SCOTUS 2021

[boutons_deux]

Supreme Court Blocks Power Plant Document Release

“The Supreme Court just dealt

a severe blow to government transparency and accountability, as well as the Endangered Species Act,”

said Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity.

“This decision will make it

easier for political appointees to meddle secretly in scientific decisions, gut protections for our air and water, and

push more of our wildlife toward extinction.

Now more than ever, Congress must step in and end the abuse of the deliberative process privilege or we’ll have an unaccountable executive branch.”

https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2021/03/04/supreme-court-blocks-power-plant-document-release

[boutons_deux]

Justices Gorsuch and Breyer Just Took Turns Accusing Each Other of Judicial Activism in Immigration Decision

a case addressing a legal issue that occurs at the messy intersection of federal immigration law and state criminal law.

SCOTUS ruled against Clemente Pereida,

Breyer warned that the majority decision ignored congressional intent.

“I fear today’s decision will result in precisely the practical difficulties and potential unfairness that Congress intended to avoid,” he wrote.

https://lawandcrime.com/supreme-court/justices-gorsuch-and-breyer-just-took-turns-accusing-each-other-of-judicial-activism-in-immigration-decision/

Active RWNJ SCOTUS assholes pander to the White Supremacy assholes who bought them SCOTUS seats by ruling an activist xenophobic decision.

[boutons_deux]

The Supreme Court Is Poised to Find New Ways to Disenfranchise Black Voters

If the court gives the go-ahead to two new, blatantly discriminatory voting laws, we can say goodbye to free and fair elections.

the Supreme Court entertained a frontal attack on the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Republicans in Arizona, ... have instituted a pair of new voter restrictions aimed directly at depressing the minority vote.

Passing laws to depress the minority vote is the only policy platform Republicans have (https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/republican-voter-suppression/).

What’s interesting is that Republicans are being relatively open about the fact that the point of their laws is to suppress votes.

“Because it puts us at a competitive disadvantage relative to Democrats. Politics is a zero-sum game.”

Republicans are arguing that the Voting Rights Act should be reinterpreted to allow their conduct.

Arizona’s two laws are designed to and will have the effect of decreasing minority turnout in elections in the state. One law prohibits so-called ballot harvesting, which is when people who vote by mail give their ballots to another person to drop off at the polls.

Another law allows Arizona simply to throw away votes that were cast at the wrong precinct.

Both of these laws will disproportionately affect minority communities, just like they’re designed to do.

the Democratic National Committee pointed out that polling places are frequently changed in minority communities, and they are often intentionally changed to counterintuitive locations.

The Republican argument is so obviously reanimated from the Jim Crow era that even some conservatives on the court seemed to fear it would eat their brains.

While Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch revealed themselves to be card carrying members of the Big Lie caucus that is willing to entertain any argument that prevents people of color from voting,

alleged attempted rapist Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, and even Roberts appeared skeptical about effectively shredding the entire Voting Rights Act.

https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/supreme-court-voting-rights/

Repugs demanding SCOTUS to violate the "equal treatment" clause of the 14th Amendment.

[boutons_deux]

the politicized, corrupt SCOTUS promoting Christian nationalism and weaponized "freedom of expression"

Supreme Court nixes another California pandemic restriction

The Supreme Court has once again ruled against California in a case concerning religious worship during the coronavirus pandemic.

In a 5-4 decision, mostly along ideological lines,

the court ruled (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-california-coronavirus-church/2021/04/10/182faec2-99e8-11eb-962b-78c1d8228819_story.html) late Friday night that California cannot enforce its three-household limit on at-home religious meetings, such as prayer groups and Bible studies in.

Conservatives were in the majority, with only Chief Justice John Roberts splitting off and siding with the three liberal justices.

https://theweek.com/speedreads/976741/supreme-court-nixes-another-california-pandemic-restriction

Gore sucks says a couple people in a secular liquor store is the same as a home or church filled dozens or 100s of Christians.

ACB is now providing Roberts cover so he can bolster his historical reputation as apolitical

while the 5 conservatives, with whom he actually agrees with, fuck over America.

[boutons_deux]

Clarence and Virginia Thomas have an impressively corrupt activist/judge scheme going

quite the scheme going.

She takes in dark money contributions to her Tea Party-connected nonprofit, Liberty Central, and

organizes Republicans on exactly the kind of issues that often reach the Supreme Court.

He sits on the Supreme Court and

never recuses himself as justices are called on by federal law to do in certain situations,

including ones where their spouses have financial interests.

while Justice Stephen Breyer is solemnly warning (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/justice-breyer-says-expanding-the-supreme-court-will-erode-trust/2021/04/06/cabc95c4-9730-11eb-a6d0-13d207aadb78_story.html) that

expanding the Supreme Court might be a problem because

“Structural alteration motivated by the perception of political influence can only feed”

the perception that the court is guided by politics, “further eroding that trust.”

As if that ship had not long since sailed.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025108

[boutons_deux]

HOUSE AND SENATE DEMOCRATS PLAN BILL TO ADD FOUR JUSTICES TO SUPREME COURT

The Constitution allows Congress to set the number of Supreme Court justices.


https://theintercept.com/2021/04/14/house-and-senate-democrats-plan-bill-to-add-four-justices-to-supreme-court/

[boutons_deux]

The Supreme Court Broke Its Own Rules to Radically Redefine Religious Liberty

5–4 decision in Tandon v. Newsom (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a151_4g15.pdf), which blocked California’s COVID-related ban on religious gatherings in private homes.

it radically altered the law of religious liberty.

Since 1990’s Employment Division v. Smith (https://www.oyez.org/cases/1989/88-1213), the Supreme Court has not interpreted the First Amendment’s free exercise clause to require religious exemptions to laws that don’t discriminate against religion.

, the majority effectively overturned Smith by establishing a new rule, often called the “most favored nation” theory.

Under this doctrine, any secular exemption to a law

automatically creates a claim for a religious exemption,

vastly expanding the government’s obligation to provide religious accommodations to countless regulations.

Smith says the free exercise clause of the First Amendment protects against the government targeting religious practice for disfavored treatment,

but does not grant a right to exemptions from general law.

Almost immediately after Smith, there were efforts to read into it a broader

“most favored nation” theory that said:

Any time the government grants an exemption to a law, it has an obligation to grant a religious exemption, too, unless the government meets strict scrutiny.

But that was not the law of the land until Friday night.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/04/supreme-court-religious-liberty-covid-california.html

I read last year that ACB was the dam buster who would allow the Stinky Six, almost all Catholics, to weaponize "freedom of expression". Last Friday's bullshit is just the beginning.

[boutons_deux]

Sonia Sotomayor rips Brett Kavanaugh with a warning

https://www.alternet.org/media-library/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6I mh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzQ3MTU0OC9vcmlnaW4 uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY2MzM3Mzk3MH0.klWyztyfK nLIiN3FB_vU9u8GRy0vfaQni8mTenAyN0g/image.jpg?width=1245&quality=85&coordinates=0%2C11%2C0%2C11&height=700
Kavanagh having an emotional breakdown in his job interview, got hired anyway.

Justice Sotomayor warned this newly-constructed Court,... is "willing to overrule precedent without even acknowledging it is doing so, much less providing any special justification."

Amy Coney Barrett (https://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/?s=Amy+Coney+Barrett). Justice Barrett's judicial opinions made clear she will not honor precedent (https://www.nytimes.com/article/amy-barrett-views-issues.html), known as stare decisis.

Without that legal guardrail many decidedly settled law targets of conservatives, from the right to choose an abortion to the right to marry, could be struck down by the "Trump Court."

"How low this Court's respect for stare decisis has sunk," Justice Sotomayor warned.

"Not long ago, that doctrine was recognized as a pillar of the 'rule of law,' critical to 'keep the scale of justice even and steady, and not liable to waver with every new judge's opinion,'"

"Now, it seems, the Court is willing to overrule precedent without even acknowledging it is doing so, much less providing any special justification.

It is hard to see how that approach is 'founded in the law rather than in the proclivities of individuals,'"

She called the ruling a "contortion" of previous rulings, and writes: "As this Court has consistently reiterated, 'a departure from precedent demands special justification.'"

"The Court offers no such justification today. Nor could it," she charged.

"Instead of addressing these factors, the Court simply rewrites Miller and Montgomery," ...

"to say what the Court now wishes they had said, and then denies that it has done any such thing."

https://www.alternet.org/2021/04/kavanaugh-sotomayor/

[boutons_deux]

Brett Kavanaugh’s Opinion Restoring Juvenile Life Without Parole Is Dishonest and Barbaric

In an appalling 6–3 decision on Thursday, the Supreme Court effectively reinstated juvenile life without parole by shredding precedents that had sharply limited the sentence in every state.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s majority opinion in Jones v. Mississippi (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/18-1259_8njq.pdf) is one of the most dishonest and cynical decisions in recent memory:

While pretending to follow precedent, Kavanaugh tore down judicial restrictions on JLWOP,

ensuring that fully rehabilitated individuals who committed their crimes as children will die behind bars.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent, joined by Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan, pulls no punches in its

biting rebuke of Kavanaugh’s duplicity and inhumanity.

It doubles as an ominous warning that

the conservative majority is more than willing to destroy major precedents (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/07/how-brett-kavanaugh-will-gut-roe-v-wade.html) while falsely claiming to uphold them.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/04/brett-kavanaugh-sonia-sotomayor-juvenile-life-without-parole.html

[boutons_deux]

Barrett slammed for refusing to recuse herself from case involving Koch-funded group that bankrolled ads for her confirmation

The top petitioner listed in the case is a non-profit organization spearheaded by billionaires David Koch and Charles Koch.

When Barrett was nominated for the nation's highest court by former President Donald Trump,

the group shelled out more than $1 million to cover the cost of advertisements to amplify Barrett's image.

"Justice Barrett is ignoring important ethical standards to rule on a case that could open our democracy to further infiltration by dark-money influence, perhaps permanently,"

"Her choice to press forward in spite of recusal laws also creates a troubling new precedent,

and undermines public confidence in the integrity of the Court."

https://www.rawstory.com/barrett-slammed-for-refusing-to-recuse-herself-from-case-involving-koch-funded-group-that-bankrolled-ads-for-her-confirmation

She and Repugs don't care.

They know there will be no punishment for their ethical corruption.

Trash showed them they can go as far as they want without punishment

They even care less about "public confidence :lol in the integrity :lol of the Court."

[boutons_deux]

The Supreme Court’s conservatives are quaking over cancel culture

The Court’s right flank is afraid that the monster under their bed will cancel them.

“Requiring people to stand up in public for their political acts fosters civic courage, without which democracy is doomed.

For my part, I do not look forward to a society which, thanks to the Supreme Court, campaigns anonymously ... and

even exercises the direct democracy of initiative and referendum hidden from public scrutiny and protected from the accountability of criticism.

This does not resemble the Home of the Brave.”

Those are the words of the late Justice Antonin Scalia, in a 2010 opinion (https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/09-559.ZC4.html) concerning whether the public should be allowed to learn who signed a petition seeking to call a referendum on a state law.

The conservative justices who heard this new case, Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta (https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/americans-for-prosperity-foundation-v-becerra/), showed little of the confidence and “civic courage” that Scalia once celebrated.

Many of them bristled with paranoia that angry mobs lurk in every alleyway, waiting to cancel conservative speakers.

Justice Neil Gorsuch warned of a world where the government could demand to see your Christmas card list or a list of all the people you’ve dated in the past.

Justice Clarence Thomas repeatedly suggested that the Court must provide constitutional protection to any advocacy organization that is accused of being “racist” or “homophobic.”

Justice Samuel Alito warned of “vandalism, death threats, physical violence, economic reprisals, [and] harassment in the workplace” directed against donors to an anti-LGBTQ campaign.

Americans for Prosperity is a fraught case (https://www.vox.com/2021/4/17/22384256/supreme-court-citizens-united-disclosure-americans-for-prosperity-rodriquez-thomas-more), presenting

sensitive issues concerning when donors to advocacy organizations should be allowed to keep their identities secret in order to protect them from reprisals.

the Court’s conservative majority appears to believe that reprisals against political conservatives are now so common that

it may require handing down a sweeping and potentially unprecedented remedy to protect their fellow conservative activists from the horrors of cancel culture.

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/22404001/supreme-court-cancel-culture-americans-for-prosperity-bonta-california-alito-thomas-gorsuch

Protecting the oligarchy and others from public view as they finance hate, corruption, rigging of politiicans and judges.

Complete and total FASCISM.

[Ef-man]

Guess government authorities have to provide full details in one notice rather than multiple notices.

U.S. Supreme Court hands victory to immigrants facing deportation.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday offered new hope to thousands of long-term immigrants seeking to avoid deportation in a ruling that faulted the federal government for improperly notifying a man who came to the United States illegally from Guatemala to appear for a removal hearing.

The justices, in a 6-3 decision that divided the high court's conservative bloc, overturned a lower court's decision that had prevented Agusto Niz-Chavez from pursuing his request to cancel the attempted expulsion based on the length of time he had lived in the United States. He lives in Michigan with his family after entering the United States illegally in 2005.

The justices decided that federal immigration law requires authorities to include all relevant details for a notice to appear for a hearing in one document rather than sending the information across multiple documents. While a technical issue, the ruling could affect hundreds of thousands of immigration cases.

"In this case, the law's terms ensure that, when the federal government seeks a procedural advantage against an individual, it will at least supply him with a single and reasonably comprehensive statement of the nature of the proceedings against him," conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the ruling.

Gorsuch was joined by the court's three liberal justices as well as conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Amy Coney Barrett.

In a dissent, conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, said the ruling was "perplexing as a matter of statutory interpretation and common sense."

[Winehole23]

life comes at you fast.

if Roe. v Wade is overturned a bunch of states have trigger laws that instantly criminalize abortion.

1394284962438918147

[Winehole23]

Radley Balko put it something like this: SCOTUS just ruled non-unianimous jury verdicts unconstitutional and acknowledged their origin in racist jurisprudence, but they also denied relief to any claimant injured before SCOTUS started caring about it.

1394294766217662476

[Winehole23]

1394296717068013571

[Thread]

1394296717068013571

...How could this happen, Winester?...

Simple...

Trump President.
Not Clinton.

[Ef-man]

Trump President.
Not Clinton.

https://media.giphy.com/media/109TbhwGaMeQGQ/giphy.gif

[Winehole23]

In unanimous Fourth Amendment ruling, a reminder that there is, in fact, no place like home (https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/05/in-unanimous-fourth-amendment-ruling-a-reminder-that-there-is-in-fact-no-place-like-home/)decision: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-157_8mjp.pdf

[Winehole23]

...How could this happen, Winester?...

Simple...

Trump President.
Not Clinton.it is shocking that a developer/vulgarian like DJT installed one-third of the Supreme Court

[Thread]

it is shocking that a developer/vulgarian like DJT installed one-third of the Supreme Court

Even after Madonna tried to stop him by threatening to blow up the White House the day he moved into it.

***We'll see though if his installations remain RIGHT. Usually we fuck this up, most of the time (on purpose) like with that mother fucker Bush2 they're really LEFT in RIGHT clothing.

The LEFT? They never fuck up their installations. That fucker is LEFT and stays LEFT, ever more.

[Ef-man]

Madonna gets to threaten to blow up the White House without penalty.

https://media.giphy.com/media/109TbhwGaMeQGQ/giphy.gif

[spurraider21]

Even after Madonna tried to stop him by threatening to blow up the White House the day he moved into it.
:lol so upset over this


***We'll see though if his installations remain RIGHT. Usually we fuck this up, most of the time (on purpose) like with that mother fucker Bush2 they're really LEFT in RIGHT clothing.

The LEFT? They never fuck up their installations. That fucker is LEFT and stays LEFT, ever more.
his installations at least did the right thing during the post-election period

[Thread]

:lol so upset over this

Oh, absolutely. It's pure gold. Let me try that, 21...They'd be at, then thru the front door within mere hours.

"GD, Dale, I told you to stop with this Trump shit, GD, it."

"Just make sure to DVR Hill Street Blues tonight, uh, honey-bun......."

[Thread]

Madonna gets to threaten to blow up the White House without penalty.

https://media.giphy.com/media/109TbhwGaMeQGQ/giphy.gif

She's laying low now 4 years+. (They'll) let her know when it's time to resurface. You know what she'll do then, Ef? She'll reinforce it, by & by. "I shouldn't have said that in such a way, but I felt strongly then as I do now, perhaps even stronger, well, not stronger, per se, but I'm woman, and so hear me roar, in a numbers too big to like ignore. Now, I'm coming out with a new recording and I hope you all like it. 3% of the proceeds will go to BLM. I hate God. Chow!"

[spurraider21]

Oh, absolutely. It's pure gold. Let me try that, 21...They'd be at, then thru the front door within mere hours.

"GD, Dale, I told you to stop with this Trump shit, GD, it."

"Just make sure to DVR Hill Street Blues tonight, uh, honey-bun......."
but the secret service did open an investigation.

nothing came of it because obviously there was no actual threat :lol

[Thread]

his installations at least did the right thing during the post-election period

I already stipulated that it's a ruse; just to gum up the works, give ya's a taste of your own meds, get even, throw a monkey into the wrench, foul the water, et al and etc. You know shit all over mother fucker Biden's installed Presidency as you all shit all over Trump's Presidency. Make every day for mother fucker a living hell. Drive him into that shitter, deep into it. Cause mother fucker to lose sleep and chafe. Keep that blood pressure on the high end.

Let us proceed...

369 more dead American yesterday, 21 on Biden's end of the (19) Death Ledger.

Got a 100 more already today.

Ain't like the salad days, sure, but I'm venerated Cherokee and I'm countin' coup.

[Thread]

but the secret service did open an investigation.

nothing came of it because obviously there was no actual threat :lol

I'll just bet they did.

"Disappear Ms Ciconne for awhile. It'll be okay."

"Agreed. I hate God. The butler will see you out. I hate God."

[spurraider21]

I already stipulated that it's a ruse; just to gum up the works, give ya's a taste of your own meds, get even, throw a monkey into the wrench, foul the water, et al and etc. You know shit all over mother fucker Biden's installed Presidency as you all shit all over Trump's Presidency. Make every day for mother fucker a living hell. Drive him into that shitter, deep into it. Cause mother fucker to lose sleep and chafe. Keep that blood pressure on the high end.

Let us proceed...

369 more dead American yesterday, 21 on Biden's end of the (19) Death Ledger.

Got a 100 more already today.

Ain't like the salad days, sure, but I'm venerated Cherokee and I'm countin' coup.
you've been listening to too much Lin Wood :lol

[TSA]

When did Thread come back? :lol

[spurraider21]

When did Thread (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=19320) come back? :lol
within the last week.

but he claims he's been here all along :lol

[TSA]

:lol

[boutons_deux]

it is shocking that a developer/vulgarian like DJT installed one-third of the Supreme Court

He was handed the corrupt candidates, none of which he knew. It was all Moscow Mitch, Leonard Leo, Judicial Watch, and similar shitbags

Trash didn't, doesn't have a fucking clue

[Trill Clinton]

:lol

Where u been fam. I missed you.

[Joseph Kony]

Thread is a sad caricature of himself at this point

[TSA]

Where u been fam. I missed you.

Out of the country for work and then laid up for a month waiting on surgery. Had a successful surgery last Monday and am now back at home building up my strength and flexibility. Missed you too fam.

[Thread]

When did Thread (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=19320) come back? :lol

Now you're gonna take my pants down, TSA? First Clammy strips me down naked and sets fire ants to my old ass, then the Bum puts me on Ignore after 20 years of hammer & tonging it and now you?

Fuck me.

[Thread]

Thread is a sad caricature of himself at this point

I got old, JK.

[Thread]

He was handed the corrupt candidates, none of which he knew. It was all Moscow Mitch, Leonard Leo, Judicial Watch, and similar shitbags

Trash didn't, doesn't have a fucking clue

...my ass. He rules the roost. Are the ones you mentioned vested in the old man? No, not on your life, bouts, they're by and large RINO's to varying degrees, but they know if they try and whack Trump out 75+ million Americans will put them in the old cornfield, just-like-that. [You/them] are waiting for the old man to die, or, get "bought out."

[spurraider21]

Now you're gonna take my pants down, TSA? First Clammy strips me down naked and sets fire ants to my old ass, then the Bum puts me on Ignore after 20 years of hammer & tonging it and now you?

Fuck me.
well, you were a chickenshit. people noticed.

simple as that.

[Thread]

you've been listening to too much Lin Wood :lol

...I don't know who that is.

Biden has now lost over 600 Americans today so far with 3-4 hours left on the death count. That's over 1,000 since yesterday morning.

[Thread]

well, you were a chickenshit. people noticed.

simple as that.

Go back and fuck your mother some more, 21.

[spurraider21]

Go back and fuck your mother some more, 21.
https://i1.sndcdn.com/avatars-000364555079-zjj97e-t240x240.jpg

[Thread]

https://i1.sndcdn.com/avatars-000364555079-zjj97e-t240x240.jpg

What the fuck is wrong with you, 21?

[spurraider21]

What the fuck is wrong with you, 21?
nothing.

you're always preaching about how others should "act like somebody"

when you dont, you have to own it. you cant even do that much. no spine at all. even trying to bullshit about how you've been here every day :lol. it's shameful stuff

[Thread]

^^^
Have it your way then, 21.

Let us proceed...

[Winehole23]

Since joining the bench, Kavanaugh has sought to frame himself as an honest broker

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/05/edwards-vannoy-kagan-kavanaugh-scorekeeping.html

[Winehole23]

1404416777459748869

[Thread]

- "Hope, hope."

- "Dick Ritchie" - "True Romance"

[Winehole23]

because, of course he will

1404455345339183105

[baseline bum]

because, of course he will

1404455345339183105

Hence why it's supremely disappointing the Democrats couldn't get to 52 senators so they could have admitted DC and Puerto Rico as states in time for 2022.

[Thread]

Hence why it's supremely disappointing the Democrats couldn't get to 52 senators so they could have admitted DC and Puerto Rico as states in time for 2022.

Sometimes you eat the bear...stealing the election from President Trump.

And sometimes, bumster, that old bear just gets up all over ya...Trump leaving Hillary where he found her, side-of-the-road.

[Trainwreck2100]

Hence why it's supremely disappointing the Democrats couldn't get to 52 senators so they could have admitted DC and Puerto Rico as states in time for 2022.

They needed GOATbrams to get to 50. We've only seen one nontrump ballot over the last 6 years and it was a gop bloodbath. So in a perfect world he is still shit at whipping his voters when he aint there. It's not like the gop wont be nominating even more moonbats to turn off enough people

[boutons_deux]

Hence why it's supremely disappointing the Democrats couldn't get to 52 senators so they could have admitted DC and Puerto Rico as states in time for 2022.


Biden administration releases billions in relief for Puerto Rico, removes ‘onerous’ restrictions
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article250784004.html

As a New York wealthy racist, Trash hates PRs

[Thread]

Biden will not help PR's disaster recovery, same position as Trash

Why can't Biden use "foreign aid" funds to help PR if he can't use FEMA?

Because it'd be throwing good money after bad. It's a shit hole, always will be a shit hole, as Trump stated. It's their way.

[Winehole23]

Brnovich drops, haven't read yet

1410618734964658176

[Winehole23]

1410600880114573321

[boutons_deux]

SCOTUS 6-3 rules voter suppression is now Constitutional, the law of the land.

America is fucked and unfuckable. All out Capitalist fascism is inevitable

[boutons_deux]

Biden doesn't have the balls to add 5 or 6 justices to SCOTUS

The Repugs fuck up America and Dems say, if anything, "OK"

[boutons_deux]

https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/210791804_4099596420086637_2942606919547626487_n.p ng?_nc_cat=1&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=c9yQOExr5msAX_yPvmi&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=a06969503ea5c7f16e7c5d768b009cd6&oe=60E53E5E

[Thread]

https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/210791804_4099596420086637_2942606919547626487_n.p ng?_nc_cat=1&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=c9yQOExr5msAX_yPvmi&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=a06969503ea5c7f16e7c5d768b009cd6&oe=60E53E5E

And frankly, bouts, I am shocked. Usually our side Presidents do us dirt when selecting SC Justices. That fuck Bush2 put Roberts in there, knowing that he was a sheep in wolf's clothing. Your side NEVER makes a mistake. Your Justices are left, stay left, shift even more left.

I'm still watching with a jaundiced eye on President Trump's trio. God willing they remain fast in the ranks.

My only regret is that the old man didn't have a sit with C. Thomas and replace him early in '20. We'd be comfortably set now.

[boutons_deux]

compromised SCOTUS is blatantly part of Capitalism's, Repug, right wing hate media conspiracy to destroy even Potemkin democracy to be replaced with one-party and Christian nationalist fascism.

[Thread]

compromised SCOTUS is blatantly part of Capitalism's, Repug, right wing hate media conspiracy to destroy even Potemkin democracy to be replaced with one-party and Christian nationalist fascism.



You ain't had a beef till President Trump made President and pushed those 3 stalwarts SO FAR. Give 'em a year and they'll show their true colors like that mother fucker John Roberts. That mother fucker.

[boutons_deux]

Analysis Reveals the Profound Damage Wrought by GOP-Packed Supreme Court

"This Supreme Court is dominated by Trump-appointed justices, with

predictably disastrous results for voting rights as well as workers, consumers, and immigrants this term."

"This Supreme Court term wrapped up with a one-two punch to voting rights and our democracy."

They have continued to abet Republican efforts to make it

harder for popular majorities to vote them out of office through free and fair elections;

let racial injustice fester in the criminal justice system;

continued to give special rights to religious organizations far beyond what the Constitution contemplates;

made life harder for undocumented immigrants trying to exercise their legal rights;

advanced their agenda to weaken Congress and

undo the New Deal;

and reinterpreted the Constitution

to give corporations a new weapon to neutralize ordinary health and safety regulations.

"the far-right justices made it

easier for states to keep people in prison even when the procedures used to convict them are later deemed unconstitutional."

6-3 right-wing majority also

"abandoned two recent precedents that protected minors from unconstitutionally excessive prison sentences"

Justices Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, and Barrett cast key votes to

further weaken Congress’ authority to insulate agency officials from political pressure and

to strike down a law on the Federal Housing Finance Agency.

The trio of Trump justices also "cast deciding votes

to invalidate part of a congressional law that provides for the appointment of independent patent judges in cases concerning the reconsideration of patents."

"made it much harder for victims of corporate malfeasance to use class action lawsuits to hold companies accountable when they violate the rights of vast numbers of people."

expanded the meaning of the Takings Clause in a way that limits organized labor in this particular case,

and that threatens any number of government protections that affect monied interests."

"the court's rightward tilt is very pronounced and raises serious concerns about risks to our rights."

it is a near-certainty that the court's conservative majority

will continue to rule in favor of the far-right interests of those that orchestrated the theft of these seats."
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2021/07/02/analysis-reveals-profound-damage-wrought-gop-packed-supreme-court

Capitalist/Repug fascism is inevitable

America is fucked and unfuckable

[Frenchfred]

Biden doesn't have the balls to add 5 or 6 justices to SCOTUS

The Repugs fuck up America and Dems say, if anything, "OK"

he should add 6 justices and make sure that this is not a life appointment

[Thread]

Biden doesn't have the balls to add 5 or 6 justices to SCOTUS

GD rights he doesn't. Same as he doesn't have the balls to nuke us or set fighter jets at us as he threatened he would.

Mother fucker Biden is good for sniffing the little ones and harvesting wet votes, the mother fucker.

[Thread]

he should add 6 justices and make sure that this is not a life appointment

This cocksucker is from fucking France where they let the Nazi's boogie right on it...no invite, no parlay. The French are like the Orphans..."Give us, Mercy."

See what I did there?

[DMC]

This cocksucker is from fucking France where they let the Nazi's boogie right on it...no invite, no parlay. The French are like the Orphans..."Give us, Mercy."

See what I did there?

Merci!

[boutons_deux]

A new Supreme Court case could blow up decades of US diplomacy

The Court must decide whether rogue judges have the power to dismantle US foreign policy.

Texas v. Biden, a case with profound implications for American foreign policy, reached the Supreme Court with lightning speed.

On August 13, a judge in Texas appointed by then-President Donald Trump effectively ordered the Biden administration to permanently reinstate Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy (https://www.vox.com/2021/8/17/22627107/trump-judge-remain-in-mexico-matthew-kacsmaryk-immigration-asylum-joe-biden-donald-trump).

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk’s opinion in Texas was wrong for many reasons,

including that he completely misread federal immigration law (https://www.vox.com/2021/8/17/22627107/trump-judge-remain-in-mexico-matthew-kacsmaryk-immigration-asylum-joe-biden-donald-trump).

Kacsmaryk wrote that a 1996 federal law only gives “the government two options vis-à-vis aliens seeking asylum:

(1) mandatory detention; or

(2) return to a contiguous territory.”

Federal immigration law actually gives immigration officials several options,


including granting “parole into the United States (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182)” to individual immigrants or releasing the immigrant on “bond of at least $1,500 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1226).”

On Thursday, a panel of three right-wing appellate judges, two of whom were appointed by Trump, refused the Justice Department’s request (https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/21/21-10806-CV0.pdf) to stay Kacsmaryk’s order and prevent it from taking effect.

https://www.vox.com/2021/8/24/22637775/supreme-court-texas-biden-remain-in-mexico-trump

corrupt Repugs judges will fuck America unfuckably

[boutons_deux]

Judicial power grab:

A Wisconsin judge defies the law by doubling as a 'probation officer'

Wisconsin Circuit Judge Vincent Biskupic acts as both judge and probation officer because he "wants to see people grow and change."

https://www.alternet.org/2021/08/judge-probation-officer/

another piece of shit right-wing activist Repug judge, appointed by Scott Walker

[boutons_deux]

Judges, esp hyper-activist Repug political hacks, can now make foreign policy

Supreme Court Allows Revival of Trump-Era ‘Remain in Mexico’ Asylum Policy

The co urt’s unsigned order refused to stay a ruling from a federal judge in Texas forbidding the Biden administration from ending the policy




https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/24/us/politics/supreme-court-immigration-asylum-mexico.html

[Thread]

Judges, esp hyper-activist Repug political hacks, can now make foreign policy

Supreme Court Allows Revival of Trump-Era ‘Remain in Mexico’ Asylum Policy

The co urt’s unsigned order refused to stay a ruling from a federal judge in Texas forbidding the Biden administration from ending the policy




https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/24/us/politics/supreme-court-immigration-asylum-mexico.html







You guys was always doing that shit, then running back here skinnin" & a grinnin'. You dished it. Now you're takin' it.

[ElNono]

Judges, esp hyper-activist Repug political hacks, can now make foreign policy

Supreme Court Allows Revival of Trump-Era ‘Remain in Mexico’ Asylum Policy

The co urt’s unsigned order refused to stay a ruling from a federal judge in Texas forbidding the Biden administration from ending the policy




https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/24/us/politics/supreme-court-immigration-asylum-mexico.html







Just read about this. Unforced error by the Biden admin, should've done this by the book to avoid this.

[boutons_deux]

Just read about this. Unforced error by the Biden admin, should've done this by the book to avoid this.

what was the error?

[ElNono]

what was the error?

The APA requires the government to explain why the policy decision is beneficial, and not just capricious.

It's true this is likely a separation of powers issue and the court can't do jackshit to make the DHS enforce the policy, but when you want to make policy changes you need to put forth a bit more effort than "because the secretary thinks so", etc.

There should've been some studies conducted backing up the decision to rescind the policy, at the very least. That's proper ammo to bring to court and leave no doubt of why you're doing what you're doing.

[Winehole23]

shadow docket super busy

activist GOP court seems to be granting a lot of emergency review and deciding controversies before they're ripe.

1431074361205739522

[Thread]

shadow docket super busy

activist GOP court seems to be granting a lot of emergency review and deciding controversies before they're ripe.

1431074361205739522

Nonetheless, you've taken a few surprised down already.

Stop whining!!!

[Winehole23]

1431070738874785795

[Winehole23]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E9wrDHDWEAISYQI?format=jpg&name=medium

[Thread]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E9wrDHDWEAISYQI?format=jpg&name=medium

- "There are consequences to elections, John."

- Hussein - lecturing that fuck wad McCain shortly after taking the con.

[boutons_deux]

the Capitalist oligarchy's strategy, now achieved:

Federal judges and SCOTUS6 ACTIVIST-LY, RELIABLY "legislating from the bench" (no messy legislature)

Fascism is not for the distant future.

The fascists, 100% bad faith, see democracy's blood in the water.

There's no way to stop them.

[boutons_deux]

https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/239602894_4263577800355164_7032805334609728207_n.j pg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=gFDJONlC1CsAX_EnsYR&tn=9ruE3w8YPL-kwJ9x&_nc_ht=scontent-sjc3-1.xx&oh=02fbe7dbb02ad8d6ce8a116421d90456&oe=61505E93

majority of the 6 are fascist, papist Catholics

[Thread]

https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/239602894_4263577800355164_7032805334609728207_n.j pg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=gFDJONlC1CsAX_EnsYR&tn=9ruE3w8YPL-kwJ9x&_nc_ht=scontent-sjc3-1.xx&oh=02fbe7dbb02ad8d6ce8a116421d90456&oe=61505E93

majority of the 6 are fascist, papist Catholics

& I still can't count on 'em when it comes down to brass tacks, bouts.

[Winehole23]

shadow docket super busy

activist GOP court seems to be granting a lot of emergency review and deciding controversies before they're ripe.

Radical judicial activism, if it happens.

1432463941486059523

[Thread]

Radical judicial activism, if it happens.

1432463941486059523

Fingers & toes crossed.

[Winehole23]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-QLrKAXIAA9_MX?format=jpg&name=largehttps://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-QLrKCWUAALpDX?format=jpg&name=large

[Winehole23]

"intends to engage"


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-NHp1OXsAIlwd_?format=png&name=small
?

[Winehole23]

:lmao

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-LOJA-UcAMFUAy?format=jpg&name=900x900

[Winehole23]

1433321938273832960

[rmt]

:lmao

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-LOJA-UcAMFUAy?format=jpg&name=900x900

Who'ld've known - LOL.

[Winehole23]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-Si33QWYAQ8P8k?format=jpg&name=small

[Thread]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-Si33QWYAQ8P8k?format=jpg&name=small

He needs to get his honkey ass down to Louisiana...and leave your fucking watch at home, asshole.

Chop/chop.

[Winehole23]

Who'ld've known - LOL.there were clues

1045396880698605571

[Thread]

there were clues

1045396880698605571

There's that hot ass bitch from -Fear- aside his right shoulder.

[Winehole23]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-WL65kWUAQ7m9f?format=png&name=small

[Winehole23]

Dems should pack the court while they're at it

1433854986161696773

[boutons_deux]

A Trump BigOil whore of a judge, in shithole, polluted, cancer-alley Louisiana, ORDERS Exec branch to follow his orders

Judge’s Order Forces Interior Department to Revive Drilling Lease Sales on Federal Lands and Waters

The Biden administration’s ban on oil and gas drilling on federal lands and waters was supposed to be temporary, lasting only as long as it took to craft reforms intended to slash the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions.

the Biden administration appealed a June ruling by Judge Terry A. Doughty of the Western District of Louisiana, who ordered the Interior Department to lift the temporary ban on new federal oil and gas leasing

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/29082021/interior-drilling-federal-lands-water

What authority does the Federal judiciary have to order the Exec branch?

What "law" is the Interior Dept breaking?

[Winehole23]

taking sides on public controversies without argument, hearings or signed opinions, tbh.

chickenshit SCOTUS

1434568812045742086

1434574311269052423

[boutons_deux]

Dems should pack the court while they're at it

1433854986161696773

"senator" softball Biden refuses to counter-pack the court after the hardball Repugs packed it.

Dems complicit passively with the Repugs installing fascism to USA's Potemkin democracy.

[boutons_deux]

Trump's Supreme Court nominees are showing their true colors

There can be no more doubts how Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Coney Barrett feel about abortion rights

it's worth remembering that during their confirmation hearings, each justice — and, often, their supporters (https://theweek.com/supreme-court/1004412/susan-collins-was-astoundingly-wrong-about-brett-kavanaugh) — danced around the question of how they might rule on the issue, giving noncommittal answers that sometimes sounded almost as though they accepted Roe as settled law.

Take Gorsuch. At his 2017 confirmation hearing, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) asked if he accepted the precedent set by Roe.

"That's the law of the land," Gorsuch said (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/03/neil-gorsuch-confirmation-hearing/520425/). "I accept the law of the land, senator, yes." :lol

Kavanaugh gave a similarly vague response at his 2018 hearing.

"As a general proposition, I understand the importance of the precedent set forth in Roe v. Wade," he told (https://www.vox.com/2018/9/5/17822974/brett-kavanaugh-abortion-views-supreme-court-hearing) a Senate hearing. :lol

Coney Barrett, at least, gave a slightly more candid answer, telling senators in her confirmation that she didn't consider Roe a "super-precedent" too settled for the court to overturn. Those cases

"are so well settled that no political actors and no people seriously push for their overruling," she said (https://www.npr.org/sections/live-amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court-confirmation/2020/10/13/923355142/barrett-says-abortion-rights-decision-not-a-super-precedent). :lol

"And I'm answering a lot of questions about Roe, which I think indicates that Roe doesn't fall in that category."

It is probably also the case, however, that Republicans want some plausible deniability when it comes to ending abortion rights in America.

While the anti-abortion cause is popular among the conservatives who make up the GOP's base,

it's less so (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/nbc-news-poll-shows-nation-s-demographic-divides-abortion-n1278210) among the electorate at large.


This is even true in red states:

Voters in South Dakota and Mississippi rejected referenda to ban abortions in 2006 (https://www.mprnews.org/story/2006/11/08/sdabortion) and 2011 (https://www.cnn.com/2011/11/09/politics/mississippi-election/index.html), respectively.

https://theweek.com/roe-v-wade/1004551/trumps-supreme-court-nominees-are-showing-their-true-colors

[Thread]

"senator" softball Biden refuses to counter-pack the court after the hardball Repugs packed it.

Dems complicit passively with the Repugs installing fascism to USA's Potemkin democracy.

All RBG had to do was agree to be coma'ed, say good bye to everybody, tell everybody where the boodle is, tell everybody how said boodle is split, call hospital security to quell the ensuring riot in that swell private hospital suite, quell stymied,,,start the drip,,,viola!!! It's 5-4 the other way.

[DMC]

Boutons' sources and font usages are :lol

Reeks of unstable incel

[Winehole23]

Boutons' sources and font usages are :lol

Reeks of unstable incelreduced to clowning on the LCD, water finds its own level I guess

[Winehole23]

great Steve Vladeck thread on SCOTUS's shadow docket

1435284127041863687

1435284131752067082

[Winehole23]

the Judiciary is co-equal branch of government. It is political in origin and import -- it gets to say what the law is

Dems need to wake up and smell the coffee.

1435284141319262211

[boutons_deux]

Amy Coney Barrett, Queen Of Gaslighters, Cries Hot Tears Over Being Called 'Partisan Hack'

Amy Coney Barrett ... complained about mean media bullies calling the Supreme Court's decisions "political."

Not in an Onion post. Not in an "SNL" sketch. In real life.

"My goal today is to convince you that this court is not comprised of a bunch of partisan hacks," :lol

Barrett has the unmitigated gall to complain that Americans perceive the court as deciding cases first and then back-formulating a justification to suit their political ends — if they can even be bothered to do that much (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/04/scotus-shadow-docket-use-problem.html).

"The media, along with hot takes on Twitter, report the results and decisions,"

"That makes the decision seem results-oriented. :lol

It leaves the reader to judge whether the court was right or wrong, based on whether she liked the results of the decision."

Well, no shit, lady.

You just overruled the viability framework of Roe and Casey

on the goddamn shadow docket, (https://www.wonkette.com/sb-8-nightmare) and

you greenlighted a bounty system on pregnant women to make it happen.

the chutzpah to dedicate her professional life to the theory of the unitary executive and

then rule that the (Dem) president is powerless

to set immigration policy and is obligated to maintain his (Repug) predecessor's policies (https://www.npr.org/2021/08/25/1031067084/the-supreme-court-reinstated-trumps-remain-in-mexico-policy-for-asylum-seekers) indefinitely.

Barrett was confirmed on a party-line vote

as the president was openly speculating that she would deliver the White House for him,

and has quite consistently sided with her more conservative colleagues.

It's the rankest gaslighting for her to congratulate herself (https://www.politico.com/news/2021/09/12/amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court-511603) and her fellow jurists on being "hyper vigilant

to make sure they're not letting personal biases creep into their decisions, since judges are people, too."

She was nominated explicitly because of her personal biases and

utter lack of respect for precedent, and she proves it every single day.

this "The Handmaid's Tale" character is doing exactly what she was hired to do.

And having a wonderful time trolling the shit out of the American public, while she's at it.

https://www.wonkette.com/chief-justice-barrett-queen-of-the-gaslighters-cries-hot-tears-over-being-called-a-partisan-hack

[Thread]

Amy Coney Barrett, Queen Of Gaslighters, Cries Hot Tears Over Being Called 'Partisan Hack'

Amy Coney Barrett ... complained about mean media bullies calling the Supreme Court's decisions "political."

Not in an Onion post. Not in an "SNL" sketch. In real life.

"My goal today is to convince you that this court is not comprised of a bunch of partisan hacks," :lol

Barrett has the unmitigated gall to complain that Americans perceive the court as deciding cases first and then back-formulating a justification to suit their political ends — if they can even be bothered to do that much (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/04/scotus-shadow-docket-use-problem.html).

"The media, along with hot takes on Twitter, report the results and decisions,"

"That makes the decision seem results-oriented. :lol

It leaves the reader to judge whether the court was right or wrong, based on whether she liked the results of the decision."

Well, no shit, lady.

You just overruled the viability framework of Roe and Casey

on the goddamn shadow docket, (https://www.wonkette.com/sb-8-nightmare) and

you greenlighted a bounty system on pregnant women to make it happen.

the chutzpah to dedicate her professional life to the theory of the unitary executive and

then rule that the (Dem) president is powerless

to set immigration policy and is obligated to maintain his (Repug) predecessor's policies (https://www.npr.org/2021/08/25/1031067084/the-supreme-court-reinstated-trumps-remain-in-mexico-policy-for-asylum-seekers) indefinitely.

Barrett was confirmed on a party-line vote

as the president was openly speculating that she would deliver the White House for him,

and has quite consistently sided with her more conservative colleagues.

It's the rankest gaslighting for her to congratulate herself (https://www.politico.com/news/2021/09/12/amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court-511603) and her fellow jurists on being "hyper vigilant

to make sure they're not letting personal biases creep into their decisions, since judges are people, too."

She was nominated explicitly because of her personal biases and

utter lack of respect for precedent, and she proves it every single day.

this "The Handmaid's Tale" character is doing exactly what she was hired to do.

And having a wonderful time trolling the shit out of the American public, while she's at it.

https://www.wonkette.com/chief-justice-barrett-queen-of-the-gaslighters-cries-hot-tears-over-being-called-a-partisan-hack



Boiled down:::

Coney SCJ.
Not Garland.

[boutons_deux]

Justice Clarence Thomas believes media criticism of decisions ‘jeopardizes any faith’ in the Supreme Court


https://www.rawstory.com/media-library/image.jpg?id=27487256&width=1200&height=625

complained about the harsh criticism the Supreme Court has received since allowing a controversial anti-abortion law to go into effect in Texas (https://www.rawstory.com/celebrities-lash-out-at-texas-abortion-law/).

Thomas delivered the 2021 Tocqueville Lecture at the University of Notre Dame :lol fascist Catholic central

"I think the media makes it sound as though you are just always going right to your personal preference.

So if they think you are anti-abortion or something personally, they think that's the way you always will come out.

They think you're for this or for that.

They think you become like a politician," Thomas said. :lol English motherfucker do you speak it?

we may have become the most dangerous," Thomas said. "And I think that's problematic." :lol

interrupted by protesters who yelled, "I still believe Anita Hill." :lol

https://www.rawstory.com/clarence-thomas-speech

CT, no fan of the 1st Amendment, except the "establishment" clause (to be violated) and "free expression" clause (to be weaponized)

[boutons_deux]

Why Stop at Roe?

https://2vynjo3oi9ijs29xb3fmjtn1-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/46955927024_40e3c81f4c_c-680x451.jpg

Donald Trump will likely go down in U.S. history as one of the worst, if not most corrupt, presidents.

Sadly, his reactionary legacy will live on much, much longer than his one term in office.

His three Supreme Court appointments – Neil Gorsuch (2017), Brett Kavanaugh (2018) and Amy Coney Barrett (2020) – have joined with the Court’s two arch conservatives — Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito –

and one moderate — John Roberts :lol moderate? :lol

– to forge the most conservative Court since the 1930s.
A quick review of some of these possible decisions (https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/programs/constitution_day/landmark-cases/;%20https:/www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/supreme-court-landmarks;%20https:/www.constitutionfacts.com/content/supremecourt/files/supremecourt_landmarkcases.pdf) suggests just how reactionary an aggressively conservative Court could be.

Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)
At issue is whether a state can pass laws that challenge the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce. The Court originally ruled that the federal government regulated interstate commerce.
So, why not “revise” the ruling and give states power over interstate commerce?

Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
The Court ruled that Congress could legalize slavery and prohibit African Americans from suing in federal court.
So, in an era of gig-work neo-slavery, why not “revise” the ruling and deny rights to those considered “un-American,” whether defined by race, gender, national origin, religion or job.

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)
The Court upheld the notion of “separate but equal” segregation laws in states.
So, in a postmodern world, why not “revise” the notion of “separate” to all those who challenge white, conservative powers-that-be?

Schenck v. United States (1919)
The Court originally ruled that the concept a “clear and present danger” threatening U.S. security violated the principle of free speech as protected by the First Amendment.
So, in a nation facing an endless “war on terror,” why not surrender First Amendment protections to defend “national security”?

Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
The Court overturned Plessy v. Ferguson finding that racially segregated public schools violate the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause, ruling “separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.”
So, why, in the postmodern 21st century, can’t “separate educational facilities” be “inherently” equal?

Cooper v. Aaron (1958)
The Court ruled that states cannot nullify decisions of the federal courts (e.g., Alabama refused to follow the Brown v. Board of Education decision.)
So, why can’t a state nullify a federal act if a state legislature — backed by state-rights activities — oppose it.

Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
The Court ruled that illegally obtained material cannot be used in a criminal trial.
So, given the police’s need to pursue all illegal activities, why shouldn’t all relevant material – no matter how it is obtained — be used in a prosecution?

Engel v. Vitale (1962)
The Court ruled that prayer in public schools violated the First Amendment.
So, in schools with parents of students having a strong religious outlook, why not permit prayer in school?

Baker v. Carr (1962)
The Court ruled that states must meet a Constitutional standard for voting that doesn’t violate the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment, thus instituting the notion of “one person, one vote.”
So, why not reconceive voting as a privilege that should be restricted to meet higher standards, whether based on age, literacy, gender, race or personal wealth?

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
The Court ruled that an individual charged with a felony and is unable to pay for a lawyer must be provided representation without charge.
So, why should a community have to pay for someone’s legal representation?

Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)
The Constitution ruled that the personal right to privacy permitted married people to acquire contraceptive devices.
So, now that Roe had been restricted to protect the fetus, why should couples or individuals have a right to conceptives?

Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
The Court ruled that the Fifth and Sixth Amendments require police to inform individuals in custody that they have a right to remain silent and to have an attorney.
So, in order to contain crime, why – for those who’ve been arrested – shouldn’t silence be a sign of guilt and, thus, there’d be no need for a defense attorney?

Loving v. Virginia (1967)
The Court invalidated state laws prohibiting interracial marriage.
So, why, under state rights, shouldn’t states prohibit “unacceptable” marriages based on race?

Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)
The Court held that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech … at the schoolhouse gate.” Thus, students could engage in non-disruptive political actions like wearing black armbands to symbolize anti-war political protest.
So, why couldn’t the Court restrict all forms of “free” speech to outside the school building?

United States v. Nixon (1974)
The Court rules that a president cannot use executive privilege to withhold evidence from criminal trial.
So, why, in a case involving former Pres. Trump’s business practices, should he be granted executive privilege?

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)
The Court ruled that universities may use race as part of an admissions decisions so long as “fixed quotas” are not used.
So, if universities can use race, why can’t they use “unfixed” quotas?

Texas v. Johnson (1989)
The Court ruled that offensive speech — such as flag burning — is protected by the First Amendment.
So, what if speech is so offensive – such as calling for the impeachment of a president — that it is not protected by the Constitution?

Cruzan v. Missouri Dept. of Health (1990)
The Court ruled that a person had a right to reject life-preserving medical treatment — their “right to die” – allowing the withdrawal of treatment with clear and convincing evidence that this is what the patient would have wanted.
So, in adhering to the primacy of the living person as codified in the Texas decision to restrict Roe, why should anyone have the “right to die”?

Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
The Court struck down state laws that prohibited sodomy between consenting adults.
So, why – in a Christian country – should anyone have a right to engage in sodomy or other homo-erotic acts?

Roper v. Simmons (2005)
The Court ruled that it is cruel and unusual punishment to execute persons for crimes they committed before age 18 in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
So, what if the youth commits a “terrorist” act or a politically-motivated mass murder? Shouldn’t s/he be executed?

United States v. Windsor (2013)
The Court ruled that the federal government must provide benefits to legally married same-sex couples.
So, why, if same-sex couples are prohibited from marrying, would benefits be provided?

Obergefell v. Hodges (2015)
The Court ruled that same-sex marriage is legal in all 50 states.
So, why, in a Christian America, are same-sex marriage permitted?

***
The reactionary Christian (Catholic papists) right now controls the Supreme Court and will likely continue to do so for the next generation or more.

Given this power, the face of the American legal system will change and, with it, social life.

Change in social and personal life could have any number of consequences —

the reestablishment separate but equal,

ending of “one person, one vote,”

blocking criminal safeguards,

restricting freedom of speech and

reshaping sexual life and relations (e.g., access to contraceptive, homosexual and interracial marriage)

Today’s most conservative Christians may well envision returning America to a life invoking the glory – gory! – days of the early Puritan colonist.

Like the days of old, such

reactionary “originalists” could redefine illegal act to include premarital sex (fornication), extramarital sex (adultery), sodomy (homosexuality) and interracial sex (amalgamation).

And they could specify the two worst offenses to be bestiality involving young men and sexual witchcraft among older women.

Other forms of “originalist” law-and-order rules were applied to the newly-settled America.

In 1662, the Virginia Assembly established the first law against interracial sex.

In 1691, it passed a much stiffer law banning “negroes, mulattoes and indians intermarrying with English, or other white women, [and] their unlawful accompanying with one another.”

Other colonies followed with similar bans, as exemplified by the North Carolina colony that, in 1715, adopted laws prohibiting interracial marriages.

Three-plus centuries later, America elected its first male president of mixed-race origin, followed a few years later by a female vice president, both children of once-scandalous interracial relations.

Who know how long before such people will, one day, be barred from holding public office.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/09/16/why-stop-at-roe/

[boutons_deux]

Legal critics pillory Justice Clarence Thomas for

‘speaking out against something he is actively doing’


he blasted the media for criticizing decisions (https://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/2021/09/justice-clarence-thomas-believes-media-criticism-of-decisions-jeopardizes-any-faith-in-the-supreme-court/) from the nation's highest court :lol and

warning federal judges to not wade in to political discussions. :lol

blasting him for, as Daily Beast editor-at-large Molly Jong-Fast says (https://twitter.com/MollyJongFast/status/1438825803035422724), "speaking out against something he is actively doing."

"Clarence Thomas didn't seem too worried about 'destroying our institutions' when he cast the deciding vote to make Bush president in 2000 or

to gut the Voting Rights Act in 2013 or

when he sat silently from 2017-2021 as Trump trashed our institutions."

Justice Thomas, saying that (https://twitter.com/mirandayaver/status/1438691093382516744)

"claiming that the Supreme Court isn't political is nonsense and we all know it.

FWIW, whenever I teach Constitutional Law and students go,

'Who in the hell would write that opinion??' the answer is invariably Clarence Thomas."

"Clarence Thomas, whose rulings in key cases mysteriously always conform with his political and partisan preferences,

says the justices do not make decisions based on politics. Hahahahaha"

https://www.alternet.org/2021/09/clarence-thomas-court/

[DMC]

reduced to clowning on the LCD, water finds its own level I guess

:lol selective outrage

[Winehole23]

:lol selective outrageno outrage at all.

you and boutons deserve each other -- water finds its own level.

[DMC]

no outrage at all.

you and boutons deserve each other -- water finds its own level.

:lmao

Your side has the LCD. You called it.

You're just a more verbose version of Boutons. He does Rawstory and you do Twitter. Same basic schtick though... two Americans angry at their lot in life, blaming it on :"the man".

[koriwhat]

You're just a more verbose version of Boutons. He does Rawstory and you do Twitter. Same basic schtick though...

Ain't that the truth! :tu

[boutons_deux]

SCOTUS6

2 sexual predators

3 appointed by a Pres who lost the popular election

1 extremist Catholic who ran a punitive, secretive Catholic fringe cult

SCOTUS revises oral argument format ahead of blockbuster term


While the Court will maintain the traditional practice of allowing justices to engage in questioning in no particular order -- the traditional free for all -- there will now be an opportunity, once an attorney's time has expired, for the justices to ask specific questions in order of seniority.

The hybrid system appears to be an attempt to blend together two approaches from the court's recent history.

The traditional format produced more lively hearings -- with justices often interrupting each other -- and advocates unable to always respond fulsomely.

At times, justices seemed to be using the argument session to probe the positions of their colleagues, almost ignoring the attorney who was left on the sidelines with little opportunity to break in.

Justice Clarence Thomas (http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/07/us/clarence-thomas-fast-facts/index.html) -- who spent years rarely asking questions from the bench -- was an active participant during the telephonic hearings, giving the public, who could listen via live audio, a much better sense of his jurisprudence and his personality.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/21/politics/supreme-court-oral-arguments-format/index.html

How will the SOCTUS6 continue to fuckup democracy and enable Capitalist/Christian fascism?

[boutons_deux]

Supreme Court Approval Drops as New Term Brings Divisive Issues


Polls finds public approval at 49%, down from 66% last year

declining confidence in the court and

growing concern that it is driven by politics.

39% view the court as deciding cases mainly on politics,

the highest percentage in the two years the survey has been conducted.

The Texas order likely helped drive down Democratic approval, which plunged from 59% in July to 37% in September,

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-09-22/supreme-court-approval-drops-as-new-term-brings-divisive-issues

[Winehole23]

1441439598274433037

[Winehole23]

non-partisan victory laps to be hosted at the Heritage Foundation

1441517692725301248

[Thread]

Supreme Court Approval Drops as New Term Brings Divisive Issues


Polls finds public approval at 49%, down from 66% last year

declining confidence in the court and

growing concern that it is driven by politics.

39% view the court as deciding cases mainly on politics,

the highest percentage in the two years the survey has been conducted.

The Texas order likely helped drive down Democratic approval, which plunged from 59% in July to 37% in September,

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-09-22/supreme-court-approval-drops-as-new-term-brings-divisive-issues

(They) opened their mouths and sullied their charge. They've nobody to blame but themselves. Their regrets are their own. I've no sympathy for them.

[Thread]

SCOTUS6

2 sexual predators

3 appointed by a Pres who lost the popular election

1 extremist Catholic who ran a punitive, secretive Catholic fringe cult

SCOTUS revises oral argument format ahead of blockbuster term


While the Court will maintain the traditional practice of allowing justices to engage in questioning in no particular order -- the traditional free for all -- there will now be an opportunity, once an attorney's time has expired, for the justices to ask specific questions in order of seniority.

The hybrid system appears to be an attempt to blend together two approaches from the court's recent history.

The traditional format produced more lively hearings -- with justices often interrupting each other -- and advocates unable to always respond fulsomely.

At times, justices seemed to be using the argument session to probe the positions of their colleagues, almost ignoring the attorney who was left on the sidelines with little opportunity to break in.

Justice Clarence Thomas (http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/07/us/clarence-thomas-fast-facts/index.html) -- who spent years rarely asking questions from the bench -- was an active participant during the telephonic hearings, giving the public, who could listen via live audio, a much better sense of his jurisprudence and his personality.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/21/politics/supreme-court-oral-arguments-format/index.html

How will the SOCTUS6 continue to fuckup democracy and enable Capitalist/Christian fascism?

...short answer:::6 ways to Sunday.

[boutons_deux]

https://www.laprogressive.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Clarence-Thomas.jpg

[Thread]

https://www.laprogressive.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Clarence-Thomas.jpg

Thomas turned out to be THE Godsend after what's his face was tarred, feathered and road out on a rail.

[boutons_deux]

Supreme Court Justice Alito publicly condemns Atlantic writer for 'inflammatory' article bashing his work

https://www.rawstory.com/media-library/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6I mh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNzU3NTA5Mi9vcmlnaW4 uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY5Mjk5MDkxOH0.3djZY8-emkSxOeDQPAr_uCsvFZqFax2NQv8Svt5b-_I/image.jpg?width=1200&height=729

singled out Atlantic writer Adam Serwer for writing what he described as an "inflammatory" article about his work.

Alito attacked Serwer for writing an article about the court's decision

to allow Texas to go through with its law that allows private citizens to sue anyone who performs or even assists in an abortion.

Alito took particular umbrage at Serwer's claim that

"the conservative majority on the Supreme Court was so eager to nullify Roe v. Wade,

the 1973 precedent securing the right to abortion, that it didn't even wait for oral arguments"

Alito called this statement "inflammatory" and "false."


Alito then called it "ridiculous" to suggest the court should have held oral arguments for the case,

even though the Texas law effectively outlawed abortion in the state in direct defiance of the landmark Roe v. Wade ruling.

https://www.rawstory.com/alito-texas-abortion-ruling

the Catholic SCOTUS6 getting antsy about pushback of their political prejudices, and their 40% approval.

[boutons_deux]

How a hard-right Supreme Court is ‘rolling back progress’ on multiple fronts

"This term, we will see conservatives celebrate the achievement of two long-sought goals they could not accomplish through electoral politics," Mystal explains.

"We will see broad conservative agreement that

women should be treated as second-class citizens,

reduced to the status of incubators with mouth parts, when the Court hears the most direct challenge to abortion rights in a generation.

And we will see broad conservative agreement that guns have more rights than children."

"They all agree that

organized labor should be disempowered, that

voting should remain a largely White privilege, and

that religious groups should be able to stop LGBTQ people from adopting children.

That's not theory; that's the upshot of three decisions the conservatives hung together to make last term.

The six conservatives agree on the outcomes;

they disagree only on the best way to go about

their awful work of reversing the gains of the civil rights and gay rights movements and dismantling the social safety net."

Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett are the four who are

prepared to thumb their noses at settled law in order to control women's bodies.

the High Court "will not only uphold Mississippi's ban, but will also do it in a way that helps the Republican political agenda the most."

https://www.alternet.org/2021/09/abortion-rights/

[boutons_deux]

1 In 3 Americans Might Consider Abolishing Or Limiting Supreme Court


more than a third of Americans say they might be willing to abolish the Supreme Court or have Congress limit its jurisdiction if the court were to make decisions they or Congress disagreed with.

38% said that when Congress disagrees with the court’s decisions, “Congress should pass legislation saying the Supreme Court can no longer rule on that issue or topic.”

https://scienceblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/1-in-3-Americans-might-consider-abolishing-or-limiting-Supreme-Court-Annenberg-survey-finds-.jpg

https://scienceblog.com/525748/1-in-3-americans-might-consider-abolishing-or-limiting-supreme-court-annenberg-survey-finds

[Thread]

1 In 3 Americans Might Consider Abolishing Or Limiting Supreme Court


more than a third of Americans say they might be willing to abolish the Supreme Court or have Congress limit its jurisdiction if the court were to make decisions they or Congress disagreed with.

38% said that when Congress disagrees with the court’s decisions, “Congress should pass legislation saying the Supreme Court can no longer rule on that issue or topic.”

https://scienceblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/1-in-3-Americans-might-consider-abolishing-or-limiting-Supreme-Court-Annenberg-survey-finds-.jpg

https://scienceblog.com/525748/1-in-3-americans-might-consider-abolishing-or-limiting-supreme-court-annenberg-survey-finds

& piss, poor Roberts is no longer of importance. Poof!!!

Now he & MSM can't play the game of (tortured swing vote) any longer. (They) loved doing that shit. In their glory.

How, how did it get to this point? Well, kids, let's think about it...tee, hee...I got it...

Trump President.
Not Clinton.

ha, ha.

[daboom1]

https://twitter.com/LifeNewsHQ/status/1448412065471864832?t

[ElNono]

https://twitter.com/LifeNewsHQ/status/1448412065471864832?t

:lmao:lmao:lmao

Should've asked to overturn the civil rights act too, let States handle slavery also...

What's much easier and unavoidable in the end, is that they stop being stuck in the 1930's and join the rest of the world in the 21st century, tbh...

[rmt]

https://twitter.com/LifeNewsHQ/status/1448412065471864832?t

She kinda looks like Celine Dion, doesn't she?

[Thread]

She kinda looks like Celine Dion, doesn't she?

Though her chin looks like Reese Witherspoon's.

[RandomGuy]

[tweet from american taliban says abortion is bad]

Wow. totally convincing.

:lol forced pregnancy Qhris wants government mandated course of health care.

[boutons_deux]

Sheldon Whitehouse:

Don't believe Justice Alito --

it's clear this Supreme Court was built by (FASCIST) dark money

The problem for Justice Alito's sense of grievance is that the evidence supports our concerns. Alito has participated in a pattern of decisions —

like the court's recent "shadow docket" ruling suspending abortion rights in our second-biggest state —

that deliver wins for big Republican donors.

Americans' perception that the court lacks independence,

and the court's related drop in approval,

doesn't flow from some left-wing conspiracy.

It's a recognition that

the evidence shows a pattern whenever certain interests come before the court.

During Chief Justice John Roberts' tenure, the Court has issued

more than 80 partisan decisions, by either a 5-4 or 6-3 vote,

involving big interests important to Republican Party major donors.

Republican-appointed justices have handed wins to the donor interests in every single case.

The decisions

greenlit rampant voter suppression and

bulk gerrymandering ;

closed courthouse doors to workers wronged by their employers;

unleashed floods of dark money to corrupt our politics and foul our democracy

and more.

Eighty to zero

is a pattern so strong that it could serve as compelling evidence in a trial alleging bias and discrimination.

https://www.rawstory.com/sheldon-whitehouse-justice-alito-complains-but-it-s-clear-this-supreme-court-was-built-by-dark-money (https://www.rawstory.com/sheldon-whitehouse-justice-alito-complains-but-it-s-clear-this-supreme-court-was-built-by-dark-money)

gutted Voting Rights Act, SCOTUS as tool for Euro-White Male Supremacy (racism)

[Thread]

Sheldon Whitehouse:

Don't believe Justice Alito --

it's clear this Supreme Court was built by (FASCIST) dark money

The problem for Justice Alito's sense of grievance is that the evidence supports our concerns. Alito has participated in a pattern of decisions —

like the court's recent "shadow docket" ruling suspending abortion rights in our second-biggest state —

that deliver wins for big Republican donors.

Americans' perception that the court lacks independence,

and the court's related drop in approval,

doesn't flow from some left-wing conspiracy.

It's a recognition that

the evidence shows a pattern whenever certain interests come before the court.

During Chief Justice John Roberts' tenure, the Court has issued

more than 80 partisan decisions, by either a 5-4 or 6-3 vote,

involving big interests important to Republican Party major donors.

Republican-appointed justices have handed wins to the donor interests in every single case.

The decisions

greenlit rampant voter suppression and

bulk gerrymandering ;

closed courthouse doors to workers wronged by their employers;

unleashed floods of dark money to corrupt our politics and foul our democracy

and more.

Eighty to zero

is a pattern so strong that it could serve as compelling evidence in a trial alleging bias and discrimination.

https://www.rawstory.com/sheldon-whitehouse-justice-alito-complains-but-it-s-clear-this-supreme-court-was-built-by-dark-money (https://www.rawstory.com/sheldon-whitehouse-justice-alito-complains-but-it-s-clear-this-supreme-court-was-built-by-dark-money)

gutted Voting Rights Act, SCOTUS as tool for Euro-White Male Supremacy (racism)

Boiled down:::

Trump President.
Not Clinton.

Therefore President Trump lodged 3-THREE-3 ringers on that bench, son.

All your side had to do was keep RBG on life support till 1.20.21. But, you was too prideful and fucked up.

Solly Cholly!!!

[Winehole23]

The report is out, Sen Whitehouse sounds off:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FBwFaXPXsAMux3j?format=png&name=medium
1448763828477571076

[Winehole23]

so much for Joe Biden packing the court

[boutons_deux]

'Nightmare scenario':

Substantial majority of Americans don't trust Supreme Court, want reforms

As the Supreme Court's conservative justices expel noxious fumes about their impartiality and adherence to judicial philosophy,

Americans continue to call bullpucky in poll after poll (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/9/27/2054679/-Supreme-court-suffers-supreme-loss-of-confidence-among-the-American-public).

62% of Americans view politics—not the law—as the main driver of Supreme Court decisions.

across the political spectrum agree,

with 60% of Republicans,

66% of Democrats, and

63% of independents

all saying the political views of the justices drive the decision-making of the nation’s highest court.
“The court faces a public convinced that its decisions are about politics rather than the Constitution,

just as it prepares to make important decisions on abortion, guns, and affirmative action.”

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/10/20/2059227/-The-current-Supreme-Court-has-been-irrevocably-politicized-and-Americans-want-reforms

Too late. The Capitalist oligarchy has captured SCOTUS as it has captured govt. NO remedy possible

America is fucked and unfuckable.

[DMC]

Wow. totally convincing.

:lol forced pregnancy Qhris wants government mandated course of health care.

You mean like vaccinations?

[boutons_deux]

so much for Joe Biden packing the court

he doesn't have 51 in the Senate.

[boutons_deux]

The Supreme Court’s Conservative Revolution Is Already Happening

The conservative justices’ fight over how fast — and far — to move the court to the right.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-roberts-court-vs-the-trump-court/

The Capitalist/Christian SCOTUS will fucked for decades.

[Winehole23]

1454166118415978505

[boutons_deux]

1454166118415978505

This is the conservative/oligarchy attack on the Constitution's "non-delegation clause"

"The non-delegation doctrine is a principle in administrative law that

Congress cannot delegate its legislative powers to other entities.

This prohibition typically involves Congress delegating its powers to administrative agencies or to private organizations." (eg the Exec branch agencies)

https://www.thenation.com/article/environment/steven-donziger-chevron-sentencing/

This part of the oligarchy's strategy to weaken if not destroy govt's "administrative state",

so the govt would not be able to stop the oligarchy from raping, killing, pillaging, polluting, impoverishing

The FASCIST Capitalist oligarchy would wield supreme power beyond challenge.

America is fucked and unfuckable

It's stupid clause, another FF fuckup.

[Winehole23]

1455588406541660163

[Warlord23]

They are not going to overturn Roe v Wade, and they will allow the idiotic Texas abortion ban to be sued and eventually overturned.

Roe v Wade is the gift that keeps on giving for the GOP. It will allow them to keep taking money and votes from single-issue Evangelicals and rural whites. No way they turn off that tap.

[Winehole23]

They are not going to overturn Roe v Wade, and they will allow the idiotic Texas abortion ban to be sued and eventually overturned.

Roe v Wade is the gift that keeps on giving for the GOP. It will allow them to keep taking money and votes from single-issue Evangelicals and rural whites. No way they turn off that tap.Huh, similar to the reason Dems won't pass a law legalizing abortion, it would kill the suspense.

Sticking it to the libs is becoming a blood sport. GOP keeps raising the bet. They tried to steal a presidential election, they rendered abortion unavailable in Texas, and now they're censoring school curriculums (all over the place) and muzzing professors (FL). I don't share your sense of security about this.

[boutons_deux]

Dems don't pass a law legalizing abortion for the same reason that can't pass anything. The Constitution

[Thread]

Huh, similar to the reason Dems won't pass a law legalizing abortion, it would kill the suspense.

Sticking it to the libs is becoming a blood sport. GOP keeps raising the bet. They tried to steal a presidential election, they rendered abortion unavailable in Texas, and now they're censoring school curriculums (all over the place) and muzzing professors (FL). I don't share your sense of security about this.

And succeeded...

Trump President.
Not Clinton.

[Thread]

They are not going to overturn Roe v Wade, and they will allow the idiotic Texas abortion ban to be sued and eventually overturned.

Roe v Wade is the gift that keeps on giving for the GOP. It will allow them to keep taking money and votes from single-issue Evangelicals and rural whites. No way they turn off that tap.

Warlord

True...but we'll have put you thru the aforementioned fuckin' wringer, by God, and the latter spigot you aforementioned will have the aforementioned nary governor.

Nary.

[boutons_deux]

John Roberts warns against Texas nullification:

‘Our constitutional system is at stake’

Chief Justice John Roberts cited two cases from early constitutional law with a dire warning as the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday delivered a ruling on the near-total ban on abortion passed by Republicans in Texas.

"The clear purpose and actual effect of S. B. 8 has been to nullify this Court’s rulings," Roberts wrote

"It is, however, a basic principle that the Constitution is the 'fundamental and paramount law of the nation,' and 't is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is,'" Roberts said,

"Indeed, '[i]f the legislatures of the several states may, at will, annul the judgments of the courts of the United States,

and destroy the rights acquired under those judgments,

the constitution itself becomes a solemn mockery,'" he continued,

citing [I]United States v. Peterson from 1809 that determined state legislatures can't overrule federal courts.

https://www.rawstory.com/john-roberts-abortion

John Roberts trying burnish his legacy, after his many rulings that made a mockery of the court

[boutons_deux]

Sotomayor unloads on the Supreme Court for betraying the Constitution in scathing response to Texas ‘madness’

"The Court should have put an end to this madness months ago, before S. B. 8 first went into effect.

It failed to do so then, and it fails again today," wrote Sotomayor.

"I concur in the Court’s judgment that the petitioners’ suit may proceed against certain executive licensing officials who retain enforcement authority under Texas law, and

I trust the District Court will act expeditiously to enter much-needed relief.

I dissent, however, from the Court’s dangerous departure from its

precedents, which establish that federal courts can and should issue relief when a State enacts a law that

chills the exercise of a constitutional right and aims to evade judicial review."

"By foreclosing suit against state-court officials and the state attorney general,

the Court effectively invites other States to refine S. B. 8’s model for nullifying federal rights," Sotomayor continued.

"The Court thus betrays not only the citizens of Texas, but also our constitutional system of government."

https://www.rawstory.com/sotomayor-texas-opinion

[Thread]

John Roberts warns against Texas nullification:

‘Our constitutional system is at stake’

Chief Justice John Roberts cited two cases from early constitutional law with a dire warning as the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday delivered a ruling on the near-total ban on abortion passed by Republicans in Texas.

"The clear purpose and actual effect of S. B. 8 has been to nullify this Court’s rulings," Roberts wrote

"It is, however, a basic principle that the Constitution is the 'fundamental and paramount law of the nation,' and 't is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is,'" Roberts said,

"Indeed, '[i]f the legislatures of the several states may, at will, annul the judgments of the courts of the United States,

and destroy the rights acquired under those judgments,

the constitution itself becomes a solemn mockery,'" he continued,

citing [I]United States v. Peterson from 1809 that determined state legislatures can't overrule federal courts.

https://www.rawstory.com/john-roberts-abortion

John Roberts trying burnish his legacy, after his many rulings that made a mockery of the court

That cocksucker doesn't like being on a back burner. He had it all, sittin' up there portending to be swing, when he was never anything but left, hard left. He ain't shit now. Nope.

Though I'm still regretful that President Trump didn't have Justice Thomas in there for a Dutch uncle and talk him into retiring so we could get another ringer in there, a youngster.

[rmt]

he doesn't have 51 in the Senate.

Because of Manchin (on packing the court).

[baseline bum]

Because of Manchin (on packing the court).

No, Manchin is why he doesn't have 50 in the senate.

[boutons_deux]

No, Manchin is why he doesn't have 50 in the senate.

Abusing the anti-democratic Senate, the Repugs packed the Senate in the 19th century

When Adding New States Helped the Republicans

Putting new stars on the U.S. flag has always been political.

But D.C. statehood is a modest partisan ploy compared with the

mass admission of underpopulated western territories—

which boosts the GOP even 130 years later.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/09/when-adding-new-states-helped-republicans/598243/

[boutons_deux]

The Supreme Court Just Came Perilously Close to Blowing Up Federal Elections


https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/03/supreme-court-democracy-independent-state-legislature.html (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/03/supreme-court-democracy-independent-state-legislature.html?via=rss)

there is no doubt they will move from 4 to 5 justices almost certainly in time for the 2024 presidential election

[boutons_deux]

https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/277100788_367023615529219_3848269041295349008_n.jp g?_nc_cat=109&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=9KWEE8dmCLcAX8etdfE&_nc_oc=AQnjvoVLANd1UqmFS051lBbfmX7qx2tsI7J3DQBcaJN P-PO8nBZj0-hdoOmVO3OB2Dg&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-1.xx&oh=00_AT8PzOUiCt_3zcSVfcdfeq7-f9em0sVcyKISCvT8iDPXBA&oe=623D095C

[Winehole23]

Court splits 6-3 on whether POTUS is commander in chief


The Supreme Court on Friday evening decided, no, it was not going to needlessly insert itself in the military chain of command above President Joe Biden.


The Court’s decision in Austin v. U.S. Navy SEALs 1-26 (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21a477_1bo2.pdf) largely halted a lower court order that permitted certain sailors to defy a direct order. A group of Navy special operations personnel sought an exemption from the Pentagon’s requirement that all active duty service members get vaccinated against Covid-19, claiming that they should receive a religious exemption.


A majority of the Court effectively ruled that, yes, in fact, troops do have to follow orders, including an order to take a vaccine.


The decision is undeniably a win for the balance of power between the executive branch and the judiciary that has prevailed for many decades. But the fact that the Court had to weigh in on this at all — not to mention that three justices, Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch, dissented from the majority — is a worrisome sign about America’s judiciary.


As Justice Brett Kavanaugh explained in a brief opinion laying out why the lower court erred, this court “in effect inserted itself into the Navy’s chain of command, overriding military commanders’ professional military judgments.”
https://www.vox.com/22996799/supreme-court-biden-navy-seal-vaccine-austin-covid

[Winehole23]

1511696249401090048

[Winehole23]

the usual "judicial activism" complainers seem to have fallen silent on the recent custom of SCOTUS deciding emergency cases without any open hearing or any written opinion, that have the effect of changing the law.

1511703176541519878

[Thread]

the usual "judicial activism" complainers seem to have fallen silent on the recent custom of SCOTUS deciding emergency cases without any open hearing or any written opinion, that have the effect of changing the law.

1511703176541519878

You're just beside yourself because Thomas didn't follow RBG "into the dust that is always the end."

[Winehole23]

Ass over teakettle back to the Lochner Era


1527066730807406592

[Winehole23]

1527110196383862784

[Winehole23]

Conservative justices shielding the government's jack-booted thugs from legal responsibility for abusing citizens and depriving them of rights.

1534536695433109504 (https://twitter.com/mjs_DC/status/1534536695433109504?s=20&t=O6uU-iiGhJ3FnrTMDCixqw)

[Winehole23]

radical right wing judges, tbh

1536342259083497473

[Winehole23]

Carson v Makin, some are calling this the repeal of the establishment clause.

tl;dr

1A requires Maine to fund religious education.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FVyJv5GWAAMT9Tu?format=jpg&name=largehttps://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1088_dbfi.pdf

[Winehole23]

Basically, three anonymous billionaires bought SCOTUS

1539339376316006401

[Winehole23]

This may go to SCOTUS.

tl;dr

Corporate political donation = core free speech

Corporate boycotts = expressionless economic activity not protected by 1A.

Affected: boycotts of Israel and fossil fuel divestment.

1539673763658317824

[Winehole23]

Guts Miranda, NY's concealed carry law goes down; Kagan identifies a theme.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-499_gfbh.pdf

1539978141665579008

[Thread]

Guts Miranda, NY's concealed carry law goes down; Kagan identifies a theme.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-499_gfbh.pdf

1539978141665579008

https://d.newsweek.com/en/full/449548/lavrov-putin.jpg

[Winehole23]

lol

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FV8e4BJWYAQQsHa?format=png&name=small

[Winehole23]

slowly at first, then suddenly

1540682022812893184

[Winehole23]

slowly at first, then suddenly

1540682022812893184cert denied, Thomas dissents

[Winehole23]

WV v EPA has the potential to radically undermine the administrative state. Radical implications beyond environmental protection, the basis all executive branch regulatory agencies is being challenged here.

Radical Republicans might get their long cherished wish to repeal the New Deal.


1017084164602904576

[Thread]

WV v EPA has the potential to radically undermine the administrative state. Radical implications beyond environmental protection, the basis all executive branch regulatory agencies is being challenged here.

Radical Republicans might get their long cherished wish to repeal the New Deal.


1017084164602904576

You thought you'd defeated President Trump, eh, Winester?

No-fuckin'-way.

[Winehole23]

The SC isn't conservative, it's revanchist and radical.

[Thread]

The SC isn't conservative, it's revanchist and radical.

This wasn't like with Bush2...President Trump wasn't fuckin' around, sassafras. He nailed ya not once, not twice, but all three times. You found out, huh?

Even made big shot Roberts get in the back seat with the 3 lefties leaving 6 jammed in the front seat...the 5 Justices and Mrs. Thomas. ha, ha, fart-face.

[Winehole23]

Supreme Court temporizes, leaving LA's racial gerrymander in place until it can rule that they're legal in another case.

1541873610893189122

[boutons_deux]

The SC isn't conservative, it's revanchist and radical.

it's christo-fascist and pro-Capitalism (eg enabled political/judicial corruption with C-U)

somebody toted up "business vs anybody" before SCOTUS. business won 80-0

[Winehole23]

Yet another unsigned, unexplained stay order preventing a district court from simply applying the law is consistent with the precedent of the Roberts Court, which is to say "law is fake, power is real."

[Winehole23]

1541885430986969088

[Winehole23]

1541886105334710281

[Winehole23]

1542149336200630273

[Winehole23]

"superlegislature"

1542148889993793536

[Winehole23]

1542176536983478272

[Thread]

You thought you'd defeated President Trump, eh, Winester?

No-fuckin'-way.https://d.newsweek.com/en/full/449548/lavrov-putin.jpg

[Winehole23]

Next session: allowing state legislatures to throw out elections because their guy lost.

1542520163194376194

[Thread]

Next session: allowing state legislatures to throw out elections because their guy lost.

1542520163194376194


https://d.newsweek.com/en/full/449548/lavrov-putin.jpg

[Winehole23]

1542512179298963457

[Thread]

1542512179298963457


Trump President.
Not Clinton.
DID THIS!!!
lmvictoriousao!!!!!!!!!

[Winehole23]

1542512179298963457tbh, the fillibuster should be broken to limit SCOTUS to its original jurisdiction, strip it of judicial review and and pack the fuck out of it with political allies of majority rule.

[Thread]

tbh, the fillibuster should be broken to limit SCOTUS to its original jurisdiction, strip it of judicial review and and pack the fuck out of it with political allies of majority rule.


& that old fuck takin' it easy in the Alps is just about ready to do precisely that, the shit stain.

Let us proceed...

[boutons_deux]

Five of the six j extremist right wing udges were placed on scotus by presidents who lost the popular vote

America is fatally fucked by the Constitution

[Thread]

Five of the six j extremist right wing udges were placed on scotus by presidents who lost the popular vote

America is fatally fucked by the Constitution


You GD rights, bouts. While you all were busy race hustling & race baiting the countryside President Trump was busy cleanin' your fuckin' clock.
ha, ha.

"Make way for the bad guy."

[Winehole23]

Parade of horribles

1542522257511026689

[Thread]

Parade of horribles

1542522257511026689

Reason? Easy...

Trump President.
Not Clinton.

ha, ha.

[SnakeBoy]

Parade of horribles

1542522257511026689

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court declined Thursday to take a new look at how far the law should go in shielding law enforcement officials from lawsuits, especially when their actions lead to the injury or death of people in their custody.

[boutons_deux]

The case against the Supreme Court of the United States
The Court was the

midwife of Jim Crow,

the right hand of union busters,

the dead hand of the Confederacy, and

now is one of the chief architects of America’s democratic decline.

https://www.vox.com/2022/6/25/23181976/case-against-the-supreme-court-of-the-united-states

[Thread]

The case against the Supreme Court of the United States


The Court was the

midwife of Jim Crow,

the right hand of union busters,

the dead hand of the Confederacy, and

now is one of the chief architects of America’s democratic decline.

https://www.vox.com/2022/6/25/23181976/case-against-the-supreme-court-of-the-united-states

Murdering babies is wrong, bouts.

[Winehole23]

kafkaesque

1544681189578985473

[Thread]

kafkaesque

1544681189578985473

LMFAO! Trump caught's ya race baiting & hustling and worked ya's over...installing 3 ringers in there. None of that happy horseshit..."Oh, I shouldn't ask 'em about Roe. Oh, it wouldn't be right. Oh, it'd be wrong. Oh, I'm better than that. Oh, I'm worried. Oh."

President Trump across that Resolute desk one-after-anothern... "Hey, I got luncheon waiting with the children. We're having Arby's brought in. I love that Arby's. I'm going to end Roe. Will you guarantee me you'll vote it down, kill it? Yes, or, no?"

You know what you call that, son? Wet work.

[boutons_deux]

https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/292345371_10225500087981606_2045441669519669666_n. jpg?stp=dst-jpg_s960x960&_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=5cd70e&_nc_ohc=YP0Ioz3jFcwAX8nAUuC&tn=qIBfsIQzR66RVbw5&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=00_AT8xG-axPu-17XPB4q5qS9WSAl7kVbmnkDq4UEV_TdB3Jw&oe=62CC0459

impeach the mofos

[boutons_deux]

SCOTUS ruled that picketing abortion/PPP clinic employees at their homes was protected by 1st Amendment

1st Amendment inoperative when the picketed home or restaurant contains a SCOTUS asshole.

[boutons_deux]

Sam Alito and John Roberts appeal to 'history and tradition' —

while dancing around the burning Constitution


https://www.alternet.org/2022/07/john-roberts/

Abortion is not ORIGINALLY in the Constitution, so it is degraded from Federal to "states rights"

Separation of church - state IS in the Constitution, so we violate the Constitution on behalf of anti-American, anti-democratic Christian Nationalists

Alito says they can't possibly know the results of their rulings, but anyway, we don't fucking care.

How many MORE black women will be killed by Thomas in unwanted childbirth? He doesn't fucking care.

[boutons_deux]

Supreme Court Threatens To Wreak Havoc In Battleground State Elections

Even though courts rejected Trump’s lawsuits, and no legislature followed that script, 84 GOP activists and officials (https://www.azmirror.com/2022/06/29/updated-trumps-fake-electors-heres-the-full-list/) in seven swing states forged documents giving Trump their Electoral College votes.

“There is no legal theory that is more closely connected to Trumpism and the failed January 6 coup,” Marc Elias,

the activist Supreme Court will hear (https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2155856519179176539&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr) a case next fall that centers on the independent state legislature theory.

The narrow question in Moore v. Harper is

whether the North Carolina Supreme Court can overrule (https://electionlawblog.org/?p=130322) its legislature that drew gerrymandered districts.

If some version of the ISL theory is validated,

the Supreme Court could eventually gut the modern system of checks and balances that govern state elections.

Both Democratic and Republican states have passed laws to enhance their party’s opportunities in November and have had their supreme courts step in and reject those.”

“What the North Carolina case foretells, if it’s actually upheld by the Supreme Court, is an end to that at the state level. It would remove the state courts as a check on the rapacious use of partisan power.”

three justices have said (https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5885&context=flr) in other rulings that they support the independent state legislature theory.

the Supreme Court is lending credence to a power grab

that has been, until now, inconceivable in mainstream legal circles.

“You really do end up where the legislature is essentially supreme with the exception of some federal constitutional, or some federal legal checks, on their power.”

The 2020 election’s aftermath has shown what Trump Republicans are willing to do – and suggests what the Supreme Court might validate or incite.

The pro-Trump legislators faced no penalty for indulging evidence-free conspiracies apart from not getting re-elected.

(As of mid-June 2022, more than 100 election-denying candidates (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/14/more-than-100-gop-primary-winners-back-trumps-false-fraud-claims/?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20220707&instance_id=65977&nl=the-morning&regi_id=47462127&segment_id=97810&te=1&user_id=66614827ea723d2b0076c637efc0e718) for statewide office or Congress have won their GOP primary.)

The fallout could include the dismantling of nonpartisan government election administration by replacing best practices – which, during 2020’s pandemic, allowed for more voting options – with brazen partisan schemes.

legislators could grant themselves the power to certify all winners.

But the possible impacts are much wider and more local, as a look at post-2020 litigation, legislation and enacted laws reveals.

Before 2020’s Election Day, there was litigation about

voter registration,
voter purges,
voter ID laws,
limits to voter assistance,
absentee ballot requirements,
use of drop boxes to return those ballots,
absentee ballot return deadlines,
timetables for fixing mistakes by voters and more.

Republican-led legislatures have imposed (https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voting-laws-roundup-may-2022) new limits on voter assistance, rolled back voting with mailed out ballots, expanded partisan observers and imposed penalties on election officials who may seek to maintain order, and,

in Georgia (https://truthout.org/articles/georgia-republicans-are-trying-to-undo-democracy-in-local-elections/), reconstituted local election boards with GOP appointees.

partisan legislatures that face no checks and balances could drastically change how their state’s elections are run.

found five categories of legislative overreach:

“Usurping control over election results,”

“Requiring partisan or unprofessional ‘audits’ or reviews,”

“Seizing power over election responsibilities,”

“Creating unworkable burdens in election administration,” and

“Imposing disproportionate criminal or other penalties.”

“left unchecked,” which is exactly what the U.S. Supreme Court’s originalists might unleash in Moore v. Harper.

https://www.nationalmemo.com/independent-state-legislature-theory-2657641198

MI's elected (corrupt) supreme court annulled drop boxes.

[boutons_deux]

SCOTUS 2022

[boutons_deux]

Supreme Court declines to hear case on DOJ ‘filter teams’ used in Trump search

declined to hear a case about whether the Justice Department (DOJ) can use “filter teams,”

such as the one enlisted by the DOJ to begin a review of evidence collected at former President Trump’s home in Mar-a-Lago to determine whether they are privileged.

The United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit

allowed the protocols to proceed without requiring the filter team to show that an exception to privilege may have applied to the documents.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3671767-supreme-court-declines-to-hear-case-on-doj-filter-teams-used-in-trump-search

[boutons_deux]

Five cases to watch as a conservative Supreme Court begins its new term

Environment

The Supreme Court’s first case of the new term involves a major environmental dispute over the federal government’s power to protect the nation’s waterways under the Clean Water Act.

Affirmative action

A pair of cases will challenge the use of race-conscious admissions in higher education. Lawsuits against Harvard and the University of North Carolina ask the justices to end affirmative action in college admissions decisions

Election law

The justices will hear an election law case that could hand state legislatures sweeping new powers over how voting maps are drawn and federal elections conducted.

it could effectively shield legislatures from having their electoral maneuvering reviewed in state courts, removing a key judicial check on lawmakers’ power. :lol SCOTUS fucks America again

Voting rights

The justices will weigh a voting rights case that tests the legal limits on alleged racial gerrymandering,

LGBTQ discrimination :lol AKA "weaponized freedom of expression"

The Supreme Court will hear a First Amendment dispute that deals with a Colorado website designer’s refusal to make her services available for same-sex weddings.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3668846-five-cases-to-watch-as-a-conservative-supreme-court-begins-its-new-term/


I expect SCOTUS6 to fuck America at least 4 times above, if not all 5.

SCOTUS validating "independent state legislatures" would bar Dems from EVER AGAIN winning Fed elections for President or Congress.

[boutons_deux]

Alito lashes out at critics: 'Questioning our integrity crosses an important line' (https://www.rawstory.com/justice-alito/)


responded to criticism from his liberal counterparts

saying or implying that the court is becoming an illegitimate institution or questioning our integrity crosses an important line.”

https://www.rawstory.com/justice-alito

Blocking Garland? illegitimated

Ramming through ACB AFTER Trash lost? Illegitimate

Repug Senate approving Kavanaugh after he whined and cried in his job interview,

and the Repug FBI ignoring 100s of reports on Kavanaugh

the fucking SCOTUS6 is fucking illegitimate, and Kagan, etc should keep up the pressure

expand the court to 11 justices, so 8-6 against the politicized SCOTUS christo fascist (Catholic) assholes.

[boutons_deux]

Experts warn about Supreme Court supporting 'dangerous' GOP legal theory

"If the Legislature were to be successful in Moore v. Harper, it could threaten the state court's ability to provide this crucial check on the legislative branch."

After North Carolina's GOP-controlled Legislature prejudicially redrew the state's congressional map to lock in 10 of its 14 districts for Republicans,

the state Supreme Court struck down the map,

which it described (https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/413PA21-1.pdf) as

an "egre#gious and inten#tional partisan gerry#mander... designed to enhance Repub#lican perform#ance."

Republican state lawmakers appealed, citing independent state legislature theory (ISLT),

popular in right-wing circles positing that

federal elections can only be regulated by a state's lawmakers, not its judiciary—or even its constitution.

ISLT is a central pillar of the "Repub#lican blue#print to steal the 2024 elec#tion."

at issue:

Whether state legislatures should be given absolute and supreme power to create voting laws and redistricting maps for congressional elections."

GOP's "down and dirty" map rigging as "illegal and unconstitutional partisan gerrymanders with devastating consequences for voters, particularly Black voters, and their ability to elect candidates of their choice."

partisan political leaders will be able to draw lines without any kind of checks,

but also that we the people will no longer have a representative government,"

"If the Legislature were to be successful in Moore v. Harper, it could threaten the state court's ability to provide this crucial check on the legislative branch,"

https://www.rawstory.com/dangerous-legal-theory

If NC Repugs wing ISLT, then every swing state will forever be red, not purple

[boutons_deux]

What the conservative Supreme Court spells for America

The current court is the most conservative its been in the last 90 years. What does that mean for the country?


What has the ultra-conservative court done in America?

In terms of controversial decisions, statistics show that in62 percent of the decisions (https://www.npr.org/2022/07/05/1109444617/the-supreme-court-conservative), conservatives prevailed.

In West Virginia v. EPA (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf) (2022), the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA does not have the power to set limits on emissions from power plants,

In Carson v. Makin (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1088_dbfi.pdf) (2022), the court ruled that prohibiting state funds from being used at religious schools was a violation of the free exercise of religion clause in the Constitution.

In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf) (2022), the ruling was that it is unconstitutional to require a license to carry a concealed weapon.

the "median justice (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-supreme-courts-conservative-supermajority-is-just-beginning-to-flex-its-muscles/)," which is the Justice that sits the most centrally in the ideologies of all the justices.

While previously Justice Roberts represented the center point,

the new center is Justice Kavanaugh. :lol who LIED in both his Federal approval Senate hearings.

https://theweek.com/feature/briefing/1016630/what-the-conservative-supreme-court-spells-for-america

[Winehole23]

A far right SCOTUS majority is acting like a superlegislature.


Since its very first legislative session in 1789, Congress has often chosen to delegate power (https://columbialawreview.org/content/delegation-at-the-founding/) to administrative agencies in broad terms, imbuing them with particular missions but leaving enough room for discretion to act in light of varied, complex, and changing circumstances. To take one modern example, the Clean Air Act of 1970 instructs EPA to set national air quality standards for harmful air pollutants at a level that allows “an adequate margin of safety” and is “requisite to protect the public health.” Lacking the kind of scientific expertise necessary to set such standards—and desiring to create a regulatory program that would address air pollution problems that were poorly understood or even completely unknown at the time—Congress chose not to set the standards itself but to direct EPA to set them and update them within the parameters Congress specified. In many cases Congress has also found that the substantive work of an agency requires some independence from political pressures. It has therefore structured the processes for the appointment and removal of agency officials in such a way as to provide a buffer zone between agency personnel and the politics of the presidency.


The Supreme Court long policed these kinds of legislative choices with a light touch, understanding that Congress was in a better position than the Court to identify the appropriate breadth of delegations of authority to agencies and the appropriate degree of political independence for them. But this long period of legislative hegemony and judicial restraint with respect to the powers and structure of federal agencies appears to be coming to an end. Deploying originalist arguments, the conservative justices on today’s Supreme Court have served notice—most recently in West Virginia v. EPA, decided (https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/west-virginia-v-environmental-protection-agency/) this June—that they are prepared to weaken and restructure contemporary government in order to return us to their vision of our constitutional past. For these justices, the fact that their originalist interpretations of the views of the Constitution’s framers align perfectly with the deregulatory and anti-government program of today’s Republican party is a mere coincidence.
https://bostonreview.net/articles/how-government-ends/

[boutons_deux]

The Supreme Court Considers What May Be

the Final Blow to the Voting Rights Act


Justices Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Sonia Sotomayor warn of what’s really at stake in Merrill v. Milligan.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-supreme-court-considers-what-may-be-the-final-blow-to-the-voting-rights-act

White supremacists have HATED the CRA / VRA for 50+ years.

Created strategy in the 1970s to nullify them, trying to seat 5 non-squishy extreme "judges" on SCOTUS. Mission accomplished

christo fascist SCOTUS6 will deliver the coup de grace to the VRA

[boutons_deux]

Supreme Court Could Strip Protections from Millions of Federal Program Beneficiaries

As such, Medicaid beneficiaries and providers cannot privately enforce it, even when their rights are directly threatened.

This argument ignores the words of section 1983 and the 1994 Congressional amendments,

reverses decades of decisions, and

reduces Medicaid from an enforceable legal right

to government largesse subject to the whim of state officials.

its decision to hear this case... the breadth of the questions it poses, suggest that

the Court is poised to fundamentally deny the judicial safeguards of American law to those most in need of protection.

https://www.commonwealthfund.org/blog/2022/supreme-court-could-strip-protections-millions-federal-program-beneficiaries

Capitalists have purchased 100s of nursing homes to access the SS/Medicare/Medicaid $Bs in cash flow received by nursing home residents.

I expect the christo fascist pro-Capitalism oligarchy-owned SCOTUS6 to remove the residents' right to sue the nursing homes, protecting the Capitalist nursing home owners' wealth.