Latest news with #Supremes
Hamilton Spectator
23-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Hamilton Spectator
Hamilton Motown tribute to support St. Matt's housing project
A Motown tribute is coming to a Hamilton performing arts centre next week. On Thursday, May 29, Motown Mania will bring performances of hits by stars such as Diana Ross and the Supremes, the Temptations and the Jackson 5 to the McIntyre Performing Arts Centre at Mohawk College. The Holk Family event's proceeds will go to non-profit St. Matt's, formerly St. Matthew's House, and the 412 Barton Project. In the fall, the 412 Barton Project will shelter 15 homeless or low-income seniors in Hamilton and provide wraparound services. Priority will be given to women, people with disabilities and members of the BIPOC community. The event starts at 7 p.m. at 135 Fennell Ave. W., Hamilton . Tickets range from $45 to $55. To buy, go to . Cheyenne Bholla is a reporter at The Hamilton Spectator. cbholla@
New York Post
19-05-2025
- Politics
- New York Post
Supreme Court attacks are a fool's game for GOP — even when rulings don't go Trump's way
The Supreme Court rules against President Donald Trump sometimes — and that's OK. But some of the very Republicans who fought for decades to bring the court back in line with constitutional values and the rule of law seem to have forgotten what that long battle was all about. In recent years, the Supremes have weathered a storm of smears and threats from left-wingers aghast at the idea that the judiciary might not accede completely to their wishes. Recall the catastrophic Democratic threats to pack the court that, had they been realized, would have done irreparable damage to the country's political compact. Somehow that was the least of progressives' offenses. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer warned Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh that they would 'reap the whirlwind' if they didn't substitute his political preferences for their legal judgments. 'Mostly peaceful' protesters gathered outside justices' homes to intimidate them and their families. A would-be assassin showed up at Kavanaugh's home —and revealed after his arrest that he'd plotted additional attacks on conservative justices to let then-President Joe Biden replace them with liberals. It was the logical conclusion of Schumer's call for revenge and the left's threat to forcibly remake the court itself. The Democrats' years-long effort to delegitimize an essential American institution makes a mockery of their self-professed commitment to decency and democracy. Yet now some on the right have adopted those very talking points. Just look at the widespread outcry last week after a 7-2 majority paused the immediate deportation of some of those targeted by Trump's use of the Alien Enemies Act against alleged gang members. Stephen Miller, the powerful deputy White House chief of staff, raged on social media, accusing the court of 'sabotaging democracy' and accommodating 'foreign terrorists.' Mike Davis of the influential Article III Project suggested that Trump should suspend the writ of habeas corpus and 'house the terrorists near the Chevy Chase Country Club, with daytime release' — a thinly veiled threat the president reposted. Radio talker Jesse Kelly called on Trump to 'ignore the Supreme Court. Arrest anyone who tries to enforce this,' and even 'dissolve the Supreme Court entirely if they push.' And the president himself expressed fury at the court — a third of it composed of his appointees, who all decided against him in this case. 'The worst murderers, drug dealers, gang members, and even those who are mentally insane, who came into our Country illegally, are not allowed to be forced out without going through a long, protracted, and expensive Legal Process,' he raged. The outburst followed an online smear campaign against Trump-appointed Amy Coney Barrett for being the swing vote in a few cases that didn't go his way earlier this year. Some self-professed Trump allies even blasted him for making the 'evil' Barrett a 'DEI' hire. Exactly none of the outrage or invective is warranted. The court, like every other part of the federal government, is not beyond reproach — but in its current form, most of its members are faithfully attempting to do their job of accurately interpreting the law and applying it to the fact patterns of particular cases. It's extremely misleading to adopt the framing of partisans and the press, who regularly speak as if it's the court's role to make policy determinations. On the contrary, its decisions must hinge not on members' policy preferences, but on boring yet important procedural issues. In the Alien Enemies Act case, for example, the court found that the Trump administration had not provided necessary due process to some of those detained and scheduled to be deported. Under the law as written, as legal luminaries like Ed Whelan and John Yoo have observed, those targeted under the Alien Enemies Act must have the right to challenge their designation as enemies — actually giving them more due process than other illegal immigrants. So no, this court isn't pulling out every stop it can to keep illegals in the country — witness its Monday ruling lifting a deportation stay on 350,000 temporarily admitted Venezuelans. It's merely interpreting the letter of the law and applying it to the facts of this case, without fear or favor. Just as it did when it incited Democrats' fury by overturning Roe v. Wade, protecting Second Amendment rights, invalidating Biden's illegal student-loan debt transfer, and taking a wrecking ball to the runaway federal bureaucracy. Over the last 30 years, the GOP has helped shape the court into a bulwark against extra-constitutional action from power-hungry progressives. It would be a massive mistake to join with Democrats in undermining Americans' trust in the judiciary now — particularly on the basis of shortsighted misinterpretations that look like the mirror image of the left's tired, shameful campaign to blow it up. Isaac Schorr is a staff writer at Mediaite.
American Military News
18-05-2025
- Politics
- American Military News
Supreme Court hears arguments in Trump birthright citizenship challenge
The Supreme Court Thursday heard arguments on President Donald Trump's landmark effort to end birthright citizenship, which has been considered settled law for more than 150 years after being enshrined in the Constitution's 14th Amendment. A majority of judges on the conservative-dominated court sounded skeptical about Trump's effort to overturn the longstanding principle that anyone born in the U.S. is a citizen, regardless of how their mother or parents got here. 'On the merits, you are wrong,' Justice Elena Kagain told Solicitor General D. John Sauer. 'The (order) is unlawful.' But the justices seemed more receptive to the White House's related objection to nationwide injunctions issued by federal judges that have blocked many of his executive orders. The Supremes did not immediately issue any order and are expected to rule before the end of their current term by July 1. Trump issued an executive order soon after taking office in January that barred government officials from recognizing the children of undocumented immigrants as U.S. citizens, effectively ending birthright citizenship Advocates for immigrants sued to block the policy and have quickly won injunctions from several federal district court judges. Trump's Department of Justice has appealed those rulings, claiming that the 14th Amendment was only intended to apply to the children of recently freed slaves. 'Birthright citizenship was not meant for people taking vacations to become permanent Citizens of the United States of America, and bringing their families with them, all the time laughing at the 'SUCKERS' that we are!' Trump wrote on his social media site. Birthright citizenship was enacted in the post-Civil War 14th Amendment and has been upheld by the Supreme Court several times since. It says anyone 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside,' wording that would appear to unequivocally include children of undocumented immigrants born on U.S. soil. The White House also wants the Supreme Court to stop judges from issuing what it derides as 'universal injunctions,' which have temporarily blocked many of Trump's executive orders on a range of issues. Trump says no one judge should be allowed to block a policy nationwide. But proponents say they should have the power to protect citizens against overreach from the president or other authorities. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said such a ruling would 'turn our justice system into a 'catch me if you can' regime' where only individual people who sue can win the benefits of a favorable judgment. 'I don't understand how that's remotely consistent with the rule of law,' Jackson said. Birthright citizenship is among several issues the administration has asked the court to deal with on an emergency basis, after lower courts acted to slow Trump's agenda. The justices are considering the administration's pleas to end protective status from about 850,000 people from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela, which could result in their deportation. Judges also blocked Trump's order banning transgender people from serving in the military, although the Supreme Court ruled that policy could be implemented while the cases wind their way through the courts. ___ © 2025 New York Daily News. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
Glasgow Times
17-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Glasgow Times
Diana Ross slashes ticket prices for only Scottish date
The I'm Coming Out singer announced a "surprise seat ticket offer" for her Glasgow OVO Hydro show on June 25 this year. An email sent out to fans said: "From now until 10am, Monday 19 May you can see Diana Ross - Live in Concert for just £40 + fees!" The message goes on to explain that if you participate, you will be randomly assigned a seat anywhere in the venue. READ MORE: What Glasgow gave Diana Ross when US singer dazzled city in the 70s Diana Ross slashes ticket prices for only Scottish date (Image: Sourced) They explained: "You pay for a ticket, and you'll get a great seat anywhere in the venue from front to back - all you need to do is sit back, sing along, and enjoy the show." Diana last played in Glasgow at the Hydro in June 2022. READ MORE: Diana Ross to perform show at Glasgow OVO Hydro The American legendary singer is known as the 'Queen of Motown' and shot to fame as the lead singer of the group the Supremes. One fan couldn't believe the offer: "Diana Ross for only £40?! What a steal! "She might sing I'm Coming Up, but I'll be SNAPPING up that bargain."
Yahoo
15-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Supreme Court hears arguments in Trump birthright citizenship challenge
The Supreme Court Thursday heard arguments on President Donald Trump's landmark effort to end birthright citizenship, which has been considered settled law for more than 150 years after being enshrined in the Constitution's 14th Amendment. A majority of judges on the conservative-dominated court sounded skeptical about Trump's effort to overturn the longstanding principle that anyone born in the U.S. is a citizen, regardless of how their mother or parents got here. 'On the merits, you are wrong,' Justice Elena Kagain told Solicitor General D. John Sauer. 'The (order) is unlawful.' But the justices seemed more receptive to the White House's related objection to nationwide injunctions issued by federal judges that have blocked many of his executive orders. The Supremes did not immediately issue any order and are expected to rule before the end of their current term by July 1. Trump issued an executive order soon after taking office in January that barred government officials from recognizing the children of undocumented immigrants as U.S. citizens, effectively ending birthright citizenship Advocates for immigrants sued to block the policy and have quickly won injunctions from several federal district court judges. Trump's Department of Justice has appealed those rulings, claiming that the 14th Amendment was only intended to apply to the children of recently freed slaves. 'Birthright citizenship was not meant for people taking vacations to become permanent Citizens of the United States of America, and bringing their families with them, all the time laughing at the 'SUCKERS' that we are!' Trump wrote on his social media site. Birthright citizenship was enacted in the post-Civil War 14th Amendment and has been upheld by the Supreme Court several times since. It says anyone 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside,' wording that would appear to unequivocally include children of undocumented immigrants born on U.S. soil. The White House also wants the Supreme Court to stop judges from issuing what it derides as 'universal injunctions,' which have temporarily blocked many of Trump's executive orders on a range of issues. Trump says no one judge should be allowed to block a policy nationwide. But proponents say they should have the power to protect citizens against overreach from the president or other authorities. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said such a ruling would 'turn our justice system into a 'catch me if you can' regime' where only individual people who sue can win the benefits of a favorable judgment. 'I don't understand how that's remotely consistent with the rule of law,' Jackson said. Birthright citizenship is among several issues the administration has asked the court to deal with on an emergency basis, after lower courts acted to slow Trump's agenda. The justices are considering the administration's pleas to end protective status from about 850,000 people from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela, which could result in their deportation. Judges also blocked Trump's order banning transgender people from serving in the military, although the Supreme Court ruled that policy could be implemented while the cases wind their way through the courts.
