Powerful Democrats Ignore Legal Violations by Liberal Supreme Court Justice
Trump Campaign Blasts Biden's Latest Amnesty Attempt
Is This the Next FTX?
'Wildest Year Ever in NJ Politics' As Democrat Power Broker Indicted on Racketeering...
Here's Why New York Democrats Are Now Looking to Ban Masks
Former Harris Aide Identifies the One Republican She Believes Would Be the ‘Greatest...
One State Is Taking Action Against Pfizer Over COVID-19 Vaccine
Why Is Putin Visiting North Korea?
Illegal Alien Arrested in Connection With Sexual Assault of 13-Year-Old Girl in NYC
This Stunner of an Iowa Poll Is Another Loud Alarm Bell for the...
'Sanctuary City' Swallows Massive Red Pill After Illegal Alien Child Sex Offender Was...
Police in This Democrat City Will Begin Recruiting Illegal Aliens
Sorry, Libs, Recent Poll Shows Trump Hush Money Circus Didn't Damage Him
Remember That ‘Trans Woman’ Who Went Topless at the Biden White House? Well…
Let's Talk About That Weird Viral Video of Obama Escorting a 'Frozen' Biden...

Supreme Court Smacked Down The Ninth Circuit (And Progressives) All With One Decision

AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled a decision made by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals no longer stood because the decision was made after a progressive judge on the court died.


Judge Stephen Reinhardt's vote was counted in a case involving an equal pay lawsuit a California teacher filed. According to NBC News, "Reinhardt wrote an opinion for the full appeals court, but it wasn't announced until 11 days after his death. A footnote at the beginning of the appeals court decision said that Reinhardt "fully participated in this case and authored this opinion" and noted that voting by the judges was completed before he died."

The high court's decision was "per curiam” meaning “for the Court." These types of decisions are unsigned. 

According to the Supreme Court, “federal judges are appointed for life, not for eternity. The upshot is that Judge Reinhardt’s vote made a difference. Was that lawful?”

The justices said it was unlawful.

"Because Judge Reinhardt was no longer a judge at the time when the en banc decision in the case was filed, the 9th Circuit erred in counting him as a member of the majority," the Court wrote. 


The high court follows the same standard, as evidenced by Justice Antonin Scalia.

"The votes of Justice Antonin Scalia issued after his sudden death three years ago did not count, even though he had participated in a number of argued cases earlier in the court’s term. No decision is official until it is formally released by the court, and every member of the court must be on the bench at the time," Fox News reported. 

The case has been sent back to the Ninth Circuit for reconsideration.

Here's the full decision:

Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Townhall Videos