Supreme Court Update

It was a busy Monday in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Click the “Continue reading” bar if you’re interested in the latest rulings: (1) a case dealing with that terrorist plot to attack the L.A. Airport during the millennial celebration in 1999-2000, (2) a case dealing with child pornography laws, (3) a case dealing with municipal bonds, interstate commerce and taxation exemptions, (4) a case dealing with federal criminal laws, recidivist offenders and sentencing decisions.

]]>< ![CDATA[

The Millennial Bomber Case

What the Court did: Reversing the liberal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court gave a pro-law enforcement reading to a federal statute that provides for extended prison terms for those who carry explosives with them during the commission of other felonies. The case involved an Algerian national who lied to Customs agents while crossing the border in December 1999, with explosives hidden on his person, and later was convicted by jury of conspiring to detonate bombs at L.A. International Airport and thereby to engage in terrorism.

Those who support the decision: Law enforcement agents. Federal prosecutors. National security advocates. Republicans.

Those who are upset about the decision: Terrorists. The ACLU and other anti-American leftist groups. Left-wing Democrats.

* * *
The Child Pornography Law Case

What the Court did: The Court, in a 7-2 decision, upheld the 2003 PROTECT Act, which criminalizes the promotion of child pornography.

Those who support the decision: Law enforcement agents. Criminal prosecutors. Child victims advocates. Law enforcement hawks. Separation of powers advocates. Anti-judicial activism advocates. Republicans.

Those who are upset about the decision: Pedophiles. Child predators. The ACLU and other left-wing groups. Criminal defense lawyers. Left-wing Democrats.

* * *
The Municipal Bond Taxation Case

What the Court did: Reversing an activist decision by Kentucky’s highest court, the Supreme Court, in a 7-2 decision, upheld the long-standing system of taxation and tax exemptions for municipal bonds, which dates back to 1919 and under which 42 states impose state income taxes on interest derived from sister state bonds but provide blanket state tax exemptions for interest paid to residents by their own state’s bonds.

Those who support the decision: Municipal bond market participants. Federalism/states’ rights advocates. State finance groups. Separation of powers advocates. Anti-judicial activism advocates. Pragmatic business and commerce groups.

Those who are upset about the decision: Well, if you actually can get upset about a 7-2 decision involving municipal bonds, then you probably have anger management issues that go above and beyond politics and business.

* * *
The California Recidivist Criminal Case

What the Court did: Reversing the liberal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3, in connection with recidivist criminals, that federal judges can take into account enhanced state law sentences in determining whether to impose enhanced federal sentences under the Armed Career Criminal Act.

Those who support the decision: Law enforcement agents. Criminal prosecutors. Law enforcement hawks. Separation of powers advocates. Anti-judicial activism advocates. Republicans.

Those who are upset about the decision: Recidivist criminals. The ACLU and other left-wing groups. Criminal defense lawyers. Left-wing Democrats.

Liberals DO hate the troops, and we can prove it
Sichuan