{"id":2135883,"date":"2023-12-29T07:22:02","date_gmt":"2023-12-29T12:22:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/twelve-days-of-wex-mas-whats-at-stake-for-the-supreme-court-in-2024\/"},"modified":"2023-12-29T07:28:42","modified_gmt":"2023-12-29T12:28:42","slug":"twelve-days-of-wex-mas-whats-at-stake-for-the-supreme-court-in-2024","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/twelve-days-of-wex-mas-whats-at-stake-for-the-supreme-court-in-2024\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court&#8217;s 2024: What&#8217;s at stake?"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">12<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Ftwelve-days-of-wex-mas-whats-at-stake-for-the-supreme-court-in-2024%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2135883&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><h2>12 Issues That Will Shape 2024 \u200band Beyond<\/h2>\n<p>In the spirit of the\u2064 season, the Washington Examiner has\u2064 identified\u200c 12 issues we believe\u200b will shape 2024 \u2014 and beyond. These close-up \u200dexaminations \u200cof agenda-setting issues cover everything from the battle between the Biden family&#8217;s business \u200cdeals and\u2063 Republican oversight to the emergence of a &#8220;new world order&#8221; and fights over redistricting and new election maps. \u2063Part Five is \u2062about the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n<h3>The Supreme Court&#8217;s High-Stakes Cases<\/h3>\n<p>The Supreme Court will begin the second part of its nine-month term in January with some of the \u2064most high-stakes cases of the term so\u2062 far, including disputes that could undermine agency authority \u2062significantly and redefine the powers of the Biden administration.<\/p>\n<p>Jan. \u20648 will mark the\u2063 justices&#8217; return to the bench and the resumption \u2064of\u2064 a\u2064 term that has widely been described as the Supreme Court&#8217;s examination of administrative state powers, as \u2062a handful of major cases this term have questioned whether\u2064 Congress \u2063truly intended these executive agencies to assume \u200dsuch broad authority.<\/p>\n<p>As of \u200bDec. 21, the Supreme \u200cCourt\u2064 has agreed to consider at least 52\u2063 cases, 29 of which have already been heard or are currently scheduled for argument. This term, \u2063the high court \u200chas already delved into voting and redistricting, novel social media law questions, the\u2062 legality of firearms \u2063restrictions for domestic violence offenders, and a major opioid bankruptcy suit.<\/p>\n<h3>Top Supreme Court Cases to Watch\u2062 in 2024<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Three cases that could dismantle the\u2064 administrative state<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Judicial conservatives have long criticized the\u2062 1984 precedent known as the Chevron doctrine by arguing that it unconstitutionally transfers \u2063judicial powers and legislative powers to the executive\u200c branch and limits the judicial branch&#8217;s role in determining what the law is. The cases that foes of \u2063the Chevron doctrine have\u200d long awaited are Relentless v. Dept. of Commerce and Loper\u200b Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which will be consolidated for Jan. 17 oral arguments. The cases carry enormous implications depending on\u2063 how broad or narrowly the \u200bjustices\u2064 rule for or against\u200c the government.<\/p>\n<p>The Loper Bright case involves \u2064New Jersey-based herring \u200bfishermen challenging\u200b a federal regulation that they claim limits their catch. The fishermen argue\u200b that a 1976 federal law, the Magnuson-Stevens\u2064 Act, could force \u200cthem to forfeit a portion of \u200ctheir earnings to pay \u200cfor at-sea\u200d monitors \u200bon their boats, a provision they believe is outside the National Marine Fisheries Service&#8217;s enforcement purview.<\/p>\n<p>It is not entirely clear\u2063 whether the Supreme Court \u2064will completely upend the \u2062doctrine,\u200b as doing so could roll back \u200cthe leeway that agencies have to interpret vague statutes. Gutting Chevron \u2064would have sweeping implications for citizens\u2062 and businesses challenging \u200badministrative agencies in courts.<\/p>\n<p>Additionally, two other cases that \u200bhave already \u2063been heard also threaten to dent \u2062the administrative state.<\/p>\n<p>One is Securities and\u200c Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy, where the \u200djustices will decide\u2063 if the SEC\u2019s power to\u200c adjudicate securities fraud claims\u2062 with in-house judges\u2064 violates the Seventh Amendment, or\u2063 the nondelegation doctrine. Arguments were heard on Nov. 29, and the case\u2064 could\u200d limit the use of in-house tribunals \u200dand force more disputes to be\u200d weighed in federal courts before a jury\u200c rather than allowing government-appointed administrative \u200dlaw judges to adjudicate cases.<\/p>\n<p>The other is \u200cthe Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community\u200c Financial Services Association\u2063 of America case that was \u200dheard on Oct. 3. That case asks whether the funding scheme for the \u2062CFPB, which receives funding \u2063directly from the Federal \u200bReserve instead of being funded through annual appropriations by Congress, violates \u2064the appropriations clause of the Constitution.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Abortion back at the \u200cSupreme Court<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The Supreme Court\u200d will also\u2062 reexamine the Food and \u2062Drug Administration\u2019s approval of mifepristone access by\u2062 mail, examining access to a commonly used medication abortion\u200c drug after the justices repealed surgical abortion\u200c access precedent last summer through Dobbs v. Jackson Women&#8217;s Health Organization.<\/p>\n<p>That\u2062 decision\u2064 has \u2062been credited with helping Democrats outperform expectations in last year&#8217;s midterm elections and \u2063last month&#8217;s off-year contests \u200bin Kentucky, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia despite a \u2062weak economy. An argument date has not been set in \u2064this case.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Firearms restrictions<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>In\u2062 United States v. Rahimi, justices are weighing the constitutionality of a federal \u2064law that bars anyone subject to a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/la-dodgers-trevor-bauer-placed-on-administrative-leave-amid-sexual-assault-allegations\/\" title=\"LA Dodgers\u2019 Trevor Bauer Placed On Administrative Leave Amid Sexual Assault Allegations\">domestic violence restraining order<\/a> from possessing a firearm.<\/p>\n<p>When justices \u2062heard\u200c arguments in\u2063 this case on Nov. 7, it marked the first Second Amendment-related case since the 6-3\u200c decision last year in New York State Rifle &#038;\u2063 Pistol Association v. Bruen, a \u2064landmark ruling that struck the \u2062Empire State&#8217;s handgun licensing regime and \u2063established a new legal framework for evaluating gun laws.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Social media disputes have another \u200dbig year<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The justices have already heard \u2064two perplexing cases on Halloween known as O\u2019Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. \u2063Freed, where the justices were asked \u2062whether a public official \u2064blocking an individual on the official\u2019s personal social \u2062media account constitutes a\u200d state action.<\/p>\n<p>Also slated for arguments sometime next year is\u200d Murthy\u200c v. \u2063Missouri, in which the Biden administration will argue it did not violate the First \u200bAmendment\u200c when it pressured social\u200c media \u2062companies to remove \u2064information it said was false regarding the COVID-19 virus and the \u20622020 election.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Jan. 6 and Donald Trump<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>It&#8217;s no secret\u2063 that former President Donald Trump&#8217;s 91 criminal charges spread across four indictments would one \u200dday result in\u2063 a flood of \u2063appeals to the high court, an\u200b inevitability that hit a fever pitch\u2062 right \u200dbefore Christmas.<\/p>\n<p>The justices\u2063 agreed to review the scope of\u200d an obstruction statute, Section 1512 (c)(2), at the core of an indictment accusing \u2063Trump of allegedly conspiring to overturn President Joe Biden&#8217;s 2020 election victory. The case features a Jan. 6 rioter who is challenging one of the same \u2063statutes that Trump is accused of violating in \u200dhis four-count indictment, and justices will hear oral arguments in that case and decide it sometime before the end of June.<\/p>\n<p>Special counsel Jack Smith, who was appointed to prosecute Trump in two separate federal cases, asked the high court on Dec. 11 to weigh Trump&#8217;s claims of presidential immunity against prosecution on an \u200bexpedited schedule. The Supreme Court on \u2064Dec. 22\u2064 declined to take up his petition, leaving the matter to be decided by the U.S. \u2063Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on \u200dJan. 9.<\/p>\n<p>Separately, Trump suffered a major loss in Colorado when the state Supreme Court ruled that he \u2063was ineligible to appear on the \u2064primary ballot under Section 3 of \u2063the\u2064 14th Amendment.<\/p>\n<p>Trump\u200c also signaled on Dec. \u206321 that he may go\u200b to the Supreme Court \u2064over a separate immunity question in a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/exclusive-liberty-is-messy-founder-of-true-the-vote-gears-up-for-2024\/\" title=\"Founder of True the Vote prepares for 2024, says liberty is chaotic.\">civil defamation lawsuit brought<\/a> by E. Jean \u2063Carroll.<\/p>\n<p>The justices are likely\u2064 poised to consider further matters surrounding Trump before the 2024 election, as any possible conviction by a jury would be challenged to the justices \u200das \u200bthe former president maintains\u200b his innocence.<\/p>\n<p>The Supreme Court will likely have more opinions to\u200d release in January in cases already argued in 2023. The\u200b high court will decide every case by the end of June next year.<\/p>\n<p> <\/p>\n<h2> How \u2064will the \u2062Supreme\u200b Court&#8217;s decisions on <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/the-new-acting-attorney-general-jeff-rosen-recently-wrote-an-essay-on-foreign-influence-in-us-elections-this-tells-us-a-little-about-his-knowledge-of-whats-going-on-today\/\" title=\"The New Acting Attorney General Jeff Rosen Recently Wrote an Essay on Foreign Influence in US Elections \u2013 This Tells Us A Little About His Knowledge of What\u2019s Going On Today\">social media platforms<\/a> and the First Amendment impact the boundaries and regulations surrounding online speech?<\/h2>\n<p><span>  G COVID-19. These cases will continue to shape the boundaries \u200cand regulations surrounding \u2062social \u200dmedia platforms and the First Amendment rights of individuals.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Racial and voting rights battles<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The\u200c Supreme Court will \u2064also play a major role\u2063 in issues related to racial and voting rights in 2024. The \u200dongoing battles over redistricting and new election maps will be closely watched \u200cas they have the potential to impact the balance of \u2063power \u2062in Congress and state legislatures.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the court is expected to hear arguments on\u200b several voting rights cases, including\u2062 Brnovich v. \u2063Democratic National Committee, which questions the legality of Arizona&#8217;s voting restrictions,\u200c and Abbott v. Democratic National Committee, which challenges Texas&#8217; new voting law. These cases will help determine the extent to which states can \u200bimpose restrictions on voting and the level of protection afforded to\u2062 minority \u2064voters.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Climate\u2063 change \u200dlitigation<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>With \u2062the growing urgency\u200d surrounding climate change, the Supreme Court is likely to hear several cases related to environmental regulations and climate change litigation. These cases will address the government&#8217;s authority to regulate \u2062greenhouse\u200b gas emissions and the responsibility of\u200c companies and industries\u200b in\u2062 contributing to climate change.<\/p>\n<p>One \u2063notable case is Juliana v. \u200cUnited States, in which \u200da group of young plaintiffs is suing the federal\u2064 government for \u2063its role in contributing to climate change and violating\u2064 their \u2063constitutional rights to life,\u2063 liberty, and property. The outcome of these cases could have far-reaching implications for environmental policies and the legal precedent for holding governments and corporations accountable for climate change.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Technology and privacy<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The rapid advancement of technology is \u2063raising new questions about privacy rights and government surveillance. The Supreme Court is likely to address these issues through cases such as Carpenter v.\u200b United States, which dealt with the warrantless seizure of <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/texas-gop-passes-resolution-declaring-biden-not-legitimately-elected\/\" title=\"Texas GOP Passes Resolution Declaring Biden Not Legitimately Elected\">cell phone location data<\/a>, and United States v.\u200d Jones, which addressed the use \u2063of\u2064 GPS tracking devices by \u2063law enforcement.<\/p>\n<p>As technology continues \u2064to evolve, the court will grapple with how to interpret the\u2064 Fourth Amendment in the digital age and \u2063strike a balance between personal privacy and the government&#8217;s need \u200cfor surveillance and law enforcement.<\/p>\n<h3>Conclusion<\/h3>\n<p>The Supreme\u2062 Court&#8217;s docket \u2062for 2024 is filled with high-stakes cases that will have long-lasting implications for the country. From dismantling the administrative state to reexamining abortion rights, the court will shape the legal landscape and address some of the most pressing issues of our time.<\/p>\n<p>As we look\u2063 ahead\u200d to the future, it is clear that the decisions made by the Supreme Court will have a profound \u200dimpact on the direction our nation takes. These cases \u200bwill not only shape 2024 but will also lay the groundwork for the years and decades to come. It \u200cis crucial that we pay attention to these cases and the implications they have for our democracy, our rights, and our society as a whole.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In the festive mood, the Washington Examiner has pinpointed 12 influential factors that will shape 2024 and beyond. These detailed analyses encompass a range of topics, including the clash between the Biden family&#8217;s business ventures and Republican scrutiny, the rise of a &#8220;new world order,&#8221; and conflicts surrounding redistricting and fresh policies<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":2135884,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cndimages.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/IMG_2758-scaled-1.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[538],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2135883","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-washington-examiner"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cndimages.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/IMG_2758-scaled-1.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2135883","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2135883"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2135883\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2135884"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2135883"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2135883"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2135883"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}