(C) Daily Kos
This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .



Excepting Climate, Nothing is a Greater Concern to the USA than Rulings of Federal Judges. [1]

['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.', 'Backgroundurl Avatar_Large', 'Nickname', 'Joined', 'Created_At', 'Story Count', 'N_Stories', 'Comment Count', 'N_Comments', 'Popular Tags']

Date: 2022-10-03

Let’s assess our concerns. Putin and his 7/2 off suit ham-handed bluff attempt? Nope. The border? Don’t make me chuckle. Opioids? Bad, but nope. See none of this matters as much as the judiciary, because with rare exception, the judiciary can negatively affect the outcomes of most anything. Climate was undermined by the Supreme Court. We know about Roe. And we will let them know about our rage through our vote in November. But there are so many other impactful cases on the docket, and way too many Federalists with their hands on them.

Let’s start with a recent lawsuit, this time concerning student loan relief.

In one of the first significant legal challenges to President Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan, a public interest lawyer filed a lawsuit Tuesday arguing that the policy is an abuse of executive power. Plaintiff Frank Garrison claims that because of the forthcoming student loan forgiveness, he will be forced to pay state taxes on the amount canceled – an expense he would otherwise avoid. The lawsuit is backed by Garrison’s employer, the Pacific Legal Foundation – a nonprofit libertarian law firm. It was filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, the state where Garrison resides.

The Biden administration responded thusly: if you don’t want debt relief, don’t apply for it. Most legal experts seem to think the lawsuit is doomed to fail. Ah yes, if it were only about applying the law. Allow me to remind you about the opinions of Trump’s special master request before we realized who was on the bench.

Yes. Nonsensical, ridiculous, and my Twitter favorite, “That is not how any of this works.” I have heard that one since 2000. For the most part, that is exactly how it has worked. So would a rogue judge actually issue a stay and delay much needed relief for millions of Americans? In this case they didn’t as the claim was tossed.

But, regarding student loan relief, there was more opposition from the usual crowd-

President Joe Biden announced his plan last month to cancel $10,000 in student loans for those who meet certain income requirements and $20,000 for students who received Pell Grants who met the same requirements. The lawsuit was filed Thursday in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri by the attorneys general of Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska and South Carolina. It accuses the Biden administration of violating federal law including “the constitutional principle of separation of powers and the Administrative Procedure Act when he skirted congressional authority to implement this policy.’

And these AGs have already indirectly changed the financial prospects of 4 million Americans-

But even as the lawsuit was announced, ED seemingly countered the plaintiffs' central argument by changing guidelines addressing the Federal Family Education Loans (FFEL) program. NPR reported Thursday that the department quietly changed the guidance on its website to state: “As of Sept. 29, 2022, borrowers with federal student loans not held by ED cannot obtain one-time debt relief by consolidating those loans into Direct Loans." The move may counter Republicans' lawsuit, but it would also likely put student loan debt forgiveness out of reach for approximately 4 million borrowers with commercially held FFEL loans, depending on how many consolidated before the new deadline.

That in mind, let me introduce you to someone who keeps me up at night, as someone who needs his Obamacare.

Reed ‘O Connor, of Texas, is a Federal judge appointed by George W. Bush who has opposed Obamacare. In the following ruling, he considers this “equal justice under the law.”

In a ruling issued September 7th, District Judge Reed O’Connor voided a mandate under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) which requires employers cover certain preventive healthcare products and services if these violate their religious beliefs. Here, Reed O’Connor reveals an implicitly pro-death stance, coupled with a fundamental misunderstanding of health insurance. O’Connor is no stranger to controversy. As a federal judge on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, he has issued several rulings against Obamacare, on the grounds of what the judge deemed to the unconstitutionality of the Act as well as its purported violation of religious freedom. In this instance, O’Connor is striking down an ACA requirement that insurers cover pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, which prevents transmission of the HIV virus, as well as contraception, the HPV vaccine (which prevents cervical cancer), and screenings and behavioral counseling for illicit drug use as well as sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). According to O’Connor’s opinion, “compulsory coverage for [these] services violates [employers’] religious beliefs by making them complicit in facilitating homosexual behavior and [illegal] drug use.”

Wow. Just wow. I bolded the last phrase to highlight his use of the word complicit as it applies to “homosexual behavior.” Merriam Webster defines complict as such:

complicit adjective com·​plic·​it | \ kəm-ˈpli-sət \ Definition of complicit : helping to commit a crime or do wrong in some way He was complicit in the cover-up.

But not to be outdone, I saved what could be the scariest for last. Here below we have a case that if wrongly decided, could end democracy as we know it. This, is Moore vs. Harper, and what is at stake.

The immediate issue in Moore is whether the state legislators’ extreme partisan gerrymander will stand in North Carolina. But adopting the independent state legislature theory would also mean that voters across the country have no judicial remedy — in state court or in federal court — to fight partisan gerrymandering. The potential consequences could stretch still further. The theory would throw elections into chaos, nullifying hundreds of election rules put in place through ballot initiatives, state constitutions, and administrative regulations — including foundational state policies like the processes for voter registration and mail voting and basic guarantees like the secret ballot. State lawmakers would be able to adopt vote suppression legislation without any checks or balances from state courts or even gubernatorial veto. In other words, the theory would upend key aspects of our elections.

In other words, wrongly decided, rogue legislatures could overthrow election results they don’t like. Now will that happen? Decades ago, I would have laughed. Ten years ago I would have raised an eyebrow then scoffed.

Now?

Well, you can keep telling me that “this is not how any of this works.” You can tell me that.

I know how it is supposed to work.

I also know how too often, it doesn’t.

-ROC

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/10/3/2125711/-Excepting-Climate-Nothing-is-a-Greater-Concern-to-the-USA-than-Rulings-of-Federal-Judges

Published and (C) by Daily Kos
Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified.

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/