Get all the facts without the spin.
The US Supreme Court dropped six rulings on Thursday, June 5. Four of the six were unanimous, and the others were close. From discrimination to firearm liability, the court tackled some big issues.
Guns and Discrimination
Marlean Ames – a straight white woman who accused her former employer of promoting LGBTQ workers over her because of their sexual identity – was vindicated by the high court in a unanimous decision. Ames had previously lost in the lower courts.
In Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, the justices all agreed that members of majority groups shouldn’t have to meet a higher burden of proof in discrimination cases and sent the case back to the lower courts.
In Smith & Wesson Brands v. Mexico, SCOTUS unanimously said the Mexican government can’t sue American gun manufacturers over illegal firearm sales in Mexico. The suit can’t proceed because “Mexico’s complaint does not plausibly allege that the defendant gun manufacturers aided and abetted gun dealers’ unlawful sales of firearms to Mexican traffickers.”
A Not-So-Divided Court, Unanimous or Otherwise
The Supreme Court handed down two more unanimous decisions and two in which just one justice dissented. In Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission, the court ruled that Wisconsin violated the First Amendment by prioritizing certain religious beliefs and actions over others by denying a religious tax exemption because the charity didn’t only serve Catholics.
CC/Devas (Mauritius) v. Antrix asked under what circumstances federal courts in the US could assert jurisdiction over foreign states. The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that federal courts do have jurisdiction over India.
The court was asked to consider whether victims of terrorist attacks or their families could reopen their case against a bank that provided services to the terrorists in Blom Bank v. Honickman. Eight justices affirmed the dismissal, agreeing that the people who brought the case didn’t meet the high standard that must be cleared to reopen it. Only Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wasn’t entirely onboard, as she only joined the majority opinion in part.
In Lab Corp v. Davis, the justices considered whether a federal court could certify class action suits if some of the parties lacked legal standing. The majority ruled to dismiss the case as “improvidently granted,” which means they felt the court shouldn’t have taken it up to begin with. Justice Brett Kavanaugh dissented, arguing that he felt it was possible and even valuable to rule on the case.
See the Facts
At Liberty Nation News, we feel you should see the facts of yourself, without all the spin. As such, we post the rulings themselves here for you to READ IN FULL:
Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services
Smith & Wesson Brands v. Mexico
Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission
CC/Devas (Mauritius) v. Antrix
Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.
