Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

blondebanshee

(353 posts)
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 03:20 PM Jun 2019

Justice Alito just wrote the most terrifying sentence to appear in a Supreme Court opinion in years

Stephen Bannon is about to see his dreams come true.

On the surface, Gundy v. United States is a victory for a vibrant government and the democratic constitutional order that’s prevailed in the United States for many decades. In it, a narrow majority of the court rejects an aggressive legal challenge that could render much of the executive branch of government unconstitutional.

Scratch just one inch below the surface, however, and Gundy is the harbinger of an anti-government revolution. Though the Supreme Court voted 5-3 to maintain the power of Congress to delegate the details of policymaking to executive branch agencies, Justice Samuel Alito’s vote with the majority rests on the thinnest of reeds — and he is quite explicit that he is eager to join the revolution in a future case.

The outcome in Gundy almost certainly hinges on the fact that the court’s newest member, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, was days before his confirmation vote when Gundy was argued, so he sat this case out and denied his fellow conservatives the fifth vote they needed to light much of the federal government on fire. But he won’t be absent in the next case, or the one after that, or the one after that.

The revolution is coming, and it is likely to take with it much of the regulatory structure that protects workers, patients, victims of discrimination, and the environment.


[link:https://thinkprogress.org/justice-alito-just-wrote-the-most-terrifying-sentence-to-appear-in-a-supreme-court-opinion-in-years-83a535d3ce58/|

THIS IS FRIGHTENING

53 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Justice Alito just wrote the most terrifying sentence to appear in a Supreme Court opinion in years (Original Post) blondebanshee Jun 2019 OP
Government...meet bath tub. Zoonart Jun 2019 #1
repubes have long greedily craved a chance to Starve The Beast Achilleaze Jun 2019 #2
Clickbait headlines are so annoying jberryhill Jun 2019 #3
+100 cyclonefence Jun 2019 #4
Justice Alito just wrote, "Stephen Bannon is about to see his dreams come true." Ptah Jun 2019 #7
Well, that's a heck of a line for a decision jberryhill Jun 2019 #9
No he didn't. former9thward Jun 2019 #11
You're not the boss of me. Ptah Jun 2019 #13
You should not be making stuff like that up. Blue_true Jun 2019 #33
Okay! Ptah Jun 2019 #34
Link? Polybius Jun 2019 #53
This message was self-deleted by its author Rainbow Droid Jun 2019 #8
"If a majority of this Court were willing to reconsider the approach we have taken for the past 84 Celerity Jun 2019 #10
Danke jberryhill Jun 2019 #16
bitte Celerity Jun 2019 #18
His point did not seem to be what you made it out. Blue_true Jun 2019 #38
I didn't make anything out, I just cut n pasted from the article to answer the question Celerity Jun 2019 #40
Then I apologize. But I stay with the point that I made. nt Blue_true Jun 2019 #47
fine by me Celerity Jun 2019 #48
I'm not clicking through. lagomorph777 Jun 2019 #24
I just did a post pointing that out. I conclude there is no "frightening" sentence by Alito. Honeycombe8 Jun 2019 #41
So once idiots like Brett and Samuel are done taking apart our regulatory Farmer-Rick Jun 2019 #5
Justice Alito just wrote, "Stephen Bannon is about to see his dreams come true." Ptah Jun 2019 #6
No he didn't. former9thward Jun 2019 #12
You're still not the boss of me. Ptah Jun 2019 #14
Thank god. former9thward Jun 2019 #15
I don't believe in god Ptah Jun 2019 #19
How can Ptah not believe in the gods? jberryhill Jun 2019 #20
I am the chaos. Ptah Jun 2019 #23
Okay, well, just don't leave your dirty dishes in the sink jberryhill Jun 2019 #25
From the article... Duppers Jun 2019 #36
K&R bdamomma Jun 2019 #17
WTF is WRONG with these people? OMGWTF Jun 2019 #21
Alito was one of the original supporters of the unitary executive concept. The Wizard Jun 2019 #22
If you want to stop this threat to government and the Constitution... sarabelle Jun 2019 #26
Not just for President Kaiserguy Jun 2019 #27
I think decisions that comment in any manner Harker Jun 2019 #28
I don't feel well, after reading that. ☹️ BlancheSplanchnik Jun 2019 #29
So SCOTUS voted 5-3 to maintain the power of Congress to delegate shanny Jun 2019 #30
"can we dispense with the BS click-bait fear-mongering?" jberryhill Jun 2019 #31
Aye. shanny Jun 2019 #35
Exhale. 😉 Duppers Jun 2019 #37
... shanny Jun 2019 #50
Also, the four liberals were in the majority with Alito. Blue_true Jun 2019 #42
Actually what I read in Alito's opinion was that Congress should be leery of deligating Blue_true Jun 2019 #32
Whatever that sentence by Alito is, this article has buried it deeply. I couldn't find it. Honeycombe8 Jun 2019 #39
The article that I read on the decision pointed out that Alito Blue_true Jun 2019 #44
My point being...the clickbait title, when there was no such sentence in the article... Honeycombe8 Jun 2019 #46
Yeah, the title was over the top. Blue_true Jun 2019 #49
If the point cannot be made in 4 paragraphs fescuerescue Jun 2019 #43
I read what Alito wrote. He seemed to think that Congress should have passed a law instead of Blue_true Jun 2019 #45
Yes, right. Why tease us with the sentence and not give it to us? brush Jun 2019 #52
Thank the Trump voters again and again and again donkeypoofed Jun 2019 #51

Blue_true

(31,261 posts)
33. You should not be making stuff like that up.
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 05:58 PM
Jun 2019

Alito did not write what you wrote. Seems to me he was on the camp that Congress should be careful about giving authority to just one person.

Response to jberryhill (Reply #3)

Celerity

(43,408 posts)
10. "If a majority of this Court were willing to reconsider the approach we have taken for the past 84
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 03:57 PM
Jun 2019

years, I would support that effort.”


Two more points need to be made about Gundy. The first is that there is a reason why the previous paragraph speaks of “when” the revolution occurs, and not “if.” That’s because the fifth vote to maintain SORNA’s basic structure came from Justice Samuel Alito. His opinion concurring in the result is just three paragraphs long, and it contains this portentous sentence: “If a majority of this Court were willing to reconsider the approach we have taken for the past 84 years, I would support that effort.”

Alito, in other words, appears quite eager to join Gorsuch’s revolution. He chose not to use this case as the vehicle for revolution because if “a majority is not willing to do that, it would be freakish to single out the provision at issue here for special treatment.” But it is overwhelmingly likely that the only reason there wasn’t a majority in support of revolution is because Kavanaugh did not hear this case. When the next case arrives, Alito will almost certainly be on Gorsuch’s team.

Blue_true

(31,261 posts)
38. His point did not seem to be what you made it out.
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 06:06 PM
Jun 2019

The precedent, as I understand it, is that the Court automatically sided with Congress when Congress chose to assign authority to a single person or group, typically because the Executive Branch is the branch that carries out Congress' instructions. So wholesale delegation of an authority by Congress has not raised eyebrows.

Reconsidering that could mean a lot of possible outcomes, from your alarming picture to one where the Court backs Congress more or directs Congress to hold on to authority that it is delegating by passing laws that define what it wants.

Celerity

(43,408 posts)
40. I didn't make anything out, I just cut n pasted from the article to answer the question
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 06:09 PM
Jun 2019

I offered no commentary.

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)
41. I just did a post pointing that out. I conclude there is no "frightening" sentence by Alito.
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 06:10 PM
Jun 2019

It's just clickbait by the author to get us to read his illuminations and ruminations on various things.

Farmer-Rick

(10,185 posts)
5. So once idiots like Brett and Samuel are done taking apart our regulatory
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 03:41 PM
Jun 2019

controls over corporations, who do they think will be the most powerful entities in America? It won't be the Supreme Court. It won't be the federal gov't.

It will be the handful of capitalist kings, the Waltons, Zuckerberg, the Google kings and the Koch bros. Welcome your new feudal Lords.

Duppers

(28,125 posts)
36. From the article...
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 06:02 PM
Jun 2019
"...this portentous sentence: “If a majority of this Court were willing to reconsider the approach we have taken for the past 84 years, I would support that effort.”


Essentially saying Bannon's wet dream is coming.

The Wizard

(12,545 posts)
22. Alito was one of the original supporters of the unitary executive concept.
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 04:42 PM
Jun 2019

He's well read and book smart, but he really has to get out more. Totally clueless on the ramifications of his strange positions.

Kaiserguy

(740 posts)
27. Not just for President
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 05:26 PM
Jun 2019

we must hold the House and take the Senate and keep both for a long time to come!!!

Harker

(14,024 posts)
28. I think decisions that comment in any manner
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 05:28 PM
Jun 2019

on how a revisitation might be received should be rendered moot.

That's the literal form of 'prejudice.'

 

shanny

(6,709 posts)
30. So SCOTUS voted 5-3 to maintain the power of Congress to delegate
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 05:45 PM
Jun 2019

to executive branch agencies, with Barf Kavanaugh sitting this one out because the argument was days before he was confirmed.

And if he had already been confirmed, the vote could/would have been 5-4, with the same result.



Don't get me wrong: it is a big issue and one we should focus on. But can we dispense with the BS click-bait fear-mongering?

Blue_true

(31,261 posts)
42. Also, the four liberals were in the majority with Alito.
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 06:14 PM
Jun 2019

Look to me what Alito was saying was that Congress need to be careful about what and when it delegates to the Executive Branch and pass laws to cover the issue delegated instead. He mentioned leaving decisions in the hands of one person.

His opinion seems consistent with his past one against Executive Actions by the Obama Administration. I would be more concerned about Roberts and Thomas, who seemed to have reversed their past tact.

Blue_true

(31,261 posts)
32. Actually what I read in Alito's opinion was that Congress should be leery of deligating
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 05:55 PM
Jun 2019

it's authority to the Executive Branch. Maybe I read it wrong, that that is how it seemed to me.

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)
39. Whatever that sentence by Alito is, this article has buried it deeply. I couldn't find it.
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 06:07 PM
Jun 2019

I don't want to read a history of what the author thinks about this or that. The title is about a "frightening" sentence written by Alito. You would think that the story would lead with that sentence.

I spent a couple of minutes reading the story, but when no frightening sentence (or any sentence) by Alito was forthcoming, I gave up. I think this might be a nothingburger.

Blue_true

(31,261 posts)
44. The article that I read on the decision pointed out that Alito
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 06:20 PM
Jun 2019

agreed with the delegation in this particular case, but was a little leery of Congress delegating when it can pass laws instead. Even Gorsuch in dissent, pointed out that Congress chose to leave the decisionmaking in the hands of one person.

So the decision says nothing about how a vote on Congress challenging Trump overstepping would come out. I did not see an opinion from Roberts, but his vote could mean that he agrees with more executive power or does not agree with it and thinks that Congress was wrong to delegate away that authority.

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)
46. My point being...the clickbait title, when there was no such sentence in the article...
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 06:24 PM
Jun 2019

not that I could find in a couple of minutes,anyway.

I don't want to read a history of a legal case. I wanted to read the "frightening sentence" by Alito, and then backtrack for any history I'd need to understand the sentence.

Blue_true

(31,261 posts)
49. Yeah, the title was over the top.
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 06:32 PM
Jun 2019

I had the very distasteful honor of defending Samuel Alito. Hopefully I keep down the dinner that I just ate.

fescuerescue

(4,448 posts)
43. If the point cannot be made in 4 paragraphs
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 06:14 PM
Jun 2019

It's rarely worth the trip to the article.

I guess an extra sentence is too much to ask for.

Blue_true

(31,261 posts)
45. I read what Alito wrote. He seemed to think that Congress should have passed a law instead of
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 06:21 PM
Jun 2019

delegating.

donkeypoofed

(2,187 posts)
51. Thank the Trump voters again and again and again
Thu Jun 20, 2019, 06:37 PM
Jun 2019

They each had a vote and used it dumbly; now everyone will have to pay the price. Geez. That's scary.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Justice Alito just wrote ...