FreedomWorks Originals provides you entertainment and education to help you better understand economics, the workings of government, and our insight into the most important debates facing our nation today. Watch and subscribe today!
Following the Supreme Court’s 4-4 ruling on the Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association case, Curt Levey, the Executive Director of FreedomWorks Foundation and veteran of multiple Supreme Court nomination fights, commented:
Following Hillary Clinton's speech chastising Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) for refusing to hold confirmation hearings on President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, FreedomWorks CEO Adam Brandon commented:
FreedomWorks, the conservative activist group rooted in the tea party movement, is throwing its support behind Senate Republicans who are refusing to hold confirmation hearings for President Obama’s eventual nominee to the Supreme Court.
With Justice Scalia’s death leaving a gaping hole in our nation’s highest court, Senate Republicans have only one clear choice. In the midst of a highly charged presidential election, far better to let voters choose who should appoint our next Supreme Court justice than fight a bloody and fully partisan battle with President Obama over shifting the ideological balance of SCOTUS. So far, Republican leaders in the Senate have been very clear that they agree with this assessment, vowing that they will neither hold hearings nor votes on any nominee to replace Scalia this year.
Chevron deference has been used by the Supreme Court since 1984. Since that time, federal agencies have been able to capture more and more power over the American people.
On their last day in session this term, the Supreme Court justices agreed to hear the case Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association. The plaintiffs are challenging the public-sector “agency shop” arrangements that were validated by the Supreme Court decision Abood v. Detroit Board of Education in 1977.
The Supreme Court has taken an active role in redefining, rather than simply interpreting, our country’s laws. Two clear examples of this can be seen in the two ObamaCare opinions written by Chief Justice Roberts, NFIB v. Sebelius and King v. Burwell. Whether it is calling a penalty a tax, or saying an exchange established by Kathleen Sebelius was established by the states, the Supreme Court is playing an active role in changing legislation.
In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled the EPA was unreasonable when it did not consider costs when it decided to regulate mercury emissions from power plants. The Court, in an opinion by Justice Scalia, held that the EPA must consider costs, including compliance costs, when deciding whether a regulation is appropriate and necessary.
Some words apparently have no meaning, even when written in plain English, according to a majority of Supreme Court justices. Today the Court reached its long awaited decision in King v. Burwell. The Court ruled 6-3 for Burwell, holding that the federal subsidies can continue to flow to states that have not established an exchange.
Ten years after the Supreme Court decided Kelo v. City of New London, almost to the day, the Court, in Horne v. Department of Agriculture, protected property rights in an 8-1 decision. The Court held that the government must pay just compensation when taking personal property, just as it does when taking real property.
FreedomWorks Foundation, American Legislative Exchange Council, Tea Party Patriots and Committee to Unleash Prosperity in partnership with a coalition of conservative organizations and prominent individuals, launched the Save Our Country Task Force.