@NPR
I think you mean, "It's the second time the #SCOTUS avoids addressing First Amendment rights under attack by vague #Republican anti-LGBTQ+ laws "
So, attacks on charity drag shows, sorry can't be bothered. But, overturning decades of established reproductive or regulatory rights, yes, let's jump on that!
#SCOTUSIsCorrupt
@TCatInReality Well right, because that's how the US judicial system is set up.
It's not the legislative branch. The place to handle that sort of concern is in the other branch of government.
This is the judicial branch where the system is set up to take time, let lower courts debate and explore issues before overtime raising them to the upper court.
It is absolutely reasonable, given the design of the US system, that the Supreme Court would be much more interested in taking on established rights, as that sits roll in the government.
@TCatInReality that's just not accurate, and here's a link to the plaintiff's plea so you can read for yourself.
Not only did the lower courts agree to hear the case, but they were *still in the process of hearing* the case.
So the Supreme Court merely said they'd let the normal process work through, as is normal and constitutional.
That there wasn't a single dissent registered against the SCOTUS decision is a good indication that many of the sensational stories about this are false.
@volkris
I stand corrected on the lower courts taking the case, but refusing a stay. And I accept your point on the #SCOTUS letting this work its way through lower courts.
But my point still stands about the #SCOTUS refusing to defend 1st Amendment rights, in this case by allowing prior restraint. The ask was a writ of injunction, to allow the drag show while the courts decide.
They chose to allow suppression to stand.
@volkris
As for why there is no dissent... No one knows what negotiations happen behind the scenes
But it doesn't take much to imagine Alito and Thomas saying "if the Court takes this in any fashion, we're going to push to legitimize drag bans entirely"
Again, it's anyone's guess. But one fact is clear - the SCOTUS is allowing prior restraint of a drag show. IMO, that's failing their duty to defend the Constitution.
@TCatInReality the Constitution limits the authority of the Supreme Court.
For the Court to exceed its authority by issuing rulings outside of the legal process, THAT would be failing their duty to the Constitution.
And the dissents would have noted objections without risking taking the case in any fashion. That's part of why that process exists.
