Connect with us

Politics

How views of the Supreme Court have changed since 2022 abortion ruling

Published

on


Americans’ views of the Supreme Court have moderated somewhat since the court’s standing dropped sharply after its ruling overturning Roe v. Wade in 2022, according to a new poll. But concern that the court has too much power is rising, fueled largely by Democrats.

The survey from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that about a third of U.S. adults have “hardly any confidence at all” in the court, but that’s down from 43% three years ago. As the new AP-NORC polling tracker shows, about half of Americans have “only some confidence” in the court, up from 39% in July 2022, while a relatively small number, about 1 in 5, have “a great deal of confidence,” which hasn’t shifted meaningfully in the past few years.

The moderate increase in confidence is driven by Republicans and independents.

Views of the Supreme Court have moderated

Still, views of the nation’s highest court remain more negative than they were as recently as early 2022, before the high-profile ruling that overturned the constitutional right to abortion. An AP-NORC poll conducted in February 2022 found that only around one-quarter of Americans had hardly any confidence in the court’s justices.

Persistent divide between Republicans and Democrats

The partisan divide has been persistent and stark, particularly since the Dobbs ruling, when Democrats’ confidence in the nine justices plummeted. The survey shows Republicans are happier than Democrats and independents with the conservative-dominated court, which includes three justices appointed by President Donald Trump, a Republican.

Few Republicans, just 8%, view the court dimly, down from about 1 in 5 in July 2022. For independents, the decline was from 45% just after the Dobbs ruling to about 3 in 10 now. The views among Democrats were more static, but they are also slightly less likely to have low confidence in the justices, falling from 64% in summer 2022 to 56% now.

In recent years, the court has produced historic victories for Republican policy priorities. The justices overturned Roe, leading to abortion bans in many Republican-led states, ended affirmative action in college admissions, expanded gun rights, restricted environmental regulations and embraced claims of religious discrimination.

Many of the court’s major decisions from this year are broadly popular, according to a Marquette Law School poll conducted in July. But other polling suggests that most don’t think the justices are ruling neutrally. A recent Fox News poll found that about 8 in 10 registered voters think partisanship plays a role in the justices’ decisions either “frequently” or “sometimes.”

Last year, the conservative majority endorsed a robust view of presidential immunity and allowed Trump to avoid a criminal trial on election interference charges.

In recent months, the justices on the right handed Trump a string of victories, including a ruling that limits federal judges’ power to issue nationwide injunctions.

Katharine Stetson, a self-described constitutional conservative from Paradise, Nevada, said she is glad that the court has reined in “the rogue judges, the district judges around the country” who have blocked some Trump initiatives.

Stetson, 79, said she is only disappointed it took so long. “Finally. Why did they allow it get out of hand?” she said.

Growing concerns the court is too powerful

Several recent decisions were accompanied by stinging dissents from liberal justices who complained the court was giving Trump too much leeway and taking power for itself.

“Perhaps the degradation of our rule-of-law regime would happen anyway. But this court’s complicity in the creation of a culture of disdain for lower courts, their rulings, and the law (as they interpret it) will surely hasten the downfall of our governing institutions, enabling our collective demise,” Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote when the court ruled on nationwide injunctions.

The July AP-NORC poll found a growing similar sentiment. About 4 in 10 U.S. adults now say the court has “too much” power in the way the federal government operates these days. In April, about 3 in 10 people were concerned about the court’s power.

The shift is largely due to movement among Democrats, rising from about one-third in April to more than half now.

Debra A. Harris, a 60-year-old retired state government worker who now lives in Winter Haven, Florida, said the court’s decisions in recent years “just disgust me to my soul.”

Harris said the court has changed in recent years, with the addition of the three justices appointed by Trump.

“I find so much of what they’re doing is based so much on the ideology of the Republican ticket,” Harris said, singling out last year’s immunity decision. “We don’t have kings. We don’t have dictators.”

George Millsaps, who flew military helicopters and served in Iraq, said the justices should have stood up to Trump in recent months, including on immigration, reducing the size of the federal workforce and unwinding the Education Department.

“But they’re bowing down, just like Congress apparently is now, too,” said Millsaps, a 67-year-old resident of Floyd County in rural southwest Virginia.

___

Republished with permission of The Associated Press.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Carlos G. Smith files bill to allow medical pot patients to grow their own plants

Published

on


Home cultivation of marijuana plants could be legal under certain conditions.

Medical marijuana patients may not have to go to the dispensary for their medicine if new legislation in the Senate passes.

Sen. Carlos G. Smith’s SB 776 would permit patients aged 21 and older to grow up to six pot plants.

They could use the homegrown product, but just like the dispensary weed, they would not be able to re-sell.

Medical marijuana treatment centers would be the only acceptable sourcing for plants and seeds, a move that would protect the cannabis’ custody.

Those growing the plants would be obliged to keep them secured from “unauthorized persons.”

Chances this becomes law may be slight.

A House companion for the legislation has yet to be filed. And legislators have demonstrated little appetite for homegrow in the past.



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Rolando Escalona aims to deny Frank Carollo a return to the Miami Commission

Published

on


Early voting is now underway in Miami for a Dec. 9 runoff that will decide whether political newcomer Rolando Escalona can block former Commissioner Frank Carollo from reclaiming the District 3 seat long held by the Carollo family.

The contest has already been marked by unusual turbulence: both candidates faced eligibility challenges that threatened — but ultimately failed — to knock them off the ballot.

Escalona survived a dramatic residency challenge in October after a rival candidate accused him of faking his address. A Miami-Dade Judge rejected the claim following a detailed, three-hour trial that examined everything from his lease records to his Amazon orders.

After the Nov. 4 General Election — when Carollo took about 38% of the vote and Escalona took 17% to outpace six other candidates — Carollo cleared his own legal hurdle when another Judge ruled he could remain in the race despite the city’s new lifetime term limits that, according to three residents who sued, should have barred him from running again.

Those rulings leave voters with a stark choice in District 3, which spans Little Havana, East Shenandoah, West Brickell and parts of Silver Bluff and the Roads.

The runoff pits a self-described political outsider against a veteran official with deep institutional experience and marks a last chance to extend the Carollo dynasty to a twentieth straight year on the dais or block that potentiality.

Escalona, 34, insists voters are ready to move on from the chaos and litigation that have surrounded outgoing Commissioner Joe Carollo, whose tenure included a $63.5 million judgment against him for violating the First Amendment rights of local business owners and the cringe-inducing firing of a Miami Police Chief, among other controversies.

A former busboy who rose through the hospitality industry to manage high-profile Brickell restaurant Sexy Fish while also holding a real estate broker’s license, Escalona is running on a promise to bring transparency, better basic services, lower taxes for seniors and improved permitting systems to the city.

He wants to improve public safety, support economic development, enhance communities, provide more affordable housing, lower taxes and advocate for better fiscal responsibility in government.

He told the Miami Herald that if elected, he’d fight to restore public trust by addressing public corruption while re-engaging residents who feel unheard by current officials.

Carollo, 55, a CPA who served two terms on the dais from 2009 to 2017, has argued that the district needs an experienced leader. He’s pointed to his record balancing budgets and pledges a residents-first agenda focused on safer streets, cleaner neighborhoods and responsive government.

Carollo was the top fundraiser in the District 3 race this cycle, amassing about $501,000 between his campaign account and political committee, Residents First, and spending about $389,500 by the last reporting dates.

Escalona, meanwhile, reported raising close to $109,000 through his campaign account and spending all but 6,000 by Dec. 4.

The winner will secure a four-year term.



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Florida kicks off first black bear hunt in a decade, despite pushback

Published

on


For the first time in a decade, hunters armed with rifles and crossbows are fanning out across Florida’s swamps and flatwoods to legally hunt the Florida black bear, over the vocal opposition of critics.

The state-sanctioned hunt began Saturday, after drawing more than 160,000 applications for a far more limited number of hunting permits, including from opponents who are trying to reduce the number of bears killed in this year’s hunt, the state’s first since 2015.

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission awarded 172 bear hunt permits by random lottery for this year’s season, allowing hunters to kill one bear each in areas where the population is deemed large enough. At least 43 of the permits went to opponents of the hunt who never intend to use them, according to the Florida chapter of the Sierra Club, which encouraged critics to apply in the hopes of saving bears.

The Florida black bear population is considered one of the state’s conservation success stories, having grown from just several hundred bears in the 1970s to an estimated more than 4,000 today.

The 172 people who were awarded a permit through a random lottery will be able to kill one bear each during the 2025 season, which runs from Dec. 6 to Dec. 28. The permits are specific to one of the state’s four designated bear hunting zones, each of which have a hunting quota set by state officials based on the bear population in each region.

In order to participate, hunters must hold a valid hunting license and a bear harvest permit, which costs $100 for residents and $300 for nonresidents, plus fees. Applications for the permits cost $5 each.

The regulated hunt will help incentivize maintaining healthy bear populations, and help fund the work that is needed, according to Mark Barton of the Florida chapter of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, an advocacy group that supported the hunt.

Having an annual hunt will help guarantee funding to “keep moving conservation for bears forward,” Barton said.

According to state wildlife officials, the bear population has grown enough to support a regulated hunt and warrant population management. The state agency sees hunting as an effective tool that is used to manage wildlife populations around the world, and allows the state to monetize conservation efforts through permit and application fees.

“While we have enough suitable bear habitat to support our current bear population levels, if the four largest subpopulations continue to grow at current rates, we will not have enough habitat at some point in the future,” reads a bear hunting guide published by the state wildlife commission.

___

Republished with permission of the Associated Press.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.