What happens if a state ignored a SCOTUS ruling

[Proud liberal 80]

I have seen states ignore presidential executive orders and/or congressional laws signed by the POTUS

I have seen both the POTUS and Congress ignore each other whether we are talking about subpoenas or executive orders

It seems like everyone at every level (local, state, federal) can just ignore each other and nothing is really enforced, but somehow SCOTUS rulings are sacred....but what if some governor just said nope, I don’t care what they ruled...it’s not like the court has an army or police force (except for I guess the US Marshals....what can the SCOTUS really do to enforce their ruling

[Beakybird]

1. That's a good question. If the executive branch doesn't enforce the ruling, it might not have teeth.

But if the state imposes a fine on a church, and that fine is unconstitutional, the church won't have to pay.

[Ms. Toad]

2. Kim Davis. n/t

[drray23]

3. it did happen before.

remember Ruby Bridge having to be escorted by us marshalls send by president Eisenhower on her first day at school in New Orleans because Louisiana did not want to recognize integration.

[Proud liberal 80]

4. So basically the Executive branch helped enforce it

Begs the question if the POTUS also didn’t care for the ruling and didn’t want to enforce it

[rsdsharp]

8. Even before that, Eisenhower federalized the Arkansas

National Guard, and sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock because they refused to integrate Central High.

[unblock]

5. Jackson didn't enforce a Supreme Court ruling

"The decision of the supreme court has fell still born, and they find that it cannot coerce Georgia to yield to its mandate."

He wanted to slaughter cherokees and wasn't about to let a court stop him.

[CincyDem]

6. "John Marshall made his decision, now let him enforce it" -- A. Jackson.

I don't know that we've fully tested the degree to which the executive branch can ignore SCOTUS....but I'm pretty damn sure a Biden administration isn't going to be the place we push it to the edge, no matter what the issue.

[fearnobush]

7. The court was very weak back then. SCOTUS rulings then were interpreted as suggestive

Since the court had no real mandate to enforce them. But since, the executive branch often became the muscle behind their rulings as constitutionally speaking the three branches were intended to share power equally.

[Karma13612]

9. Good question

My guess would be that Republicans just ignore laws.

Democrats try to adhere to rulings, and get screwed for ‘doing the right thing’.

Gov Cuomo will have to lighten up on the Church thing, and I hope he screams murder when they have huge spikes in COVID cases tied back to these churches.

So sick of this nonsense.

Elections matter and I hope we finally impress this on the voters.

We need to win the two Senate run-offs in Georgia. We really need to win.

[Polybius]

10. Here's what happens:

Let's say NY ignores the ruling, and imposes a 25% capacity limit on church's, with fines of $1,000 if broken. The church could simply ignore the 25% rule. When the get fined, the fine is null and void.

So there's nothing the states can do.

[roamer65]

11. Cuomo can just close the churches and ignore the SC ruling.

That’s what the National Guard is for...emergencies...like pandemics.

It’s called nullification.

Nullification is in current use. The states that have passed recreational MJ legalization are effectively nullifying federal law.

[IsItJustMe]

12. Ding! Ding! Ding!

I like that answer. It's a lot easier to not enforce a law though than it is to enforce it. It's gonna be interesting.