The Supreme Court just ruled against porn companies in their lawsuit against the state of Texas, upholding the state’s age-verification law for access to porn sites.
The ruling was 6-3, with Kagan, Sotomayor and Jackson dissenting.
Amy Howe adds: “The very short summary of Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton: “The power to require age verification is within a State’s authority to prevent children from accessing sexually explicit content.””
Other states like North Carolina have an age-verification law as well. Looks like porn sites are the big loser today.
https://therightscoop.com/breaking-supreme-court-rules-against-porn-companies-in-lawsuit-against-texas/
The Supreme Court just granted a preliminary injunction on behalf of parents and against the alphabet mafia running our schools, who are forcing LGBT-themed lessons on all students.
Here’s the ruling:
From Amy Howe:
The court first holds that the parents are likely to succeed on their claim that the policy of not allowing opt-outs unconstitutionally burdens their exercise of their religion.“We have long recognized,” Alito writes, “the rights of parents to direct ‘the religious upbringing’ of their children. And we have held that those rights are violated by government policies that substantially interfere with the religious development of children.”
Based on the record before us, the court says, the Board’s introduction of the LGBTQ-themed storybooks and the failure to provide notice and opt-out options for parents meets that test: it does interfere with the children’s religious development and imposes a burden on religious exercise.
Awesome. This is really a no-brainer.
https://therightscoop.com/breaking-supreme-court-rules-against-the-alphabet-mafia-in-schools-forcing-lgbt-themed-lessons-on-all-students/
The Supreme Court just upheld an FCC subsidy for low-cost telephone and internet services in libraries and schools.
“…does not violate the nondelegation doctrine.”
Amy Howe writes:
This was the challenge to the federal program that subsidized low-cost telephone and internet services in, for example, rural areas and for libraries and schools.It holds that neither Congress’s delegation of power to the FCC or the FCC’s delegation of power to the private corporation violated a theory known as the nondelegation doctrine.
In other words, the subsidy stands.
Justices Gorsuch, Alito and Thomas dissent.
https://therightscoop.com/breaking-supreme-court-upholds-fcc-subsidy-for-internet-services-in-libraries-and-schools/The Supreme Court just rule in a 6-3 decision, with Justice Thomas dissenting and joined by Alito and Gorsuch, that the appointment of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) is consistent with the Constitution.
The issue, according to SCOTUSblog:
Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit erred in holding that the structure of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force violates the Constitution’s appointments clause and in declining to sever the statutory provision that it found to unduly insulate the task force from the Health & Human Services secretary’s supervision.Google puts the issue like this:
The Kennedy v. Braidwood case, now before the Supreme Court, challenges the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) requirement for private health insurance to cover preventive services recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). The core issue is whether the Task Force’s structure, particularly the appointment of its members, violates the Constitution’s Appointments Clause. This case has significant implications for access to preventive healthcare services for millions of Americans.Here’s the ruling via SCOTUSblog on X:
NEW: In Kennedy v. Braidwood Management, a case about the structure of a task force with the power under the Affordable Care Act to determine which preventive services insurers must cover, the court holds that members do not need to be appointed by the president and confirmed by Senate.The 6-3 decision is from Justice Kavanaugh, who writes that “Task Force members are inferior officers whose appointment by the Secretary of HHS is consistent with the Appointments Clause.” Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion, joined by Alito and Gorsuch.
Amy Howe writes: “The court holds specifically that the task force members can be removed at will by the Secretary of HHS, and their recommendations about preventive services are reviewable by the secretary before they take effect.”
https://therightscoop.com/breaking-supreme-court-rules-on-whether-obamacare-preventive-services-task-force-must-be-confirmed-by-senate/
No comments:
Post a Comment