Rocky Mountain Voice

Menu

Tag: Supreme court

Justices to Rule on Whether Drug Use Voids the Right to Bear Arms
No Comments
Fox21, Approved, National

Justices to Rule on Whether Drug Use Voids the Right to Bear Arms

By Zach Schonfeld | FOX21 The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to take up whether a federal crime that bans gun possession for drug users is constitutional. At the Trump administration’s urging, the justices will wade into this issue this term, making it the latest front in the battle over the Second Amendment. A decision is expected by next summer.  “This is the archetypal case for this Court’s review,” Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote in court filings.  Federal law prohibits anyone “who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance” from possessing a firearm. Violations carry up to 10 years in prison.   The charge is prosecuted regularly. U.S. Circuit Judge Stephen Higginson, an appointee of former President Obama, recently noted in ...
Read More
Jack Smith’s failed crusade: How DOJ overreach fueled Trump’s comeback
No Comments
Declassified with Julie Kelly, Approved, Commentary, National

Jack Smith’s failed crusade: How DOJ overreach fueled Trump’s comeback

By Julie Kelly | Commentary, Declassified Substack John Lauro, the president's criminal defense attorney in the January 6 case, describes his experience with Special Counsel Jack Smith and his henchmen in response to Smith's recent publicity tour. In the summer of 2023, John Lauro—a New York-based defense attorney at the time representing Donald Trump related to the events of January 6—met the government prosecutors leading the criminal investigation into his client. For nearly two hours that day, Lauro spoke to Special Counsel Jack Smith and his team in response to Smith’s target letter notifying the former president that he may face charges for his attempts to “overturn the 2020 election.” Lauro and Todd Blanche, currently the deputy attorney general, tried to dissuade Smith...
Read More
Supreme Court Weighs Landmark Case on Race and Redistricting
No Comments
The Federalist, Approved, National

Supreme Court Weighs Landmark Case on Race and Redistricting

By: Shawn Fleetwood | The Federalist Here are the biggest moments from Supreme Court oral arguments in Louisiana v. Callais and Robinson v. Callais. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES — The U.S. Supreme Court held oral arguments in a pair of high stakes redistricting cases that could significantly reshape American electoral politics. Known as Louisiana v. Callais and Robinson v. Callais, the matter focuses on a dispute over the use of race in Louisiana’s congressional map. While the state’s initial map included a single black-majority district, a lawsuit and subsequent legal battle led lawmakers to redraw the map to include a second black-majority district, producing another legal battle that centered on the state’s allegedly unlawful use of race when creating the n...
Read More
A small river with big influence: How the La Plata shaped western water law
No Comments
Rocky Mountain Voice, Commentary, State, Top Stories

A small river with big influence: How the La Plata shaped western water law

By Steve Harris | Guest Commentary, Rocky Mountain Voice Editor’s note: If you’re just joining the Water Time Reflections series by Steve Harris, this is Part 4 of 6 marking 100 years since the Colorado River Compact. Earlier pieces traced how the compact was conceived, debated, and ultimately divided the river. Here, Harris turns to the lesser-known La Plata River Compact—another milestone negotiated in 1922 that shaped interstate water law. The La Plata River Compact is also over 100 years old. It was negotiated between Delph Carpenter from Colorado and Stephen Davis from New Mexico during 1922 and finalized at Bishop’s Lodge in Santa Fe, New Mexico. I could not find minutes or detailed information on the negotiations between Carpenter and Davis and so relied upon informa...
Read More
Judge rejects bid to drop Idaho trans athlete case, clearing path for SCOTUS review
No Comments
Fox News, Approved, National

Judge rejects bid to drop Idaho trans athlete case, clearing path for SCOTUS review

By Jackson Thompson | Fox News Trump-appointed judge denied former Boise State athlete's motion to drop Idaho sports law challenge FIRST ON FOX: The legal defense to "save women's sports" scored a big win in its Supreme Court battle over transgender athletes this week. After an Idaho trans athlete tried to have the potential landmark SCOTUS case dropped, a federal judge struck down the attempt to dismiss it and ruled that the case should proceed. U.S. District Judge David Nye, appointed by President Donald Trump in 2017, rejected former Boise State trans athlete Lindsay Hecox's motion to dismiss the case. The trans athlete started the legal battle in 2020, but tried to have it dismissed in September after the Supreme Court agreed in July to he...
Read More
Parental Rights Debate Deepens After Supreme Court Rejects Colorado Case
No Comments
CBS News, Approved, State

Parental Rights Debate Deepens After Supreme Court Rejects Colorado Case

By Melissa Quinn | CBS News Washington — The Supreme Court on Monday rejected a bid to revive a lawsuit brought by two Colorado families who alleged their parental rights were violated when their children attended school-sponsored club meetings that included discussions of gender identity and sexuality and were allegedly discouraged from telling their parents about it. Though the high court turned away the case, Justices Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, wrote separately to express concern with what Alito said was an unwillingness by courts to confront whether a school district violates parents' rights when it encourages a student's gender transition without the parents' knowledge or consent. "Petitioners tell us that nearly 6,000 public schoo...
Read More
Justices to hear Voting Rights Act case: Does Section 2 demand race-based districts?
No Comments
SCOTUSblog, Approved, National

Justices to hear Voting Rights Act case: Does Section 2 demand race-based districts?

By Amy Howe | SCOTUSblog The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Wednesday, Oct. 15, in Louisiana v. Callais, a challenge to the congressional map that Louisiana adopted in 2024 that may reshape the Voting Rights Act. It is the second go-round at the court for this dispute in less than a year; the justices heard arguments in the case for the first time in March, but didn’t decide it during their 2024-25 term. Here is a brief explainer on the long and complicated history of this case. How did this dispute start? The dispute began back in 2022, when Louisiana’s Legislature adopted a congressional map with one majority-Black district out of the six seats allotted to the state, although roughly one-third of the state’s population is Black. A group of Black voters ...
Read More
Justice Alito Calls Out Colorado’s ‘Blatant Viewpoint Discrimination’ on Therapy Law
No Comments
The Federalist, Approved, National

Justice Alito Calls Out Colorado’s ‘Blatant Viewpoint Discrimination’ on Therapy Law

By Shawn Fleetwood | The Federalist Associate Justice Samuel Alito exposed the absurdity of a Colorado law prohibiting so-called “conversion therapy” for minors during a high-profile case before the Supreme Court on Tuesday. The moment came during oral arguments in Chiles v. Salazar, a case focused on a legal challenge brought by Colorado resident Kaley Chiles. A licensed therapist who provides counseling to children struggling with issues related to sexual orientation and gender dysphoria, Chiles alleges that the Centennial State’s “conversion therapy” law infringes upon her First Amendment right to free speech by inhibiting the types of discussions she has with her minor clients. When questioning Colorado Solicitor General Shannon Stevenson, Alito posed ...
Read More
Supreme Court to Weigh Colorado Ban on Therapy for Gender Identity Counseling
No Comments
CBS Colorado, Approved, State

Supreme Court to Weigh Colorado Ban on Therapy for Gender Identity Counseling

By Anna Alejo | CBS Colorado On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on a case set to determine if Colorado's ban on so-called "conversion therapy" for minors violates the free speech clause of the First Amendment. The Lee family in Wellington filed an amicus brief in support of overturning Colorado's ban on the therapy. A Colorado law passed in 2019 restricts therapists from trying to change the sexual orientation or gender identity of kids under the age of 18. They opposed the law after they say it limited access for their daughter to receive therapy that met their family's needs. "They are forbidden by law from going down that path of helping a child through their gender confusion versus further into that confusion and so there's been lots of paren...
Read More
Supreme Court case claims Colorado’s conversion therapy ban erases gay identity, silences counselors
No Comments
Washington Examiner, Approved, National

Supreme Court case claims Colorado’s conversion therapy ban erases gay identity, silences counselors

By Mia Cathell | Washington Examiner A controversial Supreme Court case challenging a ban on so-called conversion therapy, as it pertains to treating transgender children, is attracting unlikely allies. At issue in Chiles v. Salazar, soon to be argued before the Supreme Court, is whether a Colorado law prohibiting “conversion therapy” for pediatric patients unconstitutionally restricts a counselor’s free speech rights, via viewpoint discrimination, when that therapist wants to counsel children experiencing gender dysphoria toward embracing their biological sex. A number of traditionally progressive third parties are siding with the plaintiff, Kaley Chiles, a licensed Christian counselor who nudges clients to “live consistently with God’s design.”...
Read More