SCOTUS

Ugh.
User avatar
Cascadia
Posts: 6677
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2018 11:15 am

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Cascadia »

Also, Breyer needs to retire so them Dems can replace him with a 45-50 year old. Can't have another RBG situation.
User avatar
ousdahl
Posts: 29999
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:55 am

Re: SCOTUS

Post by ousdahl »

I think it’s sad that so many blame RBG for not stepping down, as if she’s the one who turned scotus into what it is.

I suppose it’s too much to blame bad faith senators and their shameless power grabs, eh?
Deleted User 89

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Deleted User 89 »

WASHINGTON — The Chief Justice of the United States, John Roberts, warned Friday that the Supreme Court risks losing its own authority if it allows the existence of a law like Texas’ near-total abortion ban, which attempts to circumvent the courts.

In a strongly worded opinion joined by the high court’s three liberal justices, Roberts wrote that the "clear purpose and actual effect" of the Texas law was "to nullify this Court’s rulings." That, he said, undermines the Constitution and the fundamental role of the Supreme Court and the court system as a whole...


there’s hope yet, no matter how fleeting
User avatar
zsn
Contributor
Posts: 3817
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2018 7:39 pm
Location: SF Bay Area

Re: SCOTUS

Post by zsn »

Roberts has been worried only about how history is going to view him and nothing else. He’s as much a partisan hack as the rest of the scoundrels but he is at least worried about whatever legacy he would leave behind. Can’t say even that much about Alito, Thomas and Kavanaugh.

Anything that appears like hope is but a mirage……of Roberts’ efforts at reputation-laundering. He’s working very hard at having it both ways
Overlander
Contributor
Posts: 6255
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2021 7:12 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Overlander »

Yeah, I took his comments as more of a “hey, it wasn’t me” when the inevitable occurs

** Illy, that means when what was going to happen anyway happens
“whatever that means”
Mich
User avatar
ousdahl
Posts: 29999
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:55 am

Re: SCOTUS

Post by ousdahl »

User avatar
ousdahl
Posts: 29999
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:55 am

Re: SCOTUS

Post by ousdahl »

So as far as I can tell, scotus sent back down the vax requirement for bidnesses with 100+ employees, but upheld the mandate for healthcare workers?

With the rationale being, healthcare workers should get it cuz it’s their job to keep people healthy.

Ooook….apparently they think the mandate for 100+ employers was imposed for some reason other than keeping healthy, then?

Or is it, that bidnesses should be exempt since their primary utility is less about keeping people healthy and more about economic productivity?
User avatar
Cascadia
Posts: 6677
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2018 11:15 am

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Cascadia »

ousdahl wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 3:48 pm So as far as I can tell, scotus sent back down the vax requirement for bidnesses with 100+ employees, but upheld the mandate for healthcare workers?

With the rationale being, healthcare workers should get it cuz it’s their job to keep people healthy.

Ooook….apparently they think the mandate for 100+ employers was imposed for some reason other than keeping healthy, then?

Or is it, that bidnesses should be exempt since their primary utility is less about keeping people healthy and more about economic productivity?
I think what you’re seeing is proof that the QOP’s only agenda is “owning the libs”
User avatar
ousdahl
Posts: 29999
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:55 am

Re: SCOTUS

Post by ousdahl »

Ha, maybe.

Kinda surprised the conservative majority didn’t shoot down the healthcare mandate as well, on the grounds that the primary utility of Merican healthcare is economic productivity too.
User avatar
zsn
Contributor
Posts: 3817
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2018 7:39 pm
Location: SF Bay Area

Re: SCOTUS

Post by zsn »

Your first mistake is assuming that anything that the current SCOTUS does has any rationale. They would have upheld the mandate had a Republican President proposed it. They are partisan hacks
User avatar
ousdahl
Posts: 29999
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:55 am

Re: SCOTUS

Post by ousdahl »

User avatar
ousdahl
Posts: 29999
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:55 am

Re: SCOTUS

Post by ousdahl »

Sotomayor: I’m at higher risk with diabeetus, would everyone else please mask up?

Gorsuch: BUT MAH RIGHTS

Deleted User 863

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Deleted User 863 »

That's definitely rude as fuck.

But with increased risk she's better off working remotely regardless. Especially if they're just wearing cloth masks and in close proximity to each other.
User avatar
ousdahl
Posts: 29999
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:55 am

Re: SCOTUS

Post by ousdahl »

I also saw some headline like “scotus went from hearing one big religious case every few years, to several religious cases a session”
User avatar
Qusdahl
Posts: 1061
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2022 3:53 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Qusdahl »

Time for my boy Mitch to work his grim reaper black magic.

“Qusdahl ISNT wrong.” - PDub 1/28

“I dont dislike you, even as wildly flailing and uninformed as your theories are” - TDub 2/5
User avatar
MICHHAWK
Posts: 6129
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 10:01 am

Re: SCOTUS

Post by MICHHAWK »

is it good or bad that this person is retiring?
Overlander
Contributor
Posts: 6255
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2021 7:12 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Overlander »

MICHHAWK wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:52 pm is it good or bad that this person is retiring?
Why would you care?
“whatever that means”
Mich
RainbowsandUnicorns
Contributor
Posts: 12530
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2021 8:19 am

Re: SCOTUS

Post by RainbowsandUnicorns »

MICHHAWK wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:52 pm is it good or bad that this person is retiring?
I would like for you to tell me/us what you think.
If you are sincerely asking people who aren't relevant what their opinion is - then I may suggest
you wait for "don lemon, bruce springsteen, jesse waters, joe rogan, kid rock, whoopi goldburg, jon stockton" to chime in.
Might as well, right?
Gutter wrote: Fri Nov 8th 2:16pm
New President - New Gutter. I am going to pledge my allegiance to Donald J. Trump and for the next 4 years I am going to be an even bigger asshole than I already am.
Overlander
Contributor
Posts: 6255
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2021 7:12 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Overlander »

RainbowsandUnicorns wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:45 pm
MICHHAWK wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:52 pm is it good or bad that this person is retiring?
I would like for you to tell me/us what you think.
If you are sincerely asking people who aren't relevant what their opinion is - then I may suggest
you wait for "don lemon, bruce springsteen, jesse waters, joe rogan, kid rock, whoopi goldburg, jon stockton" to chime in.
Might as well, right?
Gutter swoops in with a LATE 4th quarter POTD!!!
“whatever that means”
Mich
Deleted User 863

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Deleted User 863 »

Post Reply