict political opponents. Unfortunately, I think we're destined to continue to assign crooked judges. So, this might bring us closer to justice. MAGA

 

[j-mac]

Members who reacted to message #3

www.usmessageboard.com

Give me some examples then liar…All we hear is how the thugs ransack stores, and prosecutors like fat Bragg drop charges.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This is an important case. Not sure anyone knows what it means yet, but the ramifications could be long term and very important.

The issue is whether Congress can bypass juries and assign cases to "administrative law judges".

The Supreme Court just lit a match and tossed it into dozens of federal agencies

SEC v. Jarkesy could render much of the federal government unable to function.

www.vox.com

The Supreme Court just ruled 6-3 that in many cases administrative law is inappropriate and violated the 6th Amendment.

The lefties seem to disagree.

The original Constitution of the United States was 4 pages long, today the Federal Register is over 90,000 pages!!

 

[1srelluc]

Now do Chevron.

 

[AMart]

This is an important case. Not sure anyone knows what it means yet, but the ramifications could be long term and very important.

The issue is whether Congress can bypass juries and assign cases to "administrative law judges".

The Supreme Court just lit a match and tossed it into dozens of federal agencies

SEC v. Jarkesy could render much of the federal government unable to function.

www.vox.com

The Supreme Court just ruled 6-3 that in many cases administrative law is inappropriate and violated the 6th Amendment.

The lefties seem to disagree.

Major clubbing and kneecapping of the deep administrative state, lovely.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Now do Chevron.

They just did.

Supreme Court rules for Jan. 6 rioter challenging obstruction charge

The closely watched case focuses on a charge that former President Donald Trump also faces in his election interference case.

www.nbcnews.com

The Supreme Court on Friday ruled in favor of a former police officer who is seeking to throw out an obstruction charge for joining the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021.

The justices in a 6-3 vote on nonideological lines handed a win to defendant Joseph Fischer, who is among hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants — including former President Donald Trump — who have been charged with obstructing an official proceeding over the effort to prevent Congress' certification of President Joe Biden’s election victory.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Now do Chevron.

That one I have mixed feelings about.

Long ago Congress abdicated most of their power to the executive Branch in a number of areas, regulations being one of them as well as the 20 plus year old AUMF that is still in effect today.

If I had any faith in Congress to do their job this could be a good ruling, but I have less faith in them than I do Trump or Biden.

The winner from this ruling right now are corporations that answer to nobody but share holders and quarterly profits.

 

[bendog]

I agree. Assigning judges like Engeron, Merchan and Lewis should have cured our habit of letting parties assign biased judges to convict political opponents. Unfortunately, I think we're destined to continue to assign crooked judges. So, this might bring us closer to justice. MAGA

try to stay on topic. This may help you

Justices limit major SEC tool to penalize fraud - SCOTUSblog

The court ruled on Thursday that the Securities and Exchange Commission’s routine practice of imposing fines in its administrative proceedings, used to penalize securities fraud, violates the Seventh Amendment “right of trial by jury” in all “suits at common law.” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote fo

www.scotusblog.com

 

[JWBooth]

Now do Chevron.

They did, and it was beautiful.

 

[Quasar44]

This is an important case. Not sure anyone knows what it means yet, but the ramifications could be long term and very important.

The issue is whether Congress can bypass juries and assign cases to "administrative law judges".

The Supreme Court just lit a match and tossed it into dozens of federal agencies

SEC v. Jarkesy could render much of the federal government unable to function.

www.vox.com

The Supreme Court just ruled 6-3 that in many cases administrative law is inappropriate and violated the 6th Amendment.

The lefties seem to disagree.

Always the same super low IQ 3 women !!
3 POS who have done zero to earn this super high honor job

 

[bendog]

An interesting development, but I'm not sure what the LONG Term ramifications will be. It's not my area, and Gosuch waxes on, but only joined by Thomas who is perhaps a pariah. As I understand Roberts and the dissenters, the govt may not use EPA bureaucrats, for example, to levy fines. Instead they have to go through Article III Courts.

But what will be the effect? Federal Courts can't handle the added load. Guess who gets to set up Art III Courts .... Congress.

It could be a very real positive ... or I guess negative. From when I did administrative law ... decades ago .... I was impressed by the depth of knowledge federal judges had of what seems to most as arcane law. So, we may just see cost shifting from administrative hearings to actual courts with juries.

forgot the links. Scotusblog is always where to start.

Justices limit major SEC tool to penalize fraud - SCOTUSblog

The court ruled on Thursday that the Securities and Exchange Commission’s routine practice of imposing fines in its administrative proceedings, used to penalize securities fraud, violates the Seventh Amendment “right of trial by jury” in all “suits at common law.” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote fo

www.scotusblog.com

 

[bendog]

Always the same super low IQ 3 women !!
3 POS who have done zero to earn this super high honor job

well you don't. lol

 

[Quasar44]

well you don't. lol

yes I don’t but these 3 evil witches are on because all 3 are far leftist hacks

 

[bendog]

This is an important case. Not sure anyone knows what it means yet, but the ramifications could be long term and very important.

The issue is whether Congress can bypass juries and assign cases to "administrative law judges".

The Supreme Court just lit a match and tossed it into dozens of federal agencies

SEC v. Jarkesy could render much of the federal government unable to function.

www.vox.com

The Supreme Court just ruled 6-3 that in many cases administrative law is inappropriate and violated the 6th Amendment.

The lefties seem to disagree.

The vox link is good.

NOT ALL Cases. We have "public" and "private" actions. Public actions still do not require juries, including the administration of public lands.

It will be interesting to see how this shakes out.

Page 9 of Roberts maj op

In this case, the remedy is all but dispositive. For respondents’ alleged fraud, the SEC seeks civil penalties, a form of monetary relief. While monetary relief can be legal or equitable, money damages are the prototypical commonlaw remedy. See Mertens v. Hewitt Associates, 508 U. S. 248, 255 (1993). What determines whether a monetary remedy is legal is if it is designed to punish or deter the wrongdoer, or, on the other hand, solely to “restore the status quo.” Tull, 481 U. S., at 422. As we have previously explained, “a civil sanction that cannot fairly be said solely to serve a remedial purpose, but rather can only be explained as also serving either retributive or deterrent purposes, is punishment.” Austin v. United States, 509 U. S. 602, 610 (1993) (internal quotation marks omitted). And while courts of equity could order a defendant to return unjustly obtained funds, only courts of law issued monetary penalties to “punish culpable individuals.” Tull, 481 U. S., at 422. Applying these principles, we have recognized that “civil penalt[ies are] a type of remedy at common law thatcould only be enforced in courts of law.” Ibid. The same is true here.
----

But consider the issue of pig and chicken shit, both of which are large issues where I live, and not a small factor in clean water. When is a penalty aimed at recovering costs to the public different from civil law fines? I'm not sure how the gummit is gonna work out that one. But then there's Clive Bundy. He was enjoined by the govt to not do things, which he then did. Can the EPA fine someone and use the fines to restore land to it's "original state."? It will be interesting.

 

[martybegan]

That one I have mixed feelings about.

Long ago Congress abdicated most of their power to the executive Branch in a number of areas, regulations being one of them as well as the 20 plus year old AUMF that is still in effect today.

If I had any faith in Congress to do their job this could be a good ruling, but I have less faith in them than I do Trump or Biden.

The winner from this ruling right now are corporations that answer to nobody but share holders and quarterly profits.

This makes them do their job if they want the executive to do something.

They have to be explicit.

 

[Quasar44]

The Hispanic and black one have an IQ even lowering than me lol