RBG sends not so subtle message SCOTUS today

[kpete]

, summarizing not 1 but 2 opinions she authored--including 1 in a case heard while she was home recuperating from surgery. She now has produced 4 opinions, more than any other justice this term.

Link to tweet

[Maru Kitteh]

1. RBG is an effing rock star legend in our time.

[Sanity Claws]

2. But what did those cases decide?

[onenote]

8. Description of cases:

One of the cases was a 7-2 decision (with Gorsuch and Thomas) dissenting, in which the majority held that the payment by a railroad to an employee who lost working time due to an on the job injury is taxable compensation under the relevant statute. Gorsuch and Thomas would have held the payments are compensation for the injury not payment for lost working time.

The other case was one of two Copyright Act cases decided by unanimous decisions, one written by Ginsburg and one by Kavanaugh. The first one (Ginsburg writing) held that a plaintiff can bring an infringement action once the Copyright Office registers the relevant copyright and the action can relate back to infringements alleged to have occurred before registration. The second one (Kavanaugh writing) decided what "costs" may be recovered in a copyright infringement lawsuit.

[former9thward]

12. The first case is nothing to celebrate...

[Sanity Claws]

15. I agree

The change now makes the payment taxable as income. Compensation for a personal injury is not taxable as income.

[Ligyron]

20. Doesn't look like it to me either.

But shoot, I often have a hard time following the convoluted legal logic involved - especially in technical cases.

[Pacifist Patriot]

25. Not necessarily.

In my job, I have had to deal with just these types of issues. There is a reasonable distinction between compensation for an injury (for coverage of medical bills, pain & suffering, etc.) and compensation for the time the employee is unable to work because of the injury. The former should not be taxable as income, but the latter should.

Compensation for lost work time due to an injury is essentially the same thing as being paid for the time you're home fighting the flu. i.e. PTO, sick time, whatever your company calls it. And that is taxable income. Am I correct that this was the issue for this case?

[Princess Turandot]

28. Yes.

From the opinion's syllabus:

Michael Loos sued petitioner BNSF Railway Company under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA) for injuries he received while working at BNSF's railyard. A jury awarded him $126,212.78, ascribing $30,000 of that amount to wages lost during the time Loos was unable to work. BNSF asserted that the lost wages constituted "compensation" taxable under the Railroad Retirement Tax Act (RRTA) and asked to withhold $3,765 of the $30,000 to cover Loos's share of the RRTA taxes. The District Court and the Eighth Circuit rejected the requested offset, holding that an award of damages compensating an injured railroad worker for lost wages is not taxable under the RRTA. Held: A railroad's payment to an employee for working time lost due to an on-the-job injury is taxable "compensation" under the RRTA. Pp. 2-14.

https://casetext.com/case/bnsf-r-co-v-loos

[Pacifist Patriot]

30. Thanks!

[mr_lebowski]

32. I'm thinking this is for funding the pension fund (see my note below) not just 'income tax' (nt)

[mr_lebowski]

31. This also doesn't sound like 'regular taxes' ...

"Railroad Retirement Tax Act (RRTA) and asked to withhold $3,765 of the $30,000 to cover Loos's share of the RRTA taxes"

Sounds like this is something more like Social Security taxes, i.e. not your regular paycheck deduction for income tax.

Which makes even more sense. The pension fund needs ... funding, still.

[former9thward]

34. The case goes against long term labor law.

The law (the the statutes governing the RR industry) says only services shall be taxed. The plaintiff in this case provided no services to the RR during his time off work. The award was made because of negligence by the RR. The employee is being taxed because of negligence by the RR.

[jxla]

9. RBG : churning out opinions

@Scotus
Mar 4
More
#RBG kicks it into high gear with a recovery prescription: Plenty of opinions https://apnews.com/a3de2762a73b45848befd231169ee4af …
Ginsburg’s recovery prescription: Plenty of opinions
By MARK SHERMAN


Eleven days before her 86th birthday, Ginsburg was in fine form as she announced two of the court’s three opinions on Monday. One of those was for a case argued in January, when Ginsburg was absent from the court while she recovered from the December surgery.

Last month, on her second day back, Ginsburg wrote the court’s opinion in a case that could limit authorities’ ability to seize property from criminal suspects.


Her first opinion on Monday, in a 7-2 vote, sided with a railroad in a dispute with a worker over lost wages following an injury. In the case from January, Ginsburg wrote a unanimous opinion resolving a case about when a party can sue for copyright infringement.

[GemDigger]

3. Well that tells us a lot....

[zaj]

4. Won't excuse risking everything to hold on a few extras years.

She's amazing, and yet still could go down as the worst Justice ever if she gives Trump another appointment and crushes the balance of the court.

[FBaggins]

6. Oh please.

I'm not a fan of her mistaken decision not to retire when Obama could have replaced her... but this would hardly make her the "worst justice ever".

You might, for instance, consider the justices who didn't need to be replaced in order to impact that balance (like - all five of the current majority)?

[zaj]

7. Hyperbole, true.

It would ruin her last legacy, imo.

[unblock]

13. mcturtle would have allowed obama to replace her? not so sure about that.

i remember being a bit annoyed, too, at the time when the window passed for her to retire under obama.

but i'm starting to think hanging on was a genius move on rbg's part.

[FBaggins]

21. Democrats controlled the Senate for six of Obama's eight years

She has to make it through Trump’s reign - which is no sure thing - before she qualifies as lucky... genius is a stretch.

[unblock]

22. time will tell.

personally, i'm pretty optimistic about our chances in 2020, and i don't think hanging on for two years is a major stretch for her.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

23. Could a simple majority of senators approve a SC justice pick?

I think it took 60 senators until the Trump/McDonnell senate changed the rule on filibuster.

So, while the Democrats had the majority in the senate, the Republicans held up many things with their filibuster.

[FBaggins]

24. Yes

Reid changed the rule for all other judges and made clear that he would do the same for SC appointments if republicans tried to filibuster one.

Moreover, we had 59 seats for quite some time. There’s no way would have been able to sustain a filibuster of a SC justice.

[CharleyDog]

10. this is bull - "worst justice ever." Can she help it if she dies or is too ill?

[zaj]

11. Agreed, that was hyperbole

But yes, she can strategically retire when a dem is in the wh

[lostnfound]

14. Bull. Voters failed her in 2010 and again in 2016, she didn't fail us. Nt

[DesertRat]

18. +1

[geardaddy]

19. +1

[nini]

16. WTF?

it's not her fault that fucktard has the presidency and in the position to appoint another justice.

And what reason would it be her fault? That she had an illness? Do we really control that?


God damn this post pisses me off and I'll shut up before I get banned.

[saidsimplesimon]

5. She has given US a lifetime of service.

Brava Justice Ginsburg, a lifetime protector for the Rule of Law, in service to her country and fellow Americans.

[Totally Tunsie]

17. Bless her. She's doing everything possible to hang in there until at least 2021.

If there is a God, he'll keep RBG under his care for a long time to come.

[Zoonart]

26. OMG THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

RBG towers above her SCOTUS contemporaries.

[Pachamama]

29. +1000000

[SpankMe]

27. It is my hope...

...that she stays healthy, never retires, and is our first 100 year old justice.

[Nitram]

33. RGB RULES!