The US supreme court will hear a case on severe abortion restrictions in Louisiana that promises to have wide-ranging impacts on women’s lives. But what is astonishing about the case is what is the same – the measure in question is nearly identical to a Texas law the court struck down just three years ago.

...

US top court divided as it ponders LGBT rights
The US Supreme Court appears divided over whether a civil rights law barring workplace discrimination applies to gay and transgender workers.

The top court heard arguments regarding two cases of alleged discrimination against gay employees, and a third involving transgender discrimination.

Protesters from both sides gathered outside the court as arguments began.

The cases may be a landmark for LGBT rights in the US, four years after gay marriage became legal nationwide.

The top court's liberal quartet indicated their agreement with the plaintiffs and the argument that LGBT workers should be covered by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

Of the conservative justices, only Trump-appointed Neil Gorsuch appeared sympathetic to the plaintiffs - an early signal that he may cast the decisive vote.

Decisions from the nine justices on America's highest court are due by next June.

Steven Vladeck wrote:Of the 22 stays the Trump administration has sought from #SCOTUS to date (versus 8 DOJ requests over the prior 16 years), here’s the updated scorecard:

9 granted in full;
3 granted in part/denied in part;
3 withdrawn; and
7 denied in full.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh seemed key to the outcome of the Supreme Court’s consideration of a restrictive abortion law from Louisiana, with both wondering Wednesday how a 2016 decision striking down an identical law from Texas should guide their judgment.

With the court’s four liberals appearing convinced that the Louisiana law is unconstitutional, Roberts could cast the deciding vote in the court’s first examination of abortion since President Trump’s two nominees joined the bench.

He asked a variation of the same question at least three times: Should the court undertake a fact-dependent, state-by-state review when examining a law’s restrictions? He did not indicate that he had made up his mind on the question.

The justices are examining whether the state’s 2014 law requiring doctors at abortion clinics to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals unduly burdens women’s access to abortion. Practitioners claim, and a federal judge agreed, that the law could force two of the state’s abortion clinics to close, leaving only one doctor to perform the procedures.

...

US Supreme Court bars discrimination against LGBT workers in landmark ruling

The US Supreme Court has delivered a watershed victory for LGBT rights — and a defeat for President Donald Trump's administration — by ruling that a longstanding law barring workplace discrimination also protects gay and transgender employees.

The landmark 6-3 ruling represented the biggest moment for LGBT rights in the United States since the Supreme Court legalised same-sex marriage nationwide in 2015.

Two conservative justices joined the court's four liberals in the decision: Neil Gorsuch, a 2017 Trump administration appointee who wrote the ruling, and Chief Justice John Roberts.

laklak wrote:Kavanaugh dissented, but on technical grounds (separation of powers). He congratulated the LBGT community on the decision.

A seat on SCOTUS changes people.

laklak wrote:The Donald isn't having a particularly good time with SCOTUS recently. They've ruled in a 5-4 decision that Trump's efforts to end the DACA program violated federal regulations. Roberts cast the deciding vote.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-rules-against-trump-administration-over-move-to-end-daca-program

laklak wrote:SCOTUS strikes down Louisiana law restricting abortions.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/scotus-strikes-down-louisiana-law-that-placed-restrictions-on-abortion-clinics

Roberts casts the deciding vote. Trumpy gonna have apoplexy.

laklak wrote:SCOTUS strikes down Louisiana law restricting abortions.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/scotus-strikes-down-louisiana-law-that-placed-restrictions-on-abortion-clinics

Roberts casts the deciding vote. Trumpy gonna have apoplexy.

felltoearth wrote:What they are effectively saying is that while abortion is legal, all these efforts to make it difficult to obtain one is unconstitutional. This will be the result of most SCOTUS challenges until it is made illegal which is the actual goal.