this post was submitted on 27 May 2025
165 points (99.4% liked)

News

36018 readers
1948 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The justices left in place lower court decisions allowing the transfer of the Tonto National Forest land, known as Oak Flat, to Resolution Copper, which plans to mine what it says is the second-largest known copper deposit in the world.

The Trump administration has said it will push to complete the transfer.

Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in dissent that it was a “grievous mistake” not to take up the appeal.

“Recognizing Oak Flat’s significance, the government has long protected both the land and the Apaches’ access to it,” Gorsuch wrote, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas. “No more. Now, the government and a mining conglomerate want to turn Oak Flat into a massive hole in the ground.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world 32 points 9 months ago (2 children)

What an I missing here... Alito recused himself from this request. And Gorsuch(!) and Thomas(!!!) were part of five justices who dissented to the decision and wanted to hear the case. How did 3 justices manage to dismiss it when 5 justices wanted to hear the case? Its it different from the simple majority when it comes to hearing a case rather than deciding on a case?

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I read somewhere that the liberal justices were concerned about the religious precedent being used.

[–] Twelve20two@slrpnk.net 10 points 9 months ago

I hate how valid a concern is.

[–] FireTower@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The 5 judges were from the lower court's dissent. It wasn't 5 justices at the Supreme Court. It takes 4 Supreme Court justices to grant cert on a case and hear it. It sounds like only Gorsuch and Thomas voted to hear it.

Gorsuch is arguably the most pro-Native American justice the court has ever seen. He started his majority opinion in McGirt v. Oklahoma with this sentence "On the far end of the Trail of Tears was a promise."

Thomas and Gorsuch joined Alito in a 77 page dissent, in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia explicitly calling to overturn a prior case that infringed on Native American's religious liberties by denying benefits to a peyote user.

[–] ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Okay, that makes more sense. Thanks for the explanation.

[–] FireTower@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

I'm glad to help, headlines and sadly even the body of news articles rarely capture nuance. Law and Politics both have their controversies but they are not synonyms. When you peek behind the curtains of headlines, things start to make more sense, because, most everyone thinks that they're being rational. But most of us are simply viewing the matters from different perspectives. There are bad perspectives, but, unfortunately, there is not a best one.