Democrats will avoid block on US Supreme Court pick

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
Presidential Candidates ◽  
Personal Influence ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Regulatory Powers

Significance President Donald Trump nominated Gorsuch to fill the Supreme Court seat left vacant by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death last year. Congressional Republicans blocked former President Barack Obama’s nominee to fill the vacancy, Judge Merrick Garland, enabling Trump to name a conservative justice to set the balance of the Court after winning the presidential election. At least one Democratic senator has threatened to block Gorsuch’s appointment via upper house procedure. Impacts Future Democratic presidential candidates from the current Senate may suffer in primaries if they allow Gorsuch’s appointment. Gorsuch will help the White House and Congress severely cut back federal regulatory powers. Congressional Republicans are more likely to defy Trump on personnel and policy as his personal influence wanes ahead of the 2020 elections.

US Supreme Court-packing unlikely

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Change ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
Presidential Nomination ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
Conservative Bias

Significance Rubio's move comes as several candidates for the Democratic Party's 2020 presidential nomination are discussing 'packing' the Supreme Court -- adding justices intended to nullify the perceived long-term conservative bias of the Court following Trump-era appointments. Impacts A constitutional change to limit the Supreme Court to nine justices is unlikely: amendments are purposely hard. Court-packing would not guarantee 'Democratic' or 'Republican' rulings: much depends on the case and how justices feel. Packing the courts would likely increase their politicisation, and potentially slow their deliberative capacity. If Trump wins a second term and Republicans keep the Senate, they will appoint further conservative justices. If the Democrats win the White House and Senate in 2020, they might 'pack' the lower courts.

Prospects for US politics to end-2017

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Equity Markets ◽  
Election Outcome ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
2016 Election ◽  
Policy Shifts ◽  
Trump Administration

Subject Prospects for US politics to end-2017. Significance The shock 2016 election outcome brought President Donald Trump to the White House, with a conservative-leaning majority on the Supreme Court and Republican control over both houses of Congress. However, the Trump administration has struggled to push through federal policy shifts in many areas, whether sought by political allies as they see a closing window for decisive change, expected by investors as US equity markets reach record highs or feared by the White House’s Democratic opponents.

US emergency powers will see deeper debate

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Puerto Rico ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Natural Disaster ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Emergency Powers ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Mexico Border ◽  
Democrats And Republicans ◽  
Us Mexico Border

Significance Democrats and Republicans have not yet agreed a way out of the impasse over building a US-Mexico border wall that caused the shutdown. President Donald Trump has suggested using presidential emergency powers to build the wall. Impacts If wall-building money came from funds for natural-disaster-hit California or Puerto Rico, Republican support could suffer. Moves to ensure furloughed federal workers get back-pay on government’s re-opening will give Republicans some political cover. Democratic legislative moves to limit presidential emergency powers could gain some Republican votes. Trump would veto any bill curtailing his powers, but he is unlikely to make widespread use of emergency powers. A fight over emergency powers would likely go to the Supreme Court; it might rule for Trump.

US November election could produce crisis

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Smooth Transition ◽  
Electoral College ◽  
Popular Vote ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Election Result ◽  
The Supreme Court

Significance Protests and partisan divisions are rife. The COVID-19 pandemic is forcing changes to how the elections will work, with some states promoting postal voting that President Donald Trump claims is a recipe for fraud. The final result could differ decisively from that reported on election night. A smooth transition rests on one candidate conceding defeat. Impacts President Donald Trump could again win the Electoral College but lose the popular vote. Delays to counting mail-in ballots may mean one candidate appears to have a wide lead that subsequently vanishes. The Supreme Court may have to arbitrate the election result. The election result could trigger widescale protests, whether Trump or Biden wins.

US election lawsuits unlikely to change result

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Election Result ◽  
Run Off ◽  
The Us ◽  
Court Intervention ◽  
Us Senate ◽  
Vote Counting

Significance However, Republican President Donald Trump is alleging that vote tallies are fraudulent and inaccurate. He is seeking recounts and undertaking lawsuits over alleged vote-counting irregularities. Impacts Two run-off elections in Georgia will determine whether the US Senate stays Republican or is tied 50-50 with the Democrats. Given the type of complaints raised by Trump’s campaign, prospects for a Supreme Court intervention look remote. Controversy over the election result will linger, perhaps until the 2024 presidential election.

Sanders will extract price for Clinton endorsement

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Financial Regulation ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Deal Making

Significance However, following Clinton's success in the delegate-rich April 29 contests, Sanders is mathematically unable to win the Democratic Party's nomination based solely on pledged delegates from the remaining primaries, setting up a period of political deal-making to build Democratic unity behind Clinton before the party convention beginning on July 25. Impacts The importance of the Supreme Court vacancy will give added impetus for each party to unite and secure the presidency. Sanders's non-interventionist leanings will not affect Clinton's hawkish foreign policy stance. Trump will adopt more populist positions on financial regulation and taxation to appeal for centrist support. Sanders may find more support for his views in a revitalised Democratic Senate majority than in a Clinton White House.

Conservatives will shape US Supreme Court agenda

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Union Membership ◽  
State Level ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Foreign Governments

Significance The Supreme Court opened its 2017–18 term earlier this month, and many of the cases currently scheduled for arguments could have significant implications for individuals, corporations, and foreign governments. The Court has not yet fully determined which cases it will hear this year, but many of those it will hear through the end of 2017 will be closely watched, especially due to the changed political and administrative circumstances surrounding the Court since the end of its 2016–17 term. Impacts A new Supreme Court vacancy could increase Trump’s popularity within his party despite his congressional critics. Democrats would benefit from gerrymandering restrictions, but stronger party structures are needed to win in redrawn districts. Union membership is likely to decline further, given structural economic shifts and state-level governmental pressure.

Prospects for US politics in 2020

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House

Subject Prospects for US politics in 2020. Significance US politics next year will be dominated by campaigning for the November 3 presidential election as well as ballots for the Senate and House of Representatives, and then by responses to the outcomes. The Republicans want to retain control of the White House, and current President Donald Trump will also want them to retain the Senate given the likelihood of impeachment by the Democratic-led House of Representatives. The Democrats want at the very least to keep control of the House.

US Supreme Court will generate greater controversy

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Foreseeable Future ◽  
Court Reform ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Chief Justice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Political Backlash

Significance The decision to hold a hearing on this issue, rather than simply issue a decision, reflects a degree of concern about perceptions of the Court’s legitimacy following the transfer of the country’s currently polarised politics onto the Court through recent appointments. Impacts The conservative majority of the Supreme Court is so dominant that no liberal decisions are likely in the foreseeable future. Chief Justice Roberts will try on occasion to moderate the Court’s conservative decision-making but mostly without effect. The recent report from President Joe Biden’s commission on the Supreme Court will prove ineffectual. Upcoming cases will provoke a political backlash among voters and make Court reform a central preoccupation for some Democrats.

US Supreme Court clarifies liability standard under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 for statements of opinion in registration statements

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 37-42
Author(s):  
Richard Parrino ◽  
Douglas Schwab ◽  
David Wertheimer
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Pension Fund ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Supreme Court

Purpose – The purpose of this article is to examine the US Supreme Court’s much anticipated decision in Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers Dist. Council Const. Indus. Pension Fund. In this 2015 case, the Supreme Court announced important principles for interpreting the application of the two bases for liability under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 to statements of opinion expressed in registration statements filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with public securities offerings. Design/methodology/approach – The article examines the Supreme Court’s articulation of the standards federal courts must apply under Section 11 to determine if opinion statements were untrue statements of a material fact or misleading because they omitted material facts necessary to make the statements of opinion not misleading. The paper identifies a number of the complexities involved in the Supreme Court’s approach and emphasizes the nuanced assessment of the facts surrounding opinion statements courts will be required to undertake by Omnicare. Findings – The Omnicare decision has significant implications for the litigation of Section 11 claims challenging statements of opinion and for the preparation of registration statement disclosures. The Omnicare decision dramatically alters the standards for reviewing Section 11 claims premised on opinions long applied in a number of US federal appellate circuits. The decision is likely to result in more Section 11 claims based on supposedly misleading opinion statements, and potentially in a greater number of Section 11 claims that survive at least an initial motion to dismiss. Omnicare highlights the importance of including in registration statement disclosures meaningful cautionary statements identifying important facts that could cause actual outcomes to differ materially from views expressed in an opinion. Originality/value – Expert guidance from experienced financial services lawyers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document