Recently, the justices of the Supreme Court have denied hearing quite a few different cases, some of which involving gay rights, campaign finance, and lethal injections. The gay rights case, Elane Photography v. Willock, has to do with a woman who has refused her photography services to gay and lesbian couples looking for a wedding photographer. Though the Supreme Court said no to the case, Justice Bosson still wrote a letter stating his opinion on the matter. The Supreme Court also declined to hear a case involving campaign finance; this case was compared to another extremely recent case, McCutcheon v. FEC. Lastly, the Court chose not to hear two different cases involving lethal injections, both having to do with whether the inmate who is subject to the death penalty has the right to be made aware of what method will be used to end their lives.
According to the laws of the federal government's judicial branch, the Supreme Court can refuse to hear any case that is sent up to them through a cert petition. It is okay--in fact, it is probably normal--for the many cases that make it through another round of appellate courts to not receive the writ of certiorari. In the circumstance of the gay rights case, a Supreme Court justice sent his concurring opinion, which is something that may have helped to settle the issue. The case dealing with campaign finance had a very closely related precedent in McCutcheon v. FEC, which could easily be the reason that the Supreme Court chose not to hear it. Lastly, the cases involving lethal injections can be easily based upon a loose or strict constructionist viewpoint; these cases have to do with the Constitutional rights of the inmates in question, and those with conservative Constitutional views would have very different opinions than those with liberal views. Like I previously stated, there are many different reasons for SCOTUS to refuse to hear any case.
Now, take a gander at the wrinkled but beautiful justices of the Supreme Court.
No comments:
Post a Comment