Posts Made By: James Lacey

Originally Posted by James Brown

Hi Rod,

Too busy?  I never had a month like this when I was working!  Exhausted is more like it.

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

I'd like Jim Brown's take on the "why" behind this CNN explanation of the "how" SCOTUS does what it does with the shadow docket:   https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/02/politics/video/shadow-docket-trump-supreme-court-explained

Originally Posted by James Brown

That’s part of it James.  Another part is the relatively new practice of left leaning district court judges issuing nationwide injunctions of alleged executive overreach.  The propriety of lower courts enjoining the executive has always been a proper subject for the Supreme Court’s emergency docket.   I am not contradicting your point.  No doubt that Trump is pushing legal limits.

On the other hand many executive actions in the fields of immigration, agency operation, agency staffing and the like are probably or possibly constitutional, even though these actions have naturally pissed off those on the left.  In addition to litigating these policies on the merits, the Democrats have sought out nationwide injunctions from friendly jurisdictions.  Setting aside those injunctions pending briefing and argument is a reasonable use of the emergency docket, even though Rod and his sources squeal like it is the end of democracy.   In every one of these cases, the emergency order is designed to best preserve the status quo until the full hearing on the merits occurs.   The case that started this thread is a good example.  The Court is using its emergency docket to decide that the Fed Governor could keep her job until a full hearing occurs on Trump’s authority to fire her.  The Court is preserving the status quo to the best of its ability.   There is no guarantee that the Fed governor keeps her job after evidentiary hearings in the lower courts and possibly briefing and oral argument at the Supreme Court.

Bottom line:  Yes Trump is pushing the boundaries hard and probably overstepping his authority in many instances. At the same time, the Democrat Resistance is seeking, and in many cases, getting injunctions of executive action at the trial court level, even when the reviled executive action is probably constitutional. This combination of overreach and excessive resistance push-back is causing the huge increase in Emergency actions which must be heard by the Supreme Court. Those who write articles from the left acting like this is the end of democracy simply don’t understand these rulings, or perhaps they can’t resist grossly politicizing the scope of the rulings being issued at the emergency docket level.   People sure eat up the “shadow docket” bs.   Ohh, how sinister!

By the way, the left is going to lose a lot of these cases when the hearings on the merits occur. The Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority. This is the Democrat’s fault. If they wanted the opportunity to appoint Supreme Court justices, they needed to win a couple of exceptionally winnable elections.

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

Jim,
I don't think the nicely-starched robe attire you've described in your initial response holds up under scrutiny. For example, the Biden administration sought clarification on a timely affordable care act issue from the emergency/shadow docket and was refused. The Trump administration later posed the same question and it received an immediate response and review by the docket. So, it appears that the politically conservative element of the court determines what is heard and what is not by their biases and not necessarily by the process that you've described. 

Additionally, as noted by a lower court judge in that CNN video, the court is not providing the guidance that it should to the lower courts in its lack of explanations for their shadow docket rulings and, in essence, alternately either refers to them as de facto precedents and/or determinations that can't somehow be provided in writing because a final determination hasn't been made by SCOTUS. Since there's no clarification by SCOTUS on this self-created problem, it appears to be a major contradictory issue on their part, or perhaps a major error of omission due to apparent judicial incompetence. 

To simply say, on your part, that's it's the fault of democrats not winning more elections to influence the makeup of the court seems unreasonable and untenable in light of the above.

Originally Posted by James Brown

Rod and James:  You both replied to this part of my post.  I’m basically just ribbing you with these “elections have consequences” lines.   Even though it is absolutely a truism, just as it was when Obama first said it.  

The orders issued on the emergency docket have rarely been detailed orders for all of history.   Also, they are not typically precedent.  Usually the Court grants or denies a stay of a lower court ruling, an injunction for example, while the litigation proceeds.   Did you guys look at those tables, and click on the links?   Did you see all the referrals back for further proceedings?  

Here is an interesting aside.  Did you notice all the death penalty cases on the emergency docket?  I did not look at them all, but it appears that these are routinely denied by the Roberts Court.  For better or worse it was not always that way.   This is a good example of the Court’s philosophy trending from left to right based upon the makeup of the Court.   

Rod, I know that I’ll never convince you, but you are simply dead wrong when you find incompetence or malfeasance in each of the  Court’s ”disappointing” rulings, when viewed from your liberal perspective.  Any pundit who writes any article whatsoever equating a conservative Court with “wrong” or “incompetent” is just a political hack and probably knows they are lying.   It is not right v. wrong thing, it is conservative judicial philosophy v liberal judicial philosophy thing.   The death penalty cases show this.  Roe showed this.  Smart people like RBG knew this.   Guest editorialist who used to be in the DOJ, or who used to be judges know this too.  You won’t catch them saying it on CNN though.

Originally Posted by Jim Moscheck

It's loading fine for me today as well. Yesterday? Not so much.

Originally Posted by Brian McFarland

I never even heard of Cloudflare.  Does that make me a luddite?

Originally Posted by Brian McFarland

Interesting. I know zip about this stuff (and social media that I don't use).

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

So my daughter's at the airport today , 10-5-25, in Denver awaiting her return flight to California after completing this 31 mile K-Run:  

https://tacobell50k.com/

Notables from the advertisement of the above run:  "SURVIVORS will eventually get a commemorative item after successful completion of the run."  "No on-course Pepto, Alka Seltzer, Pepcid A/C, Mylanta will be allowed!"

Then she sends me this while waiting at the airport for her return flight to California, keeping in mind the average gas price here is $4.65/gallon and the price you see in Colorado is airport pricing...

PPS: Don't get me started on Ca gas prices and all that goes with it...

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

"...my career as a software developer,..."

My daughter is a software engineer/developer, too. 

Sorry to hear about the situation with your wife and I understand the health insurance issue can be difficult so I hope it works out for both of you.