SCOTUS

[cradleandshoot]

You two keep telling yourselves that. It must make you feel good.

BTW, cradle, that's not my experience with lawyers.
I do a lot of my own basic legal work, based on years of experience with such docs, but in a serious issue I turn to the best, smartest, most practical within my network.

That said, I still do my own negotiations.
But informed by the best lawyers I can afford for the task.

Same for medicine...I take care of myself and my family, but on a truly serious issue I go to the very best in my network.

I seem to recall you are in refrigeration equipment...if I was installing such in a new store, whatever, I certainly would want to find someone/company who I could trust knew what they were doing, wouldn't screw it up. I'm not going to hire the guy who tells me he's never studied refrigeration, never installed any equipment...but he's a heck of a fisherman. Nor would I hire a guy who had terrible references from prior jobs.

IMO, people deserve a measure of respect for the efforts they've made to be the best they can be at what they do.

In most professions, specific kinds of intelligence are a big part of differentiating levels of excellence. Lawyers need certain sorts of intelligence that are different from a programmer which can be different from an architect which can be different from a physicist.

If you don't have exceptional levels of that specific sort of intelligence, then you simply aren't going to be able to compete at that highest level. You then apply experience and effort to produce a capability to be the best at what you do.

I want the guy or gal with that highest level.

Your best refrigeration guy/gal can do all the load calculations for any install. Actually understanding the how you do it and why is a different issue all together. When you install a heating or central air system the operative word is having a balanced system. All the money in the world can buy you the best state if the art equipment. If it isn't installed by a pro, your no better off than when you started.

Cradle: recently my main refrigerator in Boca Grande began a slow decline of cooling. We noticed the milk and other things were not the temperature I had been used to and that we had set for. This thing was a $2,000 install back when.

I called a repair guy who wanted to know the make and model. It's a Frigidaire side by side stainless. Anyway, the repair guy said he would not even come out 'because it's not worth it to fix that model...kinda hurt my feelings! (I actually do have some sweeter appliances in another house). Anyway, he also said, 'have you pulled it out and looked at the coils in the back for any buildup of lint/dust/etc?' and honestly, that had never occurred to me.

So I yanked that sucker out, which was not an easy task as the placement tolerance was approximately 1/1000th of an inch (lol), and I cleaned the back and coils like no one's business. That sucker has worked perfectly since. Who knew!!!!

Also, Gorsuch rules!

That is probably the first thing to do, clean the condenser coils. If the condenser can't breath it won't cool. The second thing on the check list is the condenser fan. If it craps the bed the first thing you will notice is the smell. The condenser will run really hot and stink to high heavens. If your fridge is co2 cooled either pay the big bill or yank it out and put it at the curb. If you see a tag on the back of your fridge saying co2 R744. read your ice box its last rights and put it out of its misery. R290 is the latest player in the game. Hydrocarbon refrigerants are the wave of the future. A standard half horse compressor is charged with about 5 ounces of refrigerant. That is about the same as a small Bic lighter. Environmentally friendly you can vent them, there is no need to reclaim them. Sorry for talking shop. On a grosser note my experience on condenser fan failures usually involve 4 legged rodents with long tails getting caught up in the fan blades, never a pretty sight.

[Typical Lax Dad]

You two keep telling yourselves that. It must make you feel good.

BTW, cradle, that's not my experience with lawyers.
I do a lot of my own basic legal work, based on years of experience with such docs, but in a serious issue I turn to the best, smartest, most practical within my network.

That said, I still do my own negotiations.
But informed by the best lawyers I can afford for the task.

Same for medicine...I take care of myself and my family, but on a truly serious issue I go to the very best in my network.

I seem to recall you are in refrigeration equipment...if I was installing such in a new store, whatever, I certainly would want to find someone/company who I could trust knew what they were doing, wouldn't screw it up. I'm not going to hire the guy who tells me he's never studied refrigeration, never installed any equipment...but he's a heck of a fisherman. Nor would I hire a guy who had terrible references from prior jobs.

IMO, people deserve a measure of respect for the efforts they've made to be the best they can be at what they do.

In most professions, specific kinds of intelligence are a big part of differentiating levels of excellence. Lawyers need certain sorts of intelligence that are different from a programmer which can be different from an architect which can be different from a physicist.

If you don't have exceptional levels of that specific sort of intelligence, then you simply aren't going to be able to compete at that highest level. You then apply experience and effort to produce a capability to be the best at what you do.

I want the guy or gal with that highest level.

Your best refrigeration guy/gal can do all the load calculations for any install. Actually understanding the how you do it and why is a different issue all together. When you install a heating or central air system the operative word is having a balanced system. All the money in the world can buy you the best state if the art equipment. If it isn't installed by a pro, your no better off than when you started.

Cradle: recently my main refrigerator in Boca Grande began a slow decline of cooling. We noticed the milk and other things were not the temperature I had been used to and that we had set for. This thing was a $2,000 install back when.

I called a repair guy who wanted to know the make and model. It's a Frigidaire side by side stainless. Anyway, the repair guy said he would not even come out 'because it's not worth it to fix that model...kinda hurt my feelings! (I actually do have some sweeter appliances in another house). Anyway, he also said, 'have you pulled it out and looked at the coils in the back for any buildup of lint/dust/etc?' and honestly, that had never occurred to me.

So I yanked that sucker out, which was not an easy task as the placement tolerance was approximately 1/1000th of an inch (lol), and I cleaned the back and coils like no one's business. That sucker has worked perfectly since. Who knew!!!!

Also, Gorsuch rules!

That is probably the first thing to do, clean the condenser coils. If the condenser can't breath it won't cool. The second thing on the check list is the condenser fan. If it craps the bed the first thing you will notice is the smell. The condenser will run really hot and stink to high heavens. If your fridge is co2 cooled either pay the big bill or yank it out and put it at the curb. If you see a tag on the back of your fridge saying co2 R744. read your ice box its last rights and put it out of its misery. R290 is the latest player in the game. Hydrocarbon refrigerants are the wave of the future. A standard half horse compressor is charged with about 5 ounces of refrigerant. That is about the same as a small Bic lighter. Environmentally friendly you can vent them, there is no need to reclaim them. Sorry for talking shop. On a grosser note my experience on condenser fan failures usually involve 4 legged rodents with long tails getting caught up in the fan blades, never a pretty sight.

That is nonsense... those jackwagons should know that man has no impact on the environment! Hydrocarbon refrigerants?? Bullsh-i-t!! Those people would know their dingus from their lingus.... https://phys.org/news/2014-09-carbon-di ... erant.html

Signed:

Hip O. Crit

[Peter Brown]

Every day brings me great joy watching libs fail to win arguments.

I thought Brett Kavanaugh was a 'fascist'?!?!?

Kavanaugh and Roberts joined the libs on the court to dismiss a major gun rights case in New York City as moot

https://spectrumlocalnews.com/nys/water ... cases-loom

Just two weeks ago, libs had already thrown in the towel on this case because I gather libs think conservatives vote as a bloc as the liberals always do?

https://www.salon.com/2020/04/12/the-su ... e_partner/

Seriously, your squad is whacked. And as a conservative, I take no issue with Roberts nor Kavanaugh deciding the way they decided. I am sure they have reasonable defenses for why they did. However, as I have said a billion times, Kavanaugh was the best centrist jurist libs could have gotten out of Trump, and they still sought to destroy the guy. His vote shows remarkable character, to decide on principles and not on emotions (unlike say all four birdbrain lib justices).

It's a great day even when my team loses!

[cradleandshoot]

You two keep telling yourselves that. It must make you feel good.

BTW, cradle, that's not my experience with lawyers.
I do a lot of my own basic legal work, based on years of experience with such docs, but in a serious issue I turn to the best, smartest, most practical within my network.

That said, I still do my own negotiations.
But informed by the best lawyers I can afford for the task.

Same for medicine...I take care of myself and my family, but on a truly serious issue I go to the very best in my network.

I seem to recall you are in refrigeration equipment...if I was installing such in a new store, whatever, I certainly would want to find someone/company who I could trust knew what they were doing, wouldn't screw it up. I'm not going to hire the guy who tells me he's never studied refrigeration, never installed any equipment...but he's a heck of a fisherman. Nor would I hire a guy who had terrible references from prior jobs.

IMO, people deserve a measure of respect for the efforts they've made to be the best they can be at what they do.

In most professions, specific kinds of intelligence are a big part of differentiating levels of excellence. Lawyers need certain sorts of intelligence that are different from a programmer which can be different from an architect which can be different from a physicist.

If you don't have exceptional levels of that specific sort of intelligence, then you simply aren't going to be able to compete at that highest level. You then apply experience and effort to produce a capability to be the best at what you do.

I want the guy or gal with that highest level.

Your best refrigeration guy/gal can do all the load calculations for any install. Actually understanding the how you do it and why is a different issue all together. When you install a heating or central air system the operative word is having a balanced system. All the money in the world can buy you the best state if the art equipment. If it isn't installed by a pro, your no better off than when you started.

Cradle: recently my main refrigerator in Boca Grande began a slow decline of cooling. We noticed the milk and other things were not the temperature I had been used to and that we had set for. This thing was a $2,000 install back when.

I called a repair guy who wanted to know the make and model. It's a Frigidaire side by side stainless. Anyway, the repair guy said he would not even come out 'because it's not worth it to fix that model...kinda hurt my feelings! (I actually do have some sweeter appliances in another house). Anyway, he also said, 'have you pulled it out and looked at the coils in the back for any buildup of lint/dust/etc?' and honestly, that had never occurred to me.

So I yanked that sucker out, which was not an easy task as the placement tolerance was approximately 1/1000th of an inch (lol), and I cleaned the back and coils like no one's business. That sucker has worked perfectly since. Who knew!!!!

Also, Gorsuch rules!

That is probably the first thing to do, clean the condenser coils. If the condenser can't breath it won't cool. The second thing on the check list is the condenser fan. If it craps the bed the first thing you will notice is the smell. The condenser will run really hot and stink to high heavens. If your fridge is co2 cooled either pay the big bill or yank it out and put it at the curb. If you see a tag on the back of your fridge saying co2 R744. read your ice box its last rights and put it out of its misery. R290 is the latest player in the game. Hydrocarbon refrigerants are the wave of the future. A standard half horse compressor is charged with about 5 ounces of refrigerant. That is about the same as a small Bic lighter. Environmentally friendly you can vent them, there is no need to reclaim them. Sorry for talking shop. On a grosser note my experience on condenser fan failures usually involve 4 legged rodents with long tails getting caught up in the fan blades, never a pretty sight.

That is nonsense... those jackwagons should know that man has no impact on the environment! Hydrocarbon refrigerants?? Bullsh-i-t!! Those people would know their dingus from their lingus.... https://phys.org/news/2014-09-carbon-di ... erant.html

Signed:

Hip O. Crit

The downside to co2 systems is they run at much higher pressure and are notorious for leaks in the system. My company is working furiously to remove all their inventory of R744 coolers out of inventory and to the junk yard. Environmentally friendly and brutally unreliable The folks at True coolers have switched over almost entirely to R290. That being the propane based hydrocarbon refrigerant also environmentally friendly.
https://www.katom.com/vendor/true-refri ... erant.html For your enjoyment TLD. R290 is hugely more environmentally friendly than co2 refrigerants.

[Typical Lax Dad]

You two keep telling yourselves that. It must make you feel good.

BTW, cradle, that's not my experience with lawyers.
I do a lot of my own basic legal work, based on years of experience with such docs, but in a serious issue I turn to the best, smartest, most practical within my network.

That said, I still do my own negotiations.
But informed by the best lawyers I can afford for the task.

Same for medicine...I take care of myself and my family, but on a truly serious issue I go to the very best in my network.

I seem to recall you are in refrigeration equipment...if I was installing such in a new store, whatever, I certainly would want to find someone/company who I could trust knew what they were doing, wouldn't screw it up. I'm not going to hire the guy who tells me he's never studied refrigeration, never installed any equipment...but he's a heck of a fisherman. Nor would I hire a guy who had terrible references from prior jobs.

IMO, people deserve a measure of respect for the efforts they've made to be the best they can be at what they do.

In most professions, specific kinds of intelligence are a big part of differentiating levels of excellence. Lawyers need certain sorts of intelligence that are different from a programmer which can be different from an architect which can be different from a physicist.

If you don't have exceptional levels of that specific sort of intelligence, then you simply aren't going to be able to compete at that highest level. You then apply experience and effort to produce a capability to be the best at what you do.

I want the guy or gal with that highest level.

Your best refrigeration guy/gal can do all the load calculations for any install. Actually understanding the how you do it and why is a different issue all together. When you install a heating or central air system the operative word is having a balanced system. All the money in the world can buy you the best state if the art equipment. If it isn't installed by a pro, your no better off than when you started.

Cradle: recently my main refrigerator in Boca Grande began a slow decline of cooling. We noticed the milk and other things were not the temperature I had been used to and that we had set for. This thing was a $2,000 install back when.

I called a repair guy who wanted to know the make and model. It's a Frigidaire side by side stainless. Anyway, the repair guy said he would not even come out 'because it's not worth it to fix that model...kinda hurt my feelings! (I actually do have some sweeter appliances in another house). Anyway, he also said, 'have you pulled it out and looked at the coils in the back for any buildup of lint/dust/etc?' and honestly, that had never occurred to me.

So I yanked that sucker out, which was not an easy task as the placement tolerance was approximately 1/1000th of an inch (lol), and I cleaned the back and coils like no one's business. That sucker has worked perfectly since. Who knew!!!!

Also, Gorsuch rules!

That is probably the first thing to do, clean the condenser coils. If the condenser can't breath it won't cool. The second thing on the check list is the condenser fan. If it craps the bed the first thing you will notice is the smell. The condenser will run really hot and stink to high heavens. If your fridge is co2 cooled either pay the big bill or yank it out and put it at the curb. If you see a tag on the back of your fridge saying co2 R744. read your ice box its last rights and put it out of its misery. R290 is the latest player in the game. Hydrocarbon refrigerants are the wave of the future. A standard half horse compressor is charged with about 5 ounces of refrigerant. That is about the same as a small Bic lighter. Environmentally friendly you can vent them, there is no need to reclaim them. Sorry for talking shop. On a grosser note my experience on condenser fan failures usually involve 4 legged rodents with long tails getting caught up in the fan blades, never a pretty sight.

That is nonsense... those jackwagons should know that man has no impact on the environment! Hydrocarbon refrigerants?? Bullsh-i-t!! Those people would know their dingus from their lingus.... https://phys.org/news/2014-09-carbon-di ... erant.html

Signed:

Hip O. Crit

The downside to co2 systems is they run at much higher pressure and are notorious for leaks in the system. My company is working furiously to remove all their inventory of R744 coolers out of inventory and to the junk yard. Environmentally friendly and brutally unreliable The folks at True coolers have switched over almost entirely to R290. That being the propane based hydrocarbon refrigerant also environmentally friendly.

Reducing CO2 green house gases is make believe. We have no control over it.... Just FLP jackwagon talk. These people making the change are just scamming consumers..... The earth will take care of itself....

Signed:

Hip O. Crit

[cradleandshoot]

You two keep telling yourselves that. It must make you feel good.

BTW, cradle, that's not my experience with lawyers.
I do a lot of my own basic legal work, based on years of experience with such docs, but in a serious issue I turn to the best, smartest, most practical within my network.

That said, I still do my own negotiations.
But informed by the best lawyers I can afford for the task.

Same for medicine...I take care of myself and my family, but on a truly serious issue I go to the very best in my network.

I seem to recall you are in refrigeration equipment...if I was installing such in a new store, whatever, I certainly would want to find someone/company who I could trust knew what they were doing, wouldn't screw it up. I'm not going to hire the guy who tells me he's never studied refrigeration, never installed any equipment...but he's a heck of a fisherman. Nor would I hire a guy who had terrible references from prior jobs.

IMO, people deserve a measure of respect for the efforts they've made to be the best they can be at what they do.

In most professions, specific kinds of intelligence are a big part of differentiating levels of excellence. Lawyers need certain sorts of intelligence that are different from a programmer which can be different from an architect which can be different from a physicist.

If you don't have exceptional levels of that specific sort of intelligence, then you simply aren't going to be able to compete at that highest level. You then apply experience and effort to produce a capability to be the best at what you do.

I want the guy or gal with that highest level.

Your best refrigeration guy/gal can do all the load calculations for any install. Actually understanding the how you do it and why is a different issue all together. When you install a heating or central air system the operative word is having a balanced system. All the money in the world can buy you the best state if the art equipment. If it isn't installed by a pro, your no better off than when you started.

Cradle: recently my main refrigerator in Boca Grande began a slow decline of cooling. We noticed the milk and other things were not the temperature I had been used to and that we had set for. This thing was a $2,000 install back when.

I called a repair guy who wanted to know the make and model. It's a Frigidaire side by side stainless. Anyway, the repair guy said he would not even come out 'because it's not worth it to fix that model...kinda hurt my feelings! (I actually do have some sweeter appliances in another house). Anyway, he also said, 'have you pulled it out and looked at the coils in the back for any buildup of lint/dust/etc?' and honestly, that had never occurred to me.

So I yanked that sucker out, which was not an easy task as the placement tolerance was approximately 1/1000th of an inch (lol), and I cleaned the back and coils like no one's business. That sucker has worked perfectly since. Who knew!!!!

Also, Gorsuch rules!

That is probably the first thing to do, clean the condenser coils. If the condenser can't breath it won't cool. The second thing on the check list is the condenser fan. If it craps the bed the first thing you will notice is the smell. The condenser will run really hot and stink to high heavens. If your fridge is co2 cooled either pay the big bill or yank it out and put it at the curb. If you see a tag on the back of your fridge saying co2 R744. read your ice box its last rights and put it out of its misery. R290 is the latest player in the game. Hydrocarbon refrigerants are the wave of the future. A standard half horse compressor is charged with about 5 ounces of refrigerant. That is about the same as a small Bic lighter. Environmentally friendly you can vent them, there is no need to reclaim them. Sorry for talking shop. On a grosser note my experience on condenser fan failures usually involve 4 legged rodents with long tails getting caught up in the fan blades, never a pretty sight.

That is nonsense... those jackwagons should know that man has no impact on the environment! Hydrocarbon refrigerants?? Bullsh-i-t!! Those people would know their dingus from their lingus.... https://phys.org/news/2014-09-carbon-di ... erant.html

Signed:

Hip O. Crit

The downside to co2 systems is they run at much higher pressure and are notorious for leaks in the system. My company is working furiously to remove all their inventory of R744 coolers out of inventory and to the junk yard. Environmentally friendly and brutally unreliable The folks at True coolers have switched over almost entirely to R290. That being the propane based hydrocarbon refrigerant also environmentally friendly.

Reducing CO2 green house gases is make believe. We have no control over it.... Just FLP jackwagon talk. These people making the change are just scamming consumers..... The earth will take care of itself....

Signed:

Hip O. Crit

To quote the late George Carlin... " The planet is fine the people are F***ed" You prove his words more true every day. Thread hijack over.

[Typical Lax Dad]

You two keep telling yourselves that. It must make you feel good.

BTW, cradle, that's not my experience with lawyers.
I do a lot of my own basic legal work, based on years of experience with such docs, but in a serious issue I turn to the best, smartest, most practical within my network.

That said, I still do my own negotiations.
But informed by the best lawyers I can afford for the task.

Same for medicine...I take care of myself and my family, but on a truly serious issue I go to the very best in my network.

I seem to recall you are in refrigeration equipment...if I was installing such in a new store, whatever, I certainly would want to find someone/company who I could trust knew what they were doing, wouldn't screw it up. I'm not going to hire the guy who tells me he's never studied refrigeration, never installed any equipment...but he's a heck of a fisherman. Nor would I hire a guy who had terrible references from prior jobs.

IMO, people deserve a measure of respect for the efforts they've made to be the best they can be at what they do.

In most professions, specific kinds of intelligence are a big part of differentiating levels of excellence. Lawyers need certain sorts of intelligence that are different from a programmer which can be different from an architect which can be different from a physicist.

If you don't have exceptional levels of that specific sort of intelligence, then you simply aren't going to be able to compete at that highest level. You then apply experience and effort to produce a capability to be the best at what you do.

I want the guy or gal with that highest level.

Your best refrigeration guy/gal can do all the load calculations for any install. Actually understanding the how you do it and why is a different issue all together. When you install a heating or central air system the operative word is having a balanced system. All the money in the world can buy you the best state if the art equipment. If it isn't installed by a pro, your no better off than when you started.

Cradle: recently my main refrigerator in Boca Grande began a slow decline of cooling. We noticed the milk and other things were not the temperature I had been used to and that we had set for. This thing was a $2,000 install back when.

I called a repair guy who wanted to know the make and model. It's a Frigidaire side by side stainless. Anyway, the repair guy said he would not even come out 'because it's not worth it to fix that model...kinda hurt my feelings! (I actually do have some sweeter appliances in another house). Anyway, he also said, 'have you pulled it out and looked at the coils in the back for any buildup of lint/dust/etc?' and honestly, that had never occurred to me.

So I yanked that sucker out, which was not an easy task as the placement tolerance was approximately 1/1000th of an inch (lol), and I cleaned the back and coils like no one's business. That sucker has worked perfectly since. Who knew!!!!

Also, Gorsuch rules!

That is probably the first thing to do, clean the condenser coils. If the condenser can't breath it won't cool. The second thing on the check list is the condenser fan. If it craps the bed the first thing you will notice is the smell. The condenser will run really hot and stink to high heavens. If your fridge is co2 cooled either pay the big bill or yank it out and put it at the curb. If you see a tag on the back of your fridge saying co2 R744. read your ice box its last rights and put it out of its misery. R290 is the latest player in the game. Hydrocarbon refrigerants are the wave of the future. A standard half horse compressor is charged with about 5 ounces of refrigerant. That is about the same as a small Bic lighter. Environmentally friendly you can vent them, there is no need to reclaim them. Sorry for talking shop. On a grosser note my experience on condenser fan failures usually involve 4 legged rodents with long tails getting caught up in the fan blades, never a pretty sight.

That is nonsense... those jackwagons should know that man has no impact on the environment! Hydrocarbon refrigerants?? Bullsh-i-t!! Those people would know their dingus from their lingus.... https://phys.org/news/2014-09-carbon-di ... erant.html

Signed:

Hip O. Crit

The downside to co2 systems is they run at much higher pressure and are notorious for leaks in the system. My company is working furiously to remove all their inventory of R744 coolers out of inventory and to the junk yard. Environmentally friendly and brutally unreliable The folks at True coolers have switched over almost entirely to R290. That being the propane based hydrocarbon refrigerant also environmentally friendly.

Reducing CO2 green house gases is make believe. We have no control over it.... Just FLP jackwagon talk. These people making the change are just scamming consumers..... The earth will take care of itself....

Signed:

Hip O. Crit

To quote the late George Carlin... " The planet is fine the people are F***ed" You prove his words more true every day. Thread hijack over.

How is George doing these days?

[seacoaster]

Well, back to the Court.

From Amy Howe at SCOTUSBlog, on briefing and scheduling orders issued today:

"The most noteworthy order came instead in a set of cases scheduled for argument in the justices’ upcoming argument session and could potentially derail congressional efforts to obtain President Donald Trump’s financial records.

The justices have scheduled oral argument for May 12 in a trio of cases involving efforts by the U.S. House of Representatives and a Manhattan district attorney to obtain Trump’s financial records from his long-time accountant and his lenders. In the two cases involving Congress, which are consolidated for one hour of argument, the question is whether the committees can subpoena Trump’s records, while in the New York case the question is whether a state grand-jury subpoena can be enforced while the president is in office. Today the justices asked the parties to the congressional-subpoena cases and the federal government, which filed a “friend of the court” brief supporting Trump, to file supplemental briefs addressing whether the political-question doctrine applies to the cases – that is, whether courts should stay out of the fight over the subpoenas because it is fundamentally a political dispute between the branches of government. If the justices were to conclude that the doctrine applies, they could dismiss the cases without ruling on the merits of the dispute – which might be a particularly appealing outcome for some justices in the lead-up to the presidential election. Such a decision could have mixed results for Trump: Without a ruling in his favor, he might not be able to block the accountant or lenders from turning over the records, but on the other hand Congress would not be able to enforce a subpoena if the companies holding the records opted not to comply."

This is a pretty big issue in my view, and I'd like to hear from NJBill, who has been following these cases so far. If the cases are deemed to have raised political questions -- meaning that substantial enough separation of powers and comity between the branches concerns have been raised to warrant the federal courts declining to exercise jurisdiction -- that should raise serious concerns about the ability to exercise any oversight over any President, not just this one. Although the subject matter is different, deeming this a political question would cut another large potential (and important) swath out of the oversight role of the Federal Courts, right on the heels of the Court's determination that partisan gerrymandering is not justiciable in the federal courts.

[seacoaster]

The gun case was simply mooted by the NY legislature's decision to amend the law that offended the Petitioners. The complainant's got their wish when the State of New York backed off. The only interesting thing is Kavanaugh's statement that he agreed with Alito's understanding of Heller and McDonald. As Alito was joined by Gorsuch and Thomas, this would make four justices that agree with whatever Alito is saying. The problem here is you have to take the time to read stuff.

Here is the per curiam decision, followed by Kav's one-paragraph concurring opinion, followed by Alito's long (30 page) opinion on the merits of the original NY law under Heller and McDonald.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/1 ... 0_ba7d.pdf

Pretty darn interesting. Alito concludes that the new law's transport ban -- the new law's requirement that one cannot stop for en route to the range or second home -- plainly violated the Second Amendment, and that it remained ripe and ready for decision by the full Court. The City had argued that the transport ban protects public safety. Alito called these reasons “weak on their face, were not substantiated in any way, and were accepted below with no serious probing.” Alito finally suggested that this case was typical of the way that Heller has been applied in the lower courts, which he called “cause for concern.”

[jhu72]

Insurers win ACA payment case.

[seacoaster]

The DC Circuit en banc consideration of the McGahn tug-of-war was today, as reported in Politico:

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/2 ... ify-214759

"Most of the nine judges who joined in the rare en banc session Tuesday seemed receptive to the House’s concerns, with one judge musing the Trump administration was so intent on sidelining the courts that the public would be left only with "revolution" as an alternative.

A lawyer representing the Trump administration offered a sweeping argument that Congress has no authority to take legal action to enforce its subpoenas because that power lies solely with the president. Rather, lawmakers must rely on a set of political tools — from choking off funding to blocking presidential nominations to impeachment — to bend a stonewalling president to the Congressional will.

“Issuing subpoenas — that's a prerogative of Congress. Enforcing subpoenas and enforcing laws — that’s a prerogative of the president,” Justice Department attorney Hashim Mooppan said.

The House’s top lawyer, Doug Letter, said DOJ’s position would upend decades of practice in congressional investigations and effectively leave lawmakers powerless to stand up to an obstructive administration.

“If the court goes with the Justice Department arguments … congressional oversight as it has been known for this country for years is going to change and be very, very different,” Letter said.

House Democrats are hopeful for a victory from the full appeals court, which is heavy with appointees of President Barack Obama and generally seen as more favorable to the House’s arguments than the three-judge panel which ruled against them 2-1 in February.

Most of the judges taking part in Tuesday’s arguments signaled early and often that they viewed DOJ’s stance with skepticism, repeatedly referencing the extreme notion of the House having to resort to arresting McGahn to get its questions answered or even a judicial resolution of Trump’s claims of executive privilege.

Judge Nina Pillard, an Obama appointee, said DOJ’s stance would leave the House with little but “huge, blunt, disproportionate nuclear options” to try to procure information.

The high-stakes battle over the House’s demand for testimony from McGahn could decide one of the most urgent political issues of Trump’s presidency — whether the White House can block Congress from using the legal system to force crucial witnesses to testify about alleged obstruction of justice by the president himself.

But it also has the potential to reshape the relationship between presidents and Congress for generations to come.

A decision by the courts seems increasingly unlikely to come in any definitive way on a timeline that would produce testimony from McGahn or other witnesses in advance of the November presidential election.

That reality, as some congressional Democrats feared, represents a win for Trump, whom they accused of tying up their case in unending litigation to prevent McGahn from publicly testifying about presidential wrongdoing. McGahn was a central witness in the two-year investigation led by former special counsel Robert Mueller into the Trump campaign’s contacts with Russians in 2016. He ultimately provided damning evidence that Trump repeatedly sought to obstruct the probe, though he declined to recommend criminal charges, citing a Justice Department prohibition on moving against a sitting president."

[RedFromMI]

The DC Circuit en banc consideration of the McGahn tug-of-war was today, as reported in Politico:

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/2 ... ify-214759

"Most of the nine judges who joined in the rare en banc session Tuesday seemed receptive to the House’s concerns, with one judge musing the Trump administration was so intent on sidelining the courts that the public would be left only with "revolution" as an alternative.

(omitted)

Merrick Garland used pointed questioning to, among other things, get Moopan and his cohorts to admit if the President wanted to just pay for the uninsured's health insurance without authorization from Congress they would have no right to sue over it (from TPM article on same thing):

U.S. appellate judge Merrick Garland pushed the Justice Department to the logical extremes of its defense of President Trump by getting a DOJ lawyer to say that Congress couldn’t sue if an administration on its own decided to pay for uninsured people’s health care.

On Tuesday, Garland laid out a hypothetical for DOJ lawyer Hashim Mooppan: Could a President, having failed to pass a health care reform bill, order the Treasury to pay for the health insurance of people who wanted coverage. The hypothetical appeared to be a sly reference to the push by progressives to expand Medicare to cover everyone. Republicans have railed against these legislative “Medicare for All” proposals. (Garland did not use that specific term.)

Mooppan said that Congress would not have the standing to bring such a case.

Garland’s line of inquiry also included a question about whether Congress could sue if a President funded a border wall if Congress explicitly forbade the President from doing so. Mooppan said no, while stressing that he was just answering a hypothetical.

Garland also posed a hypothetical wherein the administration unilaterally issued checks for Americans during the pandemic after a bill authorizing those checks failed in Congress. Mooppan said Congress could not sue in this case either, and the answer prompted a grilling from Garland on who would have standing in that scenario to sue to stop the administration from making those payments.

“That’s a significant power that the President has that can’t be checked by the Congress,” Garland said, referring to the power to spend on health or maintenance that his hypotheticals laid out.

That Merrick Garland.

[seacoaster]

Another article; let me know if you hit the pay wall:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/le ... story.html

[njbill]

The DC Circuit en banc consideration of the McGahn tug-of-war was today, as reported in Politico:

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/2 ... ify-214759

"Most of the nine judges who joined in the rare en banc session Tuesday seemed receptive to the House’s concerns, with one judge musing the Trump administration was so intent on sidelining the courts that the public would be left only with "revolution" as an alternative.

A lawyer representing the Trump administration offered a sweeping argument that Congress has no authority to take legal action to enforce its subpoenas because that power lies solely with the president. Rather, lawmakers must rely on a set of political tools — from choking off funding to blocking presidential nominations to impeachment — to bend a stonewalling president to the Congressional will.

“Issuing subpoenas — that's a prerogative of Congress. Enforcing subpoenas and enforcing laws — that’s a prerogative of the president,” Justice Department attorney Hashim Mooppan said.

The House’s top lawyer, Doug Letter, said DOJ’s position would upend decades of practice in congressional investigations and effectively leave lawmakers powerless to stand up to an obstructive administration.

“If the court goes with the Justice Department arguments … congressional oversight as it has been known for this country for years is going to change and be very, very different,” Letter said.

House Democrats are hopeful for a victory from the full appeals court, which is heavy with appointees of President Barack Obama and generally seen as more favorable to the House’s arguments than the three-judge panel which ruled against them 2-1 in February.

Most of the judges taking part in Tuesday’s arguments signaled early and often that they viewed DOJ’s stance with skepticism, repeatedly referencing the extreme notion of the House having to resort to arresting McGahn to get its questions answered or even a judicial resolution of Trump’s claims of executive privilege.

Judge Nina Pillard, an Obama appointee, said DOJ’s stance would leave the House with little but “huge, blunt, disproportionate nuclear options” to try to procure information.

The high-stakes battle over the House’s demand for testimony from McGahn could decide one of the most urgent political issues of Trump’s presidency — whether the White House can block Congress from using the legal system to force crucial witnesses to testify about alleged obstruction of justice by the president himself.

But it also has the potential to reshape the relationship between presidents and Congress for generations to come.

A decision by the courts seems increasingly unlikely to come in any definitive way on a timeline that would produce testimony from McGahn or other witnesses in advance of the November presidential election.

That reality, as some congressional Democrats feared, represents a win for Trump, whom they accused of tying up their case in unending litigation to prevent McGahn from publicly testifying about presidential wrongdoing. McGahn was a central witness in the two-year investigation led by former special counsel Robert Mueller into the Trump campaign’s contacts with Russians in 2016. He ultimately provided damning evidence that Trump repeatedly sought to obstruct the probe, though he declined to recommend criminal charges, citing a Justice Department prohibition on moving against a sitting president."

I was quite surprised when the initial three judge appellate panel reversed the well reasoned and well written trial court opinion. Not only surprised, but a bit unnerved at the result, which essentially allows for an unchecked, even unfettered, Executive Branch. That's not only antithetical to the checks and balances at the core of our system of government, but -- far more dangerous -- it provides a powerful tool in the toolbox of a dictator, or at least someone who strives to be as close to a dictator as our country will allow.

It is widely expected that the en banc court will reverse the panel's decision, setting the stage for a momentously important battle in the Supreme Court. It is never easy to predict when an appellate court will rule, but my guess is it will be anywhere from a month to a number of months from now. I suspect the decision will be issued before the election. For the Supreme Court to take the case AND issue an opinion before the election is highly unlikely. First, the D.C. Circuit would need to rule quickly. Second, the Supreme Court would need to take the case, get briefs, hear arguments, and issue a decision on a timetable that would require a serious departure from their normal schedule, quite possibly requiring the Court to work past its usual June 30 end date for a term. That's not unprecedented -- the Court did that in 1974 with U.S. v. Nixon -- but if I had to guess, I would strongly suspect the Court would not hear (and decide) the case until the next term, and after the election. That would be the normal way to handle a case like this, and I think the proper way.

How will the Supreme Court rule? I think they will affirm what I expect will be the D.C. Circuit's en banc decision. I think Roberts and maybe Kavanaugh will join the four liberal justices. If the other three have any principles, any belief in our system of government, any ability to look past the current president, they will join the majority. We'll see whether they do. If Biden wins in November, the political landscape will be dramatically different when the decision comes down. I wonder if that will influence the Thomas/Alito/Gorsuch gang?

[njbill]

Well, back to the Court.

From Amy Howe at SCOTUSBlog, on briefing and scheduling orders issued today:

"The most noteworthy order came instead in a set of cases scheduled for argument in the justices’ upcoming argument session and could potentially derail congressional efforts to obtain President Donald Trump’s financial records.

The justices have scheduled oral argument for May 12 in a trio of cases involving efforts by the U.S. House of Representatives and a Manhattan district attorney to obtain Trump’s financial records from his long-time accountant and his lenders. In the two cases involving Congress, which are consolidated for one hour of argument, the question is whether the committees can subpoena Trump’s records, while in the New York case the question is whether a state grand-jury subpoena can be enforced while the president is in office. Today the justices asked the parties to the congressional-subpoena cases and the federal government, which filed a “friend of the court” brief supporting Trump, to file supplemental briefs addressing whether the political-question doctrine applies to the cases – that is, whether courts should stay out of the fight over the subpoenas because it is fundamentally a political dispute between the branches of government. If the justices were to conclude that the doctrine applies, they could dismiss the cases without ruling on the merits of the dispute – which might be a particularly appealing outcome for some justices in the lead-up to the presidential election. Such a decision could have mixed results for Trump: Without a ruling in his favor, he might not be able to block the accountant or lenders from turning over the records, but on the other hand Congress would not be able to enforce a subpoena if the companies holding the records opted not to comply."

This is a pretty big issue in my view, and I'd like to hear from NJBill, who has been following these cases so far. If the cases are deemed to have raised political questions -- meaning that substantial enough separation of powers and comity between the branches concerns have been raised to warrant the federal courts declining to exercise jurisdiction -- that should raise serious concerns about the ability to exercise any oversight over any President, not just this one. Although the subject matter is different, deeming this a political question would cut another large potential (and important) swath out of the oversight role of the Federal Courts, right on the heels of the Court's determination that partisan gerrymandering is not justiciable in the federal courts.

This is, indeed, a noteworthy order with possibly ominous implications. I haven't read the initial briefs so I don't know if the "political question" issue has or has not been briefed by the parties. If it has already been briefed, it would seem that for some reason one or more Justices think the issue hasn't been adequately covered.

My hunch, though, it that the parties and the Feds have not briefed the issue, which I am pretty sure was not raised or decided in the courts below. I don't know what the Supreme Court's rules or protocols are for asking the parties to file supplemental briefs on an issue they didn't brief, but clearly one, or likely more than one, Justice thought the issue should be briefed.

The tea leaves suggest to me that the Justices who want the issue briefed may at least preliminarily be leaning towards dismissing the case on "political question" grounds. It is unusual, but not unprecedented, for the Court to decide a case on an issue not raised by the parties.

Here is the wikipedia page on political question which provides a pretty good explanation of the doctrine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_question

The doctrine is somewhat complicated and not particularly clearly (or consistently) applied by the courts. Here's one description I found:

"The political question doctrine could be read narrowly or more broadly. Read narrowly, the political question doctrine should be invoked only when the issue presented to the Court is one that 'has been textually committed to another branch of government.' That is, if the framers of the Constitution made clear their intention that the judiciary not resolve a particular question of constitutional interpretation, that determination must be respected. More broadly, the political question doctrine might be invoked when there is a lack of judicially manageable standards to decide the case on the merits, when judicial intervention might show insufficient respect for other branches of government, or when a judicial decision might threaten the integrity of the judicial branch."

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/f ... tions.html

Two of the three cases to be heard by the Supreme Court involve subpoenas issued by the House to Trump's accountants and banks. The House is not attempting to subpoena documents from Trump, directly, of from the Executive Branch or any federal department or agency. Stripped of their legal niceties, it seems that Trump is arguing the House is out to get him (that is, his tax returns) for political reasons and not to advance any legitimate legislative purpose.

In one of the cases, the House Oversight Committee subpoenaed documents from Trump's accountants based on testimony from Michael Cohen that Trump inflated his total assets when it served his purposes and deflated his assets to reduce his real estate taxes. Trump has argued the House has no authority to subpoena records unless it seeks information for the purpose of writing laws. In this case, they said, the House was improperly acting as an investigative body in an action that implicates the president.

In the other case, the House Financial Services Committee subpoenaed records from Trump's banks, Deutsche Bank and Capital One. Also, the House Intelligence Committee subpoenaed records from Deutsche Bank, explaining that it was investigating "potential leverage that foreign actors may have over President Trump, his family, and his businesses." The president's lawyers said the subpoenas were extraordinarily broad, because they seek more than a decade's worth of documents and covering members of his family who have never held public office and ask for "virtually every financial detail that the institutions might have" about their private affairs.

Ordinarily, the Legislative Branch is given wide latitude to perform its functions. The lower court decisions in these two cases enforcing the subpoenas, thus, are unremarkable, except for the fact that the president's records are involved. The Supreme Court obviously understands how highly charged these cases are. Dismissing the case on political question grounds would allow the Court to sidestep the core issue of whether the House can subpoena Trump's tax returns. The Court wouldn't have to expressly rule in his favor or against him. I agree with those who say the Court (or at least some members) may want to duck these cases during an election year.

Some commentators have suggested that if the Supreme Court dismisses the cases on political question grounds, Trump's banks and accountants will turn over his tax returns since they have said they will comply with a valid subpoena. If the Court dismisses the cases because they raise political questions, the Court would not have ruled the subpoenas to be invalid. On the other hand, the Court will have decided that federal courts cannot enforce the subpoenas. Very interesting question as to what the accountants and banks would do, but my money says they wouldn't turn over the records.

Then there is the third case before the Supreme Court involving the New York state grand jury subpoenas to which the political question doctrine does not apply. The Court will need to decide that case on its merits. I suspect Trump is less concerned about his tax returns being leaked by a grand jury, even a NY state grand jury.

Interestingly to me, Trump's NY state tax returns have not been leaked. I'm not familiar with what info is in NY returns so I don't know if they contain less info than would be in a federal return. Some states require the taxpayer to file a copy of his federal return with his state return. I don't know if NY is such a state. I imagine our NY posters would know the answer to that.

And, lastly, there is what I think is the strongest case for getting Trump’s tax returns, which isn't yet before the Supreme Court. That case involves the request of the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee for Trump’s tax returns pursuant to a 1976 statute that was enacted in the aftermath of Watergate. That law provides that the Treasury Department “shall” furnish “any” tax return requested by the Chairman. There is no exception for the president's tax return. Indeed, the very purpose of the law was to ensure access to the president's returns. Treasury also refused to comply with the Chairman’s follow up subpoena. The Committee has filed suit to enforce the subpoena. In the lawsuit, the Committee says that nothing in the law requires it to explain its reasons for seeking tax return information, but the Committee cites to its investigations into IRS administration of tax laws and policies relating to presidential tax returns and Trump’s compliance, including the tax agency’s annual audit of returns of sitting presidents.

This case is still in the trial court which has stayed the action pending the decision from the D.C. Circuit in the Don McGahn case, which was argued today. I suspect the trial court's stay will remain in place until the Supreme Court rules.

sc, I completely agree with your last paragraph. If the two House cases and the McGahn case were to be dismissed on political question grounds, Congress' legislative and oversight powers would be significantly restricted. Congress would become a toothless tiger in important respects. Correspondingly, the president and Executive Branch would essentially be able to do as they please without fear that their records or personnel would be subjected to Congressional inquiry or questioning. As they say, what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. No more Benghazi hearings. Do the Rs really want that?

To my thinking, that's no way to run a railroad. True and meaningful Congressional oversight (Ds over Rs and Rs over Ds) is essential to maintaining a proper check on the president and Executive Branch. Everyone should want that.

[Peter Brown]

Unaccountable federal agencies and leftist agitators are such an awful combination for American excellence.

Ben Domenech wrote a funny joke on Twitter and some rando Massachusetts class action arse filed a claim with the NLRB claiming that Ben had violated federal employer law (not even on behalf of the employees!); oh not for nothing, this plaintiff has quite the colorful vulgar Twitter feed going after, among all people, Ben's wife.

Thankfully Ben has the dough to fight this case and win (helping each and every one of you), but imagine if you are a small business owner and any rando in the country could file an NLRB claim against your company for any reason. Anarchy and chaos. What Democrats want.

I won't even get into the weeds on this case, as eventually it will be gratefully tossed by level headed jurists (though not the career administrative judge ruling now, whose politics are also against Ben's...). What's far more important is once again, Democrats bare their fangs at free speech time and time and time again, and yet there are those even here at Fanlax who swear Democrats are all good with free speech. They aren't, nothing could be further from the truth; Democrats treat free speech as a means to an end, not an end in itself.

The seeds of crushing dissenting speech always happen within leftist ideology, and by the time it's apparent even to the most ardent leftist, it's too far along to halt the momentum of totalitarianism.

Awful. Defeat Democrats to preserve your fundamental liberties.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/ ... salt-mine/

[Kismet]

During today's live telecon oral arguments, someone on the call failed to mute their phone when all of a sudden there was the distinct sound of a toilet flushing as one of the lawyers was making his case to the Justices. the toilet flush and other background noise could be heard as Roman Martinez, an attorney for the AAPC, was presenting arguments. The noise did not appear to come from Martinez's line, but from another unmuted person on the teleconference.

[njbill]

Wouldn’t you like to have been a fly on the wall during the justices post oral argument conference call today? I wonder if the guilty party fessed up?

[cradleandshoot]

The DC Circuit en banc consideration of the McGahn tug-of-war was today, as reported in Politico:

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/2 ... ify-214759

"Most of the nine judges who joined in the rare en banc session Tuesday seemed receptive to the House’s concerns, with one judge musing the Trump administration was so intent on sidelining the courts that the public would be left only with "revolution" as an alternative.

A lawyer representing the Trump administration offered a sweeping argument that Congress has no authority to take legal action to enforce its subpoenas because that power lies solely with the president. Rather, lawmakers must rely on a set of political tools — from choking off funding to blocking presidential nominations to impeachment — to bend a stonewalling president to the Congressional will.

“Issuing subpoenas — that's a prerogative of Congress. Enforcing subpoenas and enforcing laws — that’s a prerogative of the president,” Justice Department attorney Hashim Mooppan said.

The House’s top lawyer, Doug Letter, said DOJ’s position would upend decades of practice in congressional investigations and effectively leave lawmakers powerless to stand up to an obstructive administration.

“If the court goes with the Justice Department arguments … congressional oversight as it has been known for this country for years is going to change and be very, very different,” Letter said.

House Democrats are hopeful for a victory from the full appeals court, which is heavy with appointees of President Barack Obama and generally seen as more favorable to the House’s arguments than the three-judge panel which ruled against them 2-1 in February.

Most of the judges taking part in Tuesday’s arguments signaled early and often that they viewed DOJ’s stance with skepticism, repeatedly referencing the extreme notion of the House having to resort to arresting McGahn to get its questions answered or even a judicial resolution of Trump’s claims of executive privilege.

Judge Nina Pillard, an Obama appointee, said DOJ’s stance would leave the House with little but “huge, blunt, disproportionate nuclear options” to try to procure information.

The high-stakes battle over the House’s demand for testimony from McGahn could decide one of the most urgent political issues of Trump’s presidency — whether the White House can block Congress from using the legal system to force crucial witnesses to testify about alleged obstruction of justice by the president himself.

But it also has the potential to reshape the relationship between presidents and Congress for generations to come.

A decision by the courts seems increasingly unlikely to come in any definitive way on a timeline that would produce testimony from McGahn or other witnesses in advance of the November presidential election.

That reality, as some congressional Democrats feared, represents a win for Trump, whom they accused of tying up their case in unending litigation to prevent McGahn from publicly testifying about presidential wrongdoing. McGahn was a central witness in the two-year investigation led by former special counsel Robert Mueller into the Trump campaign’s contacts with Russians in 2016. He ultimately provided damning evidence that Trump repeatedly sought to obstruct the probe, though he declined to recommend criminal charges, citing a Justice Department prohibition on moving against a sitting president."

Your point defines why more and more people applying for handgun permits in NYS are going the concealed carry route. If you are breaking the law because you have to stop to get a cup of coffee and pee on your way to the rifle range. That just does not make any sense.

[seacoaster]

A unanimous Court overturns the conviction of Chris Christie's Deputy Chief of Staff:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/1 ... 9_e2p3.pdf