US supreme court rules on three major cases; Trump immunity ruling expected Monday – live | US supreme court

The 6-3 decision in the case of Fischer v. United States may also affect the federal criminal case against Donald Trump, who is accused of similar crimes in the special prosecutor’s office Jack Smithinvestigation into the attack.

Trump faces four criminal charges in the case, one of which is a violation of 18 USC section 1512(c)(2). He is also charged with conspiracy to obstruct official proceedings. His lawyers can now argue that those two charges fall under the narrower standard announced by the Supreme Court on Friday.

Some experts argue that the evidence against Trump would allow the fees to hold ourselves to even a narrower standard.

The court’s decision will have profound implications for the hundreds of rebels on January 6

Environmental, health, civil rights and labor groups have warned that removing Chevron solution will undo the regulatory framework that has improved the health, safety, and welfare of Americans for four decades.

It would also undermine efforts to protect the environment and combat the climate crisis.

The Supreme Court is “pushing the nation into uncharted waters as it usurps, seizes power from our elected branches of government to push its deregulatory agenda,” Sambhav Sankar, a lawyer with the environmental group earthly justice, said in a statement carried by AP. The statement continues:

Conservative justices are aggressively reshaping the foundations of our government so that the president and Congress have less power to protect the public and corporations have more power to challenge regulations in search of profits. This decision threatens the legitimacy of hundreds of regulations that keep us safe, protect our homes and environment, and create a level playing field for businesses.

Adam Schiff, the California Democratic congressman, criticized the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Chevron solution.

Schiff, in a post to X, warned that “our people and our planet will feel the consequences” of the court’s ruling today. He wrote:

This biased Supreme Court just broke another precedent, overturning Chevron and weakening our ability to fight the climate crisis, hold corporations accountable, and more.

Minister of Justice Merrick Garland, in his statementsaid the court’s decision would not affect the “vast majority” of the more than 1,400 defendants charged in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

There are no instances in which the Department has charged a defendant since January 6 solely with the offense at issue in the Fischer case. For cases affected by today’s decision, the Department will take appropriate steps to comply with the Court’s decision.

Garland continued:

We will continue to use all tools at our disposal to hold accountable those criminally responsible for the January 6th attack on our democracy.

Merrick Garland is “disappointed” by the court’s Jan. 6 decision

The Biden administration has previously warned that repealing the Chevron doctrine could have a “convulsive” impact on the functioning of government.

Voting as a bloc, the six right-wing justices who hold the supermajority overruled the Supreme Court’s own 1984 opinion. Chevron USA Inc v. Natural Resources Defense Councilwhich requires courts to consider knowledge of government experts in their judicious interpretation of ambiguous laws.

In recent years, the Chevron doctrine has become a central target of right-wing groups who blame it for what they see as a proliferation of government regulations enforced by unelected bureaucrats in the so-called “deep state.”

A key group behind the Supreme Court challenge, the New Alliance for Civil Liberties, Is founded with seed money from the oil billionaire Charles Koch.

IN raft on amicus briefs before the court, coalitions of scientists, environmentalists and labor organizations warned that eliminating Chevron would undo a regulatory framework that for four decades has improved the health, safety and welfare of Americans. It would also undermine efforts to protect the environment and combat the climate crisis.

Chief Justice John Roberts, in the decision overturning the landmark Chevron decision, wrote:

Courts must exercise their independent discretion when deciding whether an agency acted within its statutory authority.

Roberts wrote that the decision did not call into question previous cases that relied on the Chevron decision.

justice Elena Kagan, writing in the dissent, said the decision was “yet another example of the Court’s determination to override agency authority, despite congressional directions to the contrary.” Kagan wrote:

The rule of judicial humility gives way to the rule of judicial arrogance. In recent years, this Court has too often usurped the decision-making authority Congress has granted to agencies.

Jim Jordan, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, issued a statement following the Supreme Court decision, which he overturned Chevron Doctrine that for the past 40 years has guided the work of the federal government in critical areas of public life.

Jordan’s statement read:

Today’s decision corrects the decades-long mistake of granting vague and broad powers to unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats. The Supreme Court decision restores the constitutional power to write the law where it should be – with the elected representatives of the American people.

The Supreme Court will rule on Trump’s immunity request on Monday

This is how the judges voted in Fischer a case overturning a lower court ruling that allowed a charge of corruptly obstructing an official against the former Pennsylvania police officer.