And the comments are coming in so fast it is hard to keep up and even hit the button to publish them, so apologies but thanks for the interest.
It is by Gorsuch. The vote is 5-4.
No R number, but we didn't really expect them, did we? More to come this morning.
"Today we are asked whether the land these treaties promised remains an Indian reservation for purposes of federal criminal law. Because Congress has not said otherwise, we hold the government to its word."
For purposes of the Major Crimes Act, land reserved for the Creek Nation since the 19th century remains "Indian country."
The Gorsuch opinion is joined by RBG, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan.
Roberts filed a dissenting opinion, joined by Alito and Kavanaugh in full and by Thomas except for a footnote. Thomas also filed his own dissenting opinion.
The court also released at the same time the very brief unsigned decision in Sharp v. Murphy, which had been held over since last term, affirming the 10th Circuit's ruling in light of today's decision.
Okay, one minute until the next one. Here we go.
Among Indian law lawyers, particularly those who represent tribes, there is a dark joke that the “real Indian canon” is that the Indians always lose. The reason is often the kinds of concerns about consequences that this opinion rejects. That might mark the real sea change that this opinion creates.
It is by Roberts. The vote is 7-2.
Try the court's homepage if the opinion page isn't working. I've got Vance from the homepage.
Article II and the Supremacy Clause do not categorically preclude, or require a heightened standard for, the issuance of a state criminal subpoena to a sitting President.
Kavanaugh concurs in the judgment, joined by Gorsuch. Thomas dissents, joined by Alito.
"Given these safeguards and the Court's precedents, we cannot conclude that absolute immunity is necessary or appropriate under Article II or the Supremacy Clause. Our dissenting colleagues agree," the chief writes.
"Rejecting a heightened need standard does not leave Presidents with 'no real protection.' To start, a President may avail himself of the same protections available to every other citizen."
End of majority says issue here was limited to absolute immunity and heightened need, and 2d Circuit ordered case returned to District Court for other possible issues. So SCOTUS remands and presumably the case still goes back to 2d Circuit and then District Court.
Submit Event
