2025 SCOTUS

[Winehole23]

the real news is that four justices basically voted for Führerprinzip


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:t4x2ruk2qmob2b2cx55h4v7r/bafkreibicsyjiirrmtcdptmxz62fyzvc73fpiyuxl4jpdbdfq tniapzpmi@jpeg

[Millennial_Messiah]

Get rid of VRA Section 2, overturn Citizens United v FEC, maybe overturn Obergefell and return it to the states :toast

[Qabick]

Dating for Sex. (https://adult.casualdate.live)

[SnakeBoy]

I did but I got itchy scotus

[Winehole23]

Get rid of VRA Section 2, overturn Citizens United v FEC, maybe overturn Obergefell and return it to the states :toastthere is approximately zero chance a very Republican Supreme Court will turn off the dark money spigot that propelled them to where they are now.

[Millennial_Messiah]

there is approximately zero chance a very Republican Supreme Court will turn off the dark money spigot that propelled them to where they are now.

Definitely propels Democrats a lot too especially from 2018 to 2022 and even down ballot in 2024 since they learned to play the game that they sucked at downballot from 2010 to 2016

[Winehole23]

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:rjr6nfdzrfngjgc34jjyty6a/bafkreiezl7336i36wzhytcvnklialbnb6pk4q7pfteiacmuat mjbfucfdu@jpeg

[Winehole23]

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:rjr6nfdzrfngjgc34jjyty6a/bafkreihsydfdr624md7kl2mhtamdjlmfga2gcj7fzuxmnahcn l632khfeq@jpeg

[Winehole23]

in the putative interest of protecting US users from so-far hypothetical foreign harms, in an unsigned, unanimous opinion SCOTUS has allowed Congress to trample free expression and restrict information to Americans

sounds like neo-Cold War bullshit to me


The U.S. has said it’s concerned about TikTok collecting vast swaths of user data, including sensitive information on viewing habits (https://apnews.com/article/tiktok-bytedance-censorship-us-data-240e11d9bb6212b0c9b1adab821e5005), that could fall into the hands of the Chinese government through coercion. Officials have also warned the algorithm that fuels what users see on the app is vulnerable to manipulation by Chinese authorities, who can use it to shape content on the platform in a way that’s difficult to detecthttps://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-tiktok-china-security-speech-166f7c794ee587d3385190f893e52777

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-656_ca7d.pdf

[Winehole23]

fuck optics

what's the point of even pretending when it's game over?

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:cf26plxwia7dxpm6plry3sj2/bafkreidbqz6cmf6wsuniuljcufhcarpal3b55eu6gfpcoptgk whcu3pipy@jpeg

[SnakeBoy]

Sotomayer looking rough. Diabeetus is a killer.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N565gR7fYnE

[Winehole23]

^^^ carrion feeder

[Winehole23]

Trump wants US free speech to be more like the UK: curtailed by the state and the threat of libel

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:xs5kossjbra2o6rxa42cjpnv/bafkreidqr4cikcw6arbvd62f6ld7j6l5ajt3f4qnxiqdroihp yv3x4uaou@jpeg
https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:xs5kossjbra2o6rxa42cjpnv/bafkreiex23t4pxijxp2sfgovviaitay7bxgl3fd2xohqspe4z 35qxzfg4e@jpeg
https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:xs5kossjbra2o6rxa42cjpnv/bafkreicyifhzxh6usd4vi6suypjqkcqlgibe4fxbya6aqe2bb robo44roa@jpeg

[Winehole23]

(Wynn is a sex pest and a billionaire donor to Trump)

[Winehole23]

they may rule in Trump's favor later

for now, Hampton Dellinger keeps his job


The U.S. Supreme Court (https://www.upi.com/topic/supreme-court/)declined to hear an emergency appeal to fire the leader of an independent watchdog agency in the issue first to reach the Supreme Court challenging President Donald Trump (https://www.upi.com/topic/Donald_Trump/)'s executive orders.https://www.newsbreak.com/share/3824216171569-u-s-supreme-court-prevents-top-watchdog-from-being-fired-for-now

[Winehole23]

"I am glad to be able to continue my work as an independent government watchdog and whistleblower advocate," Dellinger said in a statement after the ruling. "I am grateful to the judges and justices who have concluded that I should be allowed to remain on the job while the courts decide whether my office can retain a measure of independence from direct partisan and political control."

[Thread]

they may rule in Trump's favor later

for now, Hampton Dellinger keeps his job

https://www.newsbreak.com/share/3824216171569-u-s-supreme-court-prevents-top-watchdog-from-being-fired-for-now

And frankly because the old man didn't read the rules on what it takes to fire the fuck. So, we got spanked.

This should not have happened. GD it!!!

[SnakeBoy]

And frankly because the old man didn't read the rules on what it takes to fire the fuck. So, we got spanked.

This should not have happened. GD it!!!

Meh, the SC just said wait until Wednesday to see what the district court says

Not an L yet

[Winehole23]

If you were looking for a unified theory explaining the last 20 years of Supreme Court politics (https://bsky.app/profile/jaywillis.net/post/3ljixeypmg22k), you could do a lot worse than “Citizens United was a direct reaction to Obama winning, and Shelby County was a direct reaction to Obama winning again”

[Winehole23]

SCOTUS holds that the EPA *cannot* order cities to maintain acceptable water quality standards by limiting the discharge—usually sewage—that they dump into nearby bodies of water (like oceans and bays). The four women justices, dissenting, say that's ridiculous. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24p... (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-753_f2bh.pdf)

[Winehole23]

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:36eqtmzysqf7wsslczw4uxcd/bafkreihhfeguorqdba22tipc2a2cry5zocpjxnbb6jfmzolme y6p64brga@jpeg
https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:36eqtmzysqf7wsslczw4uxcd/bafkreicmurenpjcajxqlhtrvslcana3nmhmwd5snputlswl73 orkvth7zq@jpeg

[Winehole23]

SCOTUS upholds ~$2B ruling against the State Department for denying payment for work already done



https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:euynv325eix7glyek377orak/bafkreifzctdeaixkxkbphjwxxzvyg7xryusgkuvervjqjgfnt dl64apypi@jpeghttps://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/25551544/24a831-order-2.pdf

[Winehole23]

Alito apparently doesn't think that Congress exists or has any authority

Nor judges, for that matter


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:maiw2rfujepnphhrejytvuu5/bafkreibqtai6puqgqq2k4egpqamtyac63wb2zux53bmhkirwm 2tlfuizly@jpeg

[Thread]

SCOTUS upholds ~$2B ruling against the State Department for denying payment for work already done


https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/25551544/24a831-order-2.pdf

It's the Barrett girl. Where she votes Roberts follows.

SOB.

And you could tell last night at the last when Trump was goin' down that SC line she loathes him. I've seen that look from my MIL.

[z0sa]

Alito apparently doesn't think that Congress exists or has any authority

Nor judges, for that matter

Judiciary not part of the government and/or the law anymore unless they're approving everything the executive branch does. God help us.

[Thread]

Judiciary not part of the government and/or the law anymore unless they're approving everything the executive branch does. God help us.

...HE did help us. In that Pennsylvania berry patch last Summer.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Time to Pelican Brief Crusty Roberts and Amnesty Amy. ASAP. Obstructionist resistlib neocon globalists.

It's sad our two best justices are boomers (and not boomercons).

[Thread]

Time to Pelican Brief Crusty Roberts and Amnesty Amy. ASAP. Obstructionist resistlib neocon globalists.

It's sad our two best justices are boomers (and not boomercons).

Well, Trump had the prime chance of sticking Judge Pirro in there and instead went for Amy. Fuck us. Roberts had been waiting patiently for a cohort and got it with her.

And she's gonna get worse moving to the Left upwards of 80% of the time if not completely Left within the next 2 years. And Roberts will follow religiously her movement.

We're fucked.

He had to be better than this and failed.

ADDENDUM: And CNN knew it in that circa. I remember they were happy and said she was gonna be problem for the Right. I said at the time:::"Bullshit, you're just sour grapes." But, yet felt a bit sick at the stomach.

But, they knew.

[Knoxxx]

My heart bleeds for you that even by stealing seats ya’ll could only get a 4 to 5 court on the most nefarious or unconstitutional of the agenda.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Well, Trump had the prime chance of sticking Judge Pirro in there and instead went for Amy. Fuck us. Roberts had been waiting patiently for a cohort and got it with her.

And she's gonna get worse moving to the Left upwards of 80% of the time if not completely Left within the next 2 years. And Roberts will follow religiously her movement.

We're fucked.

He had to be better than this and failed.

ADDENDUM: And CNN knew it in that circa. I remember they were happy and said she was gonna be problem for the Right. I said at the time:::"Bullshit, you're just sour grapes." But, yet felt a bit sick at the stomach.

But, they knew.
She's very culturally woke, adopted black kids etc.

Apart from being pro-life she's a mainstream Catholic Democrat tbh.

Jeanine Pirro is great but she's too old and has had too many health issues. Got to pick someone younger. Someone who probably wouldn't have gotten confirmed at the time, like a Matt Gaetz or Pam Bondi.

[Thread]

She's very culturally woke, adopted black kids etc.

Apart from being pro-life she's a mainstream Catholic Democrat tbh.

Jeanine Pirro is great but she's too old and has had too many health issues. Got to pick someone younger. Someone who probably wouldn't have gotten confirmed at the time, like a Matt Gaetz or Pam Bondi.

We're gonna suffer greatly for that pick.

Enough to wreck a mood, by God.

And like I said: once she crosses over a few times she'll cross for good and then it's gonna be tragic. I thought we had learned our lesson of picking wrong.

THEY never make a mistake. Ever. It's their religion.

[Winehole23]

God, how y'all hate a woman who thinks for herself instead of doing as she's told

[Thread]

God, how y'all hate a woman who thinks for herself instead of doing as she's told

You ain't had 1 Justice turn. Not 1.

[Winehole23]

well, two of em crossed over the other day to defeat Trumplandia

but they held it so long they mooted the TRO, SCOTUS temporizing for Trump has been a theme for years

[Winehole23]

"inside baseball"

according to the dogshit realism of Newsweek

they're not talking about nothing though


Conservatives are keen to see a revival of the nondelegation doctrine, which prohibits Congress (https://www.newsweek.com/topic/congress) from handing over its core legislative powers to federal agencies or other nonelected officials.

On March 27, Coney Barrett, a Trump nominee, expressed major concerns about reviving the doctrine, which hasn't been used since the 1930s and could severely weaken the power of government agencies.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/amy-coney-barrett-takes-issue-with-clarence-thomas-supreme-court-move/ar-AA1BN9j0

[Thread]

well, two of em crossed over the other day to defeat Trumplandia

but they held it so long they mooted the TRO, SCOTUS temporizing for Trump has been a theme for years

That Coney broad was a one trick pony (abortion) and the old man figured that was enough to put her in there.

I'd rather have abortion and a batting average of 1.000 every day since.

[Winehole23]

the supreme court essentially nullified (https://bsky.app/profile/theophite.bsky.social/post/3llinwiyjp22g) or read the reconstruction amendments entirely backwards for almost a century. the current supreme court believes they mandate rather than forbid racial discrimination

[Winehole23]

sort of with keeping with the current SCOTUS's take on the 14th Amendment as color-blind

so far up its own ass

it cannot see the original history nor what followed it

[Winehole23]

Leonard Leo spent $1 billion plus for the current SCOTUS (R) majority


The last day (https://bsky.app/profile/stevevladeck.bsky.social/post/3lltbkgagf22n) on which a majority of the Supreme Court’s justices had been appointed by Democratic presidents was May 14, 1969.

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:nwnlnixtjh3qhkwpz2uy5uwv/bafkreig7dffgfyqqbawuqed2krjef2swyh4hsf3eymi7p2psr xbjk5nmnq@jpeg

[Thread]

Leonard Leo spent $1 billion plus for the current SCOTUS (R) majority



https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:nwnlnixtjh3qhkwpz2uy5uwv/bafkreig7dffgfyqqbawuqed2krjef2swyh4hsf3eymi7p2psr xbjk5nmnq@jpeg

The persistent problem till Trump made President was Republican Presidents getting in there and appointing Left leaning Justices one after another. Even that barrel a shit Bush2 tried to appoint that one woman (name escapes me) who was extremely Left and they told him "No, you goofy bastard, you. No!"

[Winehole23]

Trumplandia is apparently on the warpath against trans, I wonder who's the next victim of national salvation


“I guess your colloquy with Justice Barrett makes me wonder whether this case is really the right vehicle to evaluate any of these issues,“ Jackson asked Eric Baxter, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty lawyer representing the parents. “[W]e don't even know how these books are actually being used in the classroom.“

Jackson also raised a discussion about whether it can burden a parent’s free exercise right where parents have the ability to choose sending their students to a private school or to home school them, in addition to sending them to the public schools.
https://www.lawdork.com/p/scotus-free-exercise-books-schools-lgbtq

[Winehole23]

ACB: Are your clients objecting to exposure or to indoctrination?

Becket: Exposure

ACB: well, let's pretend you didn't say that

[Winehole23]

Trumplandia is already in a post-constitutional headspace, it would seem

[Winehole23]

using the shadow docket to let Donald Trump overturn Supreme Court precedent by fiat while his (allegedly) lawless actions are under appeal

moar Calvinball

the bespoke loophole for Fed independence underlines it



https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreiegtqr2b2pp43ogisubdquvfd3bf5ne2tdck2hvlk3um 5y65lh3ni@jpeghttps://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a966_1b8e.pdf

[Winehole23]

no publicly funded religious charter schools...for now


In an unsigned one-page opinion, the Supreme Court on May 22 split 4-4 on whether Oklahoma could create the country’s first publicly-funded Catholic charter school. Because of the tie, a prior court ruling (https://oklahomavoice.com/2024/06/25/oklahoma-supreme-court-strikes-down-catholic-charter-school/) that the religious school cannot receive public funding stands—for now.

The ruling involved two cases (https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-394/327634/20241007120954967_USSC%20Petition%20for%20Writ%20o f%20Certiorari.pdf)—Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond and St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School v. Drummond—which were consolidated into a single Supreme Court case. The issue in the case was straightforward: Can states fund religious schools directly via their charter school programs?

Both cases involved a planned public charter school in Oklahoma that would be run by two Catholic dioceses. The planned public school, St. Isidore, was to be designed in the spirit of the church and serve its “evangelizing mission.

In June 2024, the Oklahoma Supreme Court put the brakes (https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/post/high-court-to-weigh-approval-for-u-s-1st-publicly-funded-religious-charter-school-in-okla/#:~:text=Last%20June%2C%20Oklahoma's%20top%20court ,respecting%20an%20establishment%20of%20religion.% E2%80%9D) on this plan. It ruled that using taxpayer money to fund religious charter schools would violate the state constitution, which forbids the use of public money “for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, or system of religion.”

Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself from the Supreme Court’s case. Without her vote, the justices split evenly—and when SCOTUS ties, the lower court wins. This means no national precedent has been set, and a similar case is likely to reach the Court in the future.
https://rewirenewsgroup.com/2025/05/22/scotus-effectively-blocks-nations-first-publicly-funded-religious-charter-school/

[Winehole23]

SCOTUS shields DOGE from transparency

The pattern since 2021 is SCOTUS temporizing in favor of Trump whenever it can


Chief Justice John Roberts issues a temporary, administrative stay blocking orders that DOGE comply with FOIA and start turning over documents to CREW.

[Winehole23]

the usual Calvinball -- SCOTUS shadow docket decision tips in favor of DOGE before the record has been fully developed in lower courts or the merits of the question reached

from the Justice Jackson dissent

this decision allows DOGE access to SSA personal information while the challenge to the legal propriety of that access is being challenged in the courts



https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:3n55ofeg53jvxkslkg3hyayd/bafkreidgj2tki4ykgfbdz5pm6p2cynay4uim67ehqa52tqekk gtjrjp7jy@jpeg

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:3n55ofeg53jvxkslkg3hyayd/bafkreigmopesqut2i2amzq2yu2crjca7mq46ohznsv7ecodxh axtsrapxy@jpeg
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a1063_6j37.pdf

[Winehole23]

once again, SCOTUS abets the roguish actions of a catch-me-if-you-can executive branch

[Winehole23]

Justice Jackson on textualism



https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreih3qdtlloz3yhggypbtwiveqdgzzfgapsnetvq7qsni7 wfmyuovoi@jpeghttps://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-997_6579.pdf

[Winehole23]

this ruling temporarily removes an injunction while the case winds through the courts, but is shocking in its effect: it allows Trump to deport people due process free to unrelated third countries for the time being

as Sotomayor points out, SCOTUS is giving relief to an administration that has twice defied judicial orders in this case, without any explanation whatsoever

there is a rather caustic dissent, much deserved imho -- the Roberts Court is going to go down in infamy alongside the Taney court


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:j7eliwxzqpvvwu6jbxr5ggaf/bafkreickatolltortsqgqlzpsocu2ewqzsgwnvvufudpvjr24 aqkkga25e@jpeg


"Rather than allowing our lower court colleagues to manage this high-stakes litigation … this Court now intervenes to grant the Government emergency relief from an order it has repeatedly defied. I cannot join so gross an abuse of the Court’s equitable discretion."


https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a1153_l5gm.pdf

[Winehole23]

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:gcp5ldm4uzm7cmwxbb7fjel2/bafkreiccxwsihavwfrih5bddsu3i7tvzzbplqwjdznewoqb2t 3y3rlfyiq@jpeg

[Winehole23]

Sotomayor: "Given its conduct in these proceedings, the Government’s posture resembles that of the arsonist who calls 911 to report firefighters for violating a local noise ordinance."

[Winehole23]

SCOTUS is exposing thousands of people to the risk of death, slavery and torture in hellholes they're not from

seems rather disproportionate to what in most cases is an administrative violation

[Winehole23]

Sotomayor put it better than me


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:ttdaexuq2ca4ok5hfphc2h5q/bafkreich44rqzqr6mk4hsnqr6gopt3bbfp66ebi3qk3zmtfdt y7glz6fii@jpeg

[Winehole23]

plaintiffs respond

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:36eqtmzysqf7wsslczw4uxcd/bafkreicvwxfsaf3z3ztqutalrdhnpdoey4dsigdqid4ctaxk7 lcco4ru2m@jpeg
https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:36eqtmzysqf7wsslczw4uxcd/bafkreigin6xunmrg5pbu5pvyaqegkulgwogtx67j5w6cavoar yotwh4mra@jpeg

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.282404/gov.uscourts.mad.282404.174.0_1.pdf

[Winehole23]

So im still working so i haven't been able to pay much attention to things, but did the Supreme Court just bring back the slave trade?

[Winehole23]

it's all about backing Trump


We're in uncharted territory with this SCOTUS. They're making decisions--without regard to precedent, without regard to norms, without regard to justice, without regard to the impact on the rule of law in the U.S., without regard to consequences, and very often with a complete lack of transparency.

[Winehole23]

while the case moves through the courts


with no due process there's no guarantee citizens will be able to prove they're citizens so, while I'm not a lawyer, I think maybe the court just ruled they can send anyone they want anywhere they want.

[Winehole23]

It's becoming increasingly clear is that the right wing of this Supreme Court is extreme even among federal courts. The district courts and appellate courts keep appropriately halting this shit, expressing appropriate outrage, and trying to hold the line. Then SCOTUS blows it all up.

[Winehole23]

lower court moves with alacrity


Judge Murphy says the 8 men in Djibouti on their way to South Sudan WILL GET THE DUE PROCESS he previously ordered, saying that his remedial order remains in effect despite the Supreme Court's unreasoned order lifting the stay on his class-wide injunction.


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:qrllvid7s54k4hnwtqxwetrf/bafkreido746d67f6ys2z5geaam3utgadhv55awuvguaudvqsl 527mig5dq@jpeghttps://bsky.app/profile/joshuajfriedman.com/post/3lsctgmsmoc24

[Winehole23]

Here's the remedial order that Judge Murphy says was not properly before the Supreme Court and which is therefore still in effect


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:qrllvid7s54k4hnwtqxwetrf/bafkreiazhhyvwudj2hwl7dn6imadrnx47tamw6i7wcgzll5ii wqp4oq4x4@jpeg
https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:qrllvid7s54k4hnwtqxwetrf/bafkreie3z2pljskhub5rzgue3f7kdkc4qiscln2244qrm2kan qsjyi4gf4@jpeg

[Winehole23]

Judge Murphy's order was foreshadowed in Sotomayor's dissent


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:qrllvid7s54k4hnwtqxwetrf/bafkreiajfnghq7dk4jrmzfou5u4vbpacpfw55wdudjj4sugyl orucmij6m@jpeg

[Winehole23]

SCOTUS destroying the authority of district courts is way radical...one might even say revolutionary

[Spurs Homer]

maga scotus scum


https://youtu.be/28WwH6OmzqI?si=9PVdtQ6k0Y7grHs-

[Winehole23]

also, one of the 27 grievances in the Declaration of Independence

sending people overseas without trial was one of the reasons we pink-slipped King George



I keep remembering the 1679 habeas corpus act. It reacted to the king arresting people & without trial deporting them. It began: “for prevention of imprisonment beyond seas.”Without explanation, our current SCOTUS majority is undoing centuries of justice.

[Winehole23]

lol

the unsigned, unargued ruling left room for the district court to issue a new order. had the majority bothered to rebut Sotomayor they could have forestalled this.


maybe the majority should have explained what it meant, idk just spitballing here...the briefing was complete as of June 5, it's not like they didn't have time to write something


lower court moves with alacrity

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:qrllvid7s54k4hnwtqxwetrf/bafkreido746d67f6ys2z5geaam3utgadhv55awuvguaudvqsl 527mig5dq@jpeg

https://bsky.app/profile/joshuajfriedman.com/post/3lsctgmsmoc24

[TSA]

lol

the unsigned, unargued ruling left room for the district court to issue a new order. had the majority bothered to rebut Sotomayor they could have forestalled this.

lol, you have no fucking clue what you are talking about. "left room" No you fucking idiot, a district judge ignored a SCOTUS ruling and used the dissent to issue his ruling. For as much whining as you've done about muh Judicial Crisis it's amazing that when there actually is one you not only get it wrong but stupidly cheer it on.

https://x.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1937338827343036609

https://x.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1937333652679188812

[Winehole23]

:blah

[Winehole23]

TSAnon the driveling fascist

[TSA]

lol

the unsigned, unargued ruling left room for the district court to issue a new order. had the majority bothered to rebut Sotomayor they could have forestalled this.

https://media1.tenor.com/m/1zzlD4jTQQgAAAAC/dumb-really-dumb-for-real.gif

https://x.com/JosephGorton1/status/1937562782016168200

https://x.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1937552079528349860

[TSA]

lol

the unsigned, unargued ruling left room for the district court to issue a new order. had the majority bothered to rebut Sotomayor they could have forestalled this.

https://x.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1937596749188858326

Winehole fell for it again

[Winehole23]

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:25cztqjrqfedqg22bpoqjljr/bafkreie2b4xopydy5cqwbz4r4njdpdvtys66cev5qlnd3zv2x znhxh2die@jpeg

[Winehole23]

from co-equal sovereign to super-legislature


The conservative majority knows exactly what it's doing. These same justices would never have allowed a Democratic administration to take similar actions, like abolishing federal agencies by executive order or federalizing national guards without state approval and deploying the military against peaceful protesters. Yet when Trump bulldozes through constitutional limits, the Court waves him on.


We are witnessing something without precedent: a Supreme Court that appears to be at war with the federal judiciary's core constitutional function. It has chosen to bless the administration's actions, and in doing so, systematically dismantles the authority of any court that stands in its way. The courts can't protect the Constitution because the Supreme Court won't let them. The Supreme Court has chosen a side, and it isn’t the rule of law.
https://data4democracy.substack.com/p/the-supreme-court-is-at-war-with

[Winehole23]

This is Medina

The question was whether South Carolina can defund Planned Parenthood by withholding Medicaid funds

SCOTUS ruled it can, below is the beginning of Justice Jackson's dissent



JUSTICE JACKSON, with whom JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR and JUSTICE KAGAN join, dissenting.

The Civil Rights Act of 1871 was an exercise in grand ambition. It had to be. In the wake of the Civil War, the American South was consumed by a wave of terrorist violence designed to disenfranchise and intimidate the country’s newly freed citizens and their allies. The threat was existential—not just for the newly liberated, but for democracy itself—and required bold intervention. It was precisely because the goals of the 1871 Act were so ambitious that those most committed to the structures it targeted, including many in South Carolina, opposed the measure so vehemently.

A century and a half later, the project of stymying one of the country’s great civil rights laws continues. In this latest chapter, South Carolina urges our Court to adopt a narrow and ahistorical reading of the 1871 Act’s first section, which is codified today at 42 U. S. C. §1983. That venerable provision permits any citizen to obtain redress in federal court for “the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws” of the United States. South Carolina asks us to hollow out that provision so that 2 MEDINA v. PLANNED PARENTHOOD SOUTH ATLANTIC JACKSON, J., dissenting the State can evade liability for violating the rights of its Medicaid recipients to choose their own doctors. The Court abides South Carolina’s request. I would not. For that reason, I respectfully dissent. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1275_e2pg.pdf#page=43

[Winehole23]

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:beirch5u3d3ybvuct27mtyxd/bafkreigyjnb453quhlefnmqx3w7hntq5wqf2pihch73szmgsy 2it6rebqm@jpeg

[Winehole23]

Civil War in reverse

Rolling back the Reconstruction Constitution


The Court’s decision today is not the first to so weaken the landmark civil rights protections that Congress enacted during the Reconstruction Era. See, e.g., Civil Rights Cases, 109 U. S. 3 (1883); United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542 (1876); Blyew v. United States, 13 Wall. 581 (1872). That means we do have a sense of what comes next: as with those past rulings, today’s decision is likely to result in tangible harm to real people. At a minimum, it will deprive Medicaid recipients in South Carolina of their only meaningful way of enforcing a right that Congress has expressly granted to them. And, more concretely, it will strip those South Carolinians—and countless other Medicaid recipients around the country—of a deeply personal freedom: the “ability to decide who treats us at our most vulnerable.” Kerr, 95 F. 4th, at 169. The Court today disregards Congress’s express desire to prevent that very outcome.

[Winehole23]

SCOTUS hamstrings the judiciary's ability to rein in an extreme and out of control executive branch

Trump's birthright citizenship EO will go into effect for "anyone not a plaintiff"

MAGA has zero problems with Mark Kacsmaryk's nationwide injunctions -- another heads I win, tails you lose Supreme Court ruling


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:sefgphqp2xqwh2hawaixykwz/bafkreiezx7s4myhtz2s42y6mmfwvnrcsohj7jbip7ecedvmkd qtqd3ugwe@jpeghttps://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a884_8n59.pdf


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:fe2hknpkjrquvgvme6frfljq/bafkreibt6yfeqsp6d2vlkyvyzevwvh6pldd44ppxn5ww77ult wnosvcks4@jpeghttps://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a884_8n59.pdf

[GAustex]

Left wing lying lawless judges told to stfu.

You lose
America wins

[Winehole23]

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:fvzkql2aqtbk7qmqjkoo2lv2/bafkreibcjsau5ululorncmts2jl5ugfpiykj6ckkbgtirgtln 4fya7pnoi@jpeg

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:fvzkql2aqtbk7qmqjkoo2lv2/bafkreia3zhn3xffhlop75pmju3srxywnwekwm65umgq32gwev mrtkmdn7m@jpeghttps://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:fvzkql2aqtbk7qmqjkoo2lv2/bafkreickh7el5tejxg5t3degkclvpb5dz3grue2rafo4ykawq onynhqqlq@jpeg

[Winehole23]

Left wing lying lawless judges told to stfu.

You lose
America winsYou win

America loses

That's the formula

[Winehole23]

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:sefgphqp2xqwh2hawaixykwz/bafkreibwhy6khvha7syw2chmlyqhkak32al4p42d2b3rtd4qn jl7b2v2f4@jpeg

[GAustex]

Drinking liberal tears
So refreshing

[ChumpDumper]

Drinking liberal tears
So refreshing

You believe in nothing.

[Winehole23]

SCOTUS affirms homophobia as a core tenet of Christian belief, rules that schools must provide an opt-out for gay-inclusive storybooks

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-297_4f14.pdf

[Winehole23]

SCOTUS hamstrings the judiciary's ability to rein in an extreme and out of control executive branch

Trump's birthright citizenship EO will go into effect for "anyone not a plaintiff"

MAGA has zero problems with Mark Kacsmaryk's nationwide injunctions -- another heads I win, tails you lose Supreme Court ruling

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a884_8n59.pdf

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a884_8n59.pdfimportant caveat, agency action can still be vacated


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:nztbvvo2gl4227zuxjf7gog3/bafkreiemf4libfwr7duoza2fgvug2fjewizmapcyyuf7ntmhc dmscwdqlq@jpeg

[TSA]

SCOTUS affirms homophobia as a core tenet of Christian belief, rules that schools must provide an opt-out for gay-inclusive storybooks

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-297_4f14.pdf

During the 2022–2023 school year, the Montgomery County Board of Ed-
ucation (Board) introduced a variety of “LGBTQ+-inclusive” texts into
the public school curriculum. Those texts included five “LGBTQ+-in-
clusive” storybooks approved for students in kindergarten through
fifth grade, which have story lines focused on sexuality and gender.
When parents in Montgomery County sought to have their children
excused from instruction involving those books, the Board initially
compromised with the parents by notifying them when the “LGBTQ+-
inclusive” storybooks would be taught and permitting their children to
be excused from the instruction. That compromise was consistent with
the Board’s “Guidelines for Respecting Religious Diversity,” which pro-
fessed a commitment to making “reasonable accommodations” for the
religious “beliefs and practices” of students. Less than a year after the
Board introduced the books, however, it rescinded the parental opt out
policy.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-297_4f14.pdf

[Winehole23]

what fucking bullshit


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:b2zlnxrfackjw5h3lbemyqg5/bafkreif6feczyicy5jj6s4knhjwhkd3o5fkchigpdxb34pkyc 5wpoisy7m@jpeg

[GAustex]

You believe in nothing.

Oh but I do
I believe
You lose
America wins

[TSA]

SCOTUS hamstrings the judiciary's ability to rein in an extreme and out of control executive branch

Trump's birthright citizenship EO will go into effect for "anyone not a plaintiff"

MAGA has zero problems with Mark Kacsmaryk's nationwide injunctions -- another heads I win, tails you lose Supreme Court ruling

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a884_8n59.pdf

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a884_8n59.pdf

SCOTUS reined in out of control judges. :bobo

[Winehole23]

age screening in Texas for porn websites is now halal, opinion by Justice Thomas


https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1122_3e04.pdf

[ChumpDumper]

Oh but I do
I believe
You lose
America wins

Nah. That's just fear and hatred of someone you don't know.

You have no actual beliefs.

[ChumpDumper]

SCOTUS reined in out of control judges. :bobo

How were they out of control?

[ChumpDumper]

During the 2022–2023 school year, the Montgomery County Board of Ed-
ucation (Board) introduced a variety of “LGBTQ+-inclusive” texts into
the public school curriculum. Those texts included five “LGBTQ+-in-
clusive” storybooks approved for students in kindergarten through
fifth grade, which have story lines focused on sexuality and gender.
When parents in Montgomery County sought to have their children
excused from instruction involving those books, the Board initially
compromised with the parents by notifying them when the “LGBTQ+-
inclusive” storybooks would be taught and permitting their children to
be excused from the instruction. That compromise was consistent with
the Board’s “Guidelines for Respecting Religious Diversity,” which pro-
fessed a commitment to making “reasonable accommodations” for the
religious “beliefs and practices” of students. Less than a year after the
Board introduced the books, however, it rescinded the parental opt out
policy.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-297_4f14.pdf
So if a kid's religion doesn't believe in science, that kid can just opt out of the subject completely with no consequences?

Based.

[Winehole23]

SCOTUS punts the Louisiana racial gerrymander, requests new arguments

[Winehole23]

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:sefgphqp2xqwh2hawaixykwz/bafkreiercmdo32w2jzehhqwj6c3pgaw6ld4jsk55dkvskymhx jds2w4ic4@jpeg

[Winehole23]

heckler's veto, raised to constitutional principle


"Today’s ruling threatens the very essence of public education. The Court, in effect, constitutionalizes a parental veto power over curricular choices long left to the democratic process and local administrators."

[GAustex]

Nah. That's just fear and hatred of someone you don't know.

You have no actual beliefs.
Fear?
Lol

[ChumpDumper]

Fear?Absolutely.

You Trumptards are afraid of nearly everything.

[Winehole23]

So if a kid's religion doesn't believe in science, that kid can just opt out of the subject completely with no consequences?

Based."my church doesn't believe in the mixing of the races"

[SnakeBoy]

Trump can't be stopped

It's the law

[Winehole23]

Trump can't be stopped

It's the laweh, we'll see

[Winehole23]

SCOTUS hamstrings the judiciary's ability to rein in an extreme and out of control executive branch

Trump's birthright citizenship EO will go into effect for "anyone not a plaintiff"

MAGA has zero problems with Mark Kacsmaryk's nationwide injunctions -- another heads I win, tails you lose Supreme Court ruling

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a884_8n59.pdf

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a884_8n59.pdfpetition for class action

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69563661/96/casa-inc-v-trump/

[GAustex]

BIG BALLS tea bagging lefties

[Winehole23]

^^^ weird daddy kink and homosexual ideation

[GAustex]

You like it

[Winehole23]

The Supreme Court is about to go on an extended summer vacation, (https://bsky.app/profile/reichlinmelnick.bsky.social/post/3lslubm5hws27) after having blown up the docket of every single lower court judge who has been working like a dog to deal with the firehose of illegal orders coming out of this administration.

[GAustex]

Don’t ya

[Winehole23]

You like itsee above

y'all are fuckin weird

[GAustex]

And you lose
And America win

[GAustex]

You got nothing
Cept stomping around on the street holding your sign
Setting fires
Burn something down
Maybe even kill someone

[ChumpDumper]

And you lose
And America win


You got nothing
Cept stomping around on the street holding your sign
Setting fires
Burn something down
Maybe even kill someone

You have nothing but posting about us.

[baseline bum]

You got nothing
Cept stomping around on the street holding your sign
Setting fires
Burn something down
Maybe even kill someone

It was your brownshirt who killed two Minnesota congressmen

[ChumpDumper]

It was your brownshirt who killed two Minnesota congressmen

:lol do they still think Walz activated a sleeper assassin?

[Winehole23]

It was your brownshirt who killed two Minnesota congressmenholy shit, the other one died?

[baseline bum]

holy shit, the other one died?

You're right, he only murdered one lawmaker plus her husband but the senator survived the MAGA attack.

[GAustex]

Boasburg just got castrated

[ChumpDumper]

Boasburg just got castrated

Why are you the ones doing the killing if you're so happy?

Please explain.

[GAustex]

Why are you the ones doing the killing if you're so happy?

Please explain.

YOU LOSE
I WIN

[ChumpDumper]

YOU LOSE
I WINBecause you're killing Democratic lawmakers?

That makes you happy?

[GAustex]

Slapped the DEI lying lawless judge down

“We will not dwell on JUSTICE JACKSON's argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries' worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself. We observe only this: JUSTICE JACKSON decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary”

[TSA]

SCOTUS hamstrings the judiciary's ability to rein in an extreme and out of control executive branch

Trump's birthright citizenship EO will go into effect for "anyone not a plaintiff"

MAGA has zero problems with Mark Kacsmaryk's nationwide injunctions -- another heads I win, tails you lose Supreme Court ruling

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a884_8n59.pdf

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a884_8n59.pdf

https://x.com/Merovingianus/status/1938640750822203770

This thread is gold. KBJ is so damn clueless.

[TSA]

https://x.com/Merovingianus/status/1938640750822203770

This thread is gold. KBJ is so damn clueless.

https://x.com/theblaze/status/1937970253666877680

:lol

[TSA]

Slapped the DEI lying lawless judge down

“We will not dwell on JUSTICE JACKSON's argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries' worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself. We observe only this: JUSTICE JACKSON decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary”

https://x.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1938635528318120198

[GAustex]

https://x.com/theblaze/status/1937970253666877680

:lol

Lol

[Winehole23]

t is the Imperial Judiciary when courts say that presidents can’t unilaterally overturn constitutional text, and the Proper Order of Things when courts say that your rights rest on the whims of who happens to be in office

[baseline bum]

SCOTUS hamstrings the judiciary's ability to rein in an extreme and out of control executive branch

Trump's birthright citizenship EO will go into effect for "anyone not a plaintiff"

MAGA has zero problems with Mark Kacsmaryk's nationwide injunctions -- another heads I win, tails you lose Supreme Court ruling

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a884_8n59.pdf

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a884_8n59.pdf

Roberts made Trump king when he made him unable to be prosecuted for his crimes as long as he called them official actions; no reason he wouldn't reinforce that ruling by further protecting Trump from having to follow the law.

[Winehole23]

If the government oppresses the people, the judiciary is powerless to protect the people from it, unless they prevail in individual lawsuits

the curtailment of liberty will be significant, Trump's war on the American people is already extensive

[Winehole23]

In the second zone, however, the executive can enforce unconstitutional actions against “those who lack the wherewithal or ability to go to court“ — a reality that “will disproportionately impact the poor, the uneducated, and the unpopular.”https://www.lawdork.com/p/scotus-conservatives-end-universal

[Winehole23]

it's no longer overstatement to say that SCOTUS is taking citizenship and racial politics in the USA back to a pre-civil war basis

[Winehole23]

breathtakingly extreme and radical

[Winehole23]

it's no longer overstatement to say that SCOTUS is taking citizenship and racial politics in the USA back to a pre-civil war basiswithout firing a shot so far (besides Vince Boelter)

[DarrinS]

Its like the civil war era

[ChumpDumper]

Its like the civil war era

Why are you even trying to talk about this?

You don't know shit about it.

[Winehole23]

for the low effort, low information person

cheap cynicism trumps all

[Winehole23]

Its like the civil war erawhat is the 14th amendment?

what would repealing jus soli (https://www.usconstitution.net/14th-amendment-birthright-citizenship/) mean in the USA?

[Winehole23]

what would repealing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 look like?

Trump's various EOs contemplate this

[Winehole23]

14th amendment was ratified in 1868

(We'll need another government like that to fix what Trump is doing)

[DMX7]

what is the 14th amendment?

what would repealing jus soli (https://www.usconstitution.net/14th-amendment-birthright-citizenship/) mean in the USA?

How many countries in the world don't do birthright citizenship?

I wonder if we asked those who passed the 14th amendment if they thought it should apply to millions in the country illegally. My guess is "no".

[ChumpDumper]

How many countries in the world don't do birthright citizenship?

I wonder if we asked those who passed the 14th amendment if they thought it should apply to millions in the country illegally. My guess is "no".
They could have written that in the amendment. They didn't. No guessing.

[Winehole23]

How many countries in the world don't do birthright citizenship?

I wonder if we asked those who passed the 14th amendment if they thought it should apply to millions in the country illegally. My guess is "no".you should read the Congressional Globe on this, i may have posted it upstream.

It's very droll, but the intent is crystal clear

[Winehole23]

there's not much evidence the immigrant surge presents a public safety hazard exceeding natives

what's the emergency?

[DMX7]

They could have written that in the amendment. They didn't. No guessing.

We have to judge what they meant and how we apply it even now which is not exactly as written. They could have written that the children of certain foreign diplomats are exempted but they didn't and they are.

[DarrinS]

Win, win, win

[Winehole23]

man, that barely makes any sense

are you high?

[Winehole23]

Win, win, win


https://media-proxy.snopes.com/width/600?url=https://media.snopes.com/2024/09/mn_confederate_flag_fb.png

[ChumpDumper]

We have to judge what they meant and how we apply it even now which is not exactly as written. They could have written that the children of certain foreign diplomats are exempted but they didn't and they are.Of course that's in the amendment.

[ChumpDumper]

Win, win, win

Any new information on your Walz sleeper assassin conspiracy theory?

Did you win?

[DMX7]

Of course that's in the amendment.

It doesn't explicitly state that, we have to make a judgement as to what it means and how we apply it.

[DarrinS]

Any new information on your Walz sleeper assassin conspiracy theory?

Did you win?

Walz appointed

[Winehole23]

:lmao

[ChumpDumper]

Walz appointedTo what?

What is your conspiracy theory here?

[ChumpDumper]

It doesn't explicitly state that, we have to make a judgement as to what it means and how we apply it.No, it's quite clear. Right in the text.

You should try reading it.

[Winehole23]

the originalism is clear. the US Congress knew what it was doing.

[Winehole23]

https://ia801508.us.archive.org/26/items/DebatesThatLedToTheCreationOfTheFourteenthAmendmen t/Debates

[DMX7]

No, it's quite clear. Right in the text.

You should try reading it.

I did read it. It doesn't explicitly say what I wrote. It's a judgement call.

[ChumpDumper]

I did read it. It doesn't explicitly say what I wrote. It's a judgement call.It sure does.

[DMX7]

It sure does.

Post it then. I know why you've avoided it so far.

[Winehole23]

lol 14th Amendment truthers

it wasn't meant to be color blind

[ChumpDumper]

Post it then. I know why you've avoided it so far.

I was just about to challenge you to do it. I know why you've avoided it so far.

[ChumpDumper]

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

It's not my fault if you don't know what the words mean.

[Winehole23]

they said what they meant, they meant what they said

Trumplandia is twisting itself in pretzel shapes to say the opposite

[Winehole23]

p. 3215, 3rd column

congress-39-session-1-part-4.pdf (https://www.congress.gov/congressional-globe/congress-39-session-1-part-4.pdf)

[Winehole23]

On May 30, 1866, the U.S. Senate kicked off its debate (https://www.congress.gov/congressional-globe/congress-39-session-1-part-4.pdf) on the Citizenship Clause of the proposed 14th Amendment, which says, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."


The first opponent to speak was Sen. Edgar Cowan (R–Penn.), who objected to the 14th Amendment on the grounds that it would bestow U.S. citizenship on the children of unpopular immigrants. "Is it proposed that the people of California are to remain quiescent while they are overrun by a flood of immigration of the Mongol race?" Cowan demanded. "Are they to be immigrated out of house and home by Chinese?"


Cowan also worried about the presence of "Gypsies" in Pennsylvania. "They wander in gangs in my State," he declared. "These people live in the country and are born in the country. They infest society." Are their children also to be granted birthright citizenship by the language of the amendment? "If the mere fact of being born in the country confers that right," Cowan complained, "then they will have it; and I think it will be mischievous."


Sen. John Conness (R–Calif.) then rose to speak in response to Cowan. "I beg my honorable friend from Pennsylvania to give himself no further trouble on account of the Chinese in California or on the Pacific coast," he said. "We are entirely ready to accept the provision proposed in this constitutional amendment, that the children born here of Mongolian parents shall be declared by the Constitution of the United States to be entitled to civil rights and to equal protection before the law with others."


Note that Cowan and Conness both agreed on the meaning of birthright citizenship. They only disagreed about whether or not that meaning would produce a welcome result. And note also that their shared original understanding runs counter to the position now advanced by the Trump administration.
https://reason.com/2025/05/20/trump-says-birthright-citizenship-is-only-about-the-babies-of-slaves-historical-evidence-says-otherwise/

[Winehole23]

The proposition before us," he said, "relates simply in that respect to the children begotten of Chinese parents in California, and it is proposed to declare that they shall be citizens. We have declared that by law; now it is proposed to incorporate the same provision in the fundamental instrument of the nation."


Conness was referring here to the Civil Rights Act of 1866 (https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/historic-document-library/detail/civil-rights-act-of-1866-april-9-1866-an-act-to-protect-all-persons-in-the-united-states-in-their-civil-rights-and-furnish-the-means-of-their-vindication), which Congress had passed in April over the veto of President Andrew Johnson. Why did Johnson veto it? Among "the provisions I cannot approve," Johnson wrote (https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/veto-message-438), was the first section of the law, in which "all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States."

It was bad enough, according to Johnson, that this statutory guarantee of birthright citizenship would make citizens "out of the entire race designated as blacks." In his view, "four million of them have just emerged from slavery to freedom. Can it be reasonably supposed that they possess the requisite qualifications to entitle them to all the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States?" But Johnson also objected to the fact that the Civil Rights Act would make citizens out of the children of "the Chinese of the Pacific States, Indians subject to taxation, [and] the people called Gipsies." Just like Cowan and Conness, Johnson also understood that birthright citizenship would apply to the U.S.-born children of unpopular immigrants.

[Winehole23]

pp. 2890-2

https://www.congress.gov/congressional-globe/congress-39-session-1-part-4.pdf

[Winehole23]

they are reconstructing something like the antebellum constitutional world, where state police powers are paramount and neither the federal government nor federal courts have the power to establish uniform standards or floors for rights...

[Winehole23]

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:twasya42lpacrrncfhcrbjyv/bafkreifvy5gvwbo7nscp2unmj2oyhiacofx4boppeo74t7gm2 drlsz5rfm@jpeg

[Winehole23]

H/T, Bill Kristol

ten years ago, I was not on this guy's side

I think he moved closer to me than the reverse

[ChumpDumper]

Its like the civil war era

Darrin talks out of his ass for a reason.

1938631996999106887

https://x.com/atrupar/status/1938631996999106887

[Extra Stout]

Birthright citizenship is so obviously ingrained in the 14th Amendment and subsequent court challenges that even Samuel Alito will struggle to cobble together a dissent that isn’t merely partisan hackery. Trump’s argument will lose at least 7-2.

The entire lines of argument raised by the nativists were brought up back in the 1800’s and rejected.

Birthright citizenship will only end under a right-wing dictatorship where the Court is merely a rubber stamp.

[Winehole23]

I think the court entered a post-constitutional headspace after 2021, they shielded Trump from prosecution and gratuitously awarded him new legal immunity as president. It doesn't seem to me they have any trouble backfilling the constitution with bespoke content in order to help Republicans...

[Winehole23]

In effect, the Supreme Court ruled that only it could decide issues on a national level. And then, with thousands and thousands of people waiting in limbo for resolution of many legally disputed Trump orders, the justices went on summer vacation, not to return until October.

[Winehole23]

"no law, just vibes"

this is a pretty good rundown of this session


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:qwxftspzayyqtmwv5t4rtdsm/bafkreiervgubank7ew7mwap6xdtmncj6vo34rgzwmwl5kgmrf gqcachtte@jpeghttps://www.stevevladeck.com/p/163-a-new-kind-of-judicial-supremacy

[Winehole23]

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:36eqtmzysqf7wsslczw4uxcd/bafkreievtam2tnqjiso2kagkkeqnivoezprxwzobs7pcay4yh l7j36saci@jpeg
https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:36eqtmzysqf7wsslczw4uxcd/bafkreiaqdu46de5dz44tv2i2xrzbpb3xh4badnko5tty6vzfg gzvfa7hby@jpeg
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a1153_2co3.pdf

[Winehole23]

the Roberts court has covered itself with disgrace

this decision is particularly evil and noxious

process free removal to South Sudan as a third country for 8 people

[Winehole23]

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreieweyn3xqkwy7xw3fw64br6xf6vwuwbnuioyg3mi4b5c gouj5z2mq@jpeg

[Winehole23]

dp

[Yonivore]

You and Justice Sotomayor should probably read up on the "Plenary Power Doctrine." as it give Congress and the Executive Branch broad authority over immigration matters, including deportation...as established in Fong Yue Ting v. United States, in 1893, (holding deportation is civil, not criminal, matter with different constitutional standards). Zadvydas v. Davis, in 2001, acknowledged the government could remove illegal immigrants to any country willing to accept them. And, Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam, in 2020, where the court held limiting judicial review of expedited removal procedures does not violate the constitution.

https://i.ibb.co/gLbHSZM2/YOU-ARE-HERE-070325.png (https://ibb.co/210mv379)

[GAustex]

Lol

[Winehole23]

look up non-refoulement

sending people to countries they're not from -- let alone war-torn hellholes and countries where they face harm and persecution -- isn't deportation, it's a crime

[Winehole23]

that's not orderly immigration, hoss

[Winehole23]

SCOTUS grants emergency equitable relief without a word explaining why

Biden couldn't alter the terms of student loans, but Trump can illegally dismantle the Department of Education



JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, with whom JUSTICE KAGAN and JUSTICE JACKSON join, dissenting.

This case arises out of the President’s unilateral efforts to eliminate a Cabinet-level agency established by Congress nearly half a century ago: the Department of Education. As Congress mandated, the Department plays a vital role in this Nation’s education system, safeguarding equal access to learning and channeling billions of dollars to schools and students across the country each year.

Only Congress has the power to abolish the Department. The Executive’s task, by contrast, is to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” U. S. Const., Art. II, §3. Yet, by executive fiat, the President ordered the Secretary of Education to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure 2 MCMAHON v. NEW YORK SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting of the Department.” Exec. Order No. 14242, 90 Fed. Reg. 13679 (2025). Consistent with that Executive Order, Secretary Linda McMahon gutted the Department’s work force, firing over 50 percent of its staff overnight. In her own words, that mass termination served as “the first step on the road to a total shutdown” of the Department. Dept. of Ed., Press Release (Mar. 11, 2025); infra, at 7.

When the Executive publicly announces its intent to break the law, and then executes on that promise, it is the Judiciary’s duty to check that lawlessness, not expedite it. Two lower courts rose to the occasion, preliminarily enjoining the mass firings while the litigation remains ongoing. Rather than maintain the status quo, however, this Court now intervenes, lifting the injunction and permitting the Government to proceed with dismantling the Department. That decision is indefensible. It hands the Executive the power to repeal statutes by firing all those necessary to carry them out. The majority is either willfully blind to the implications of its ruling or naive, but either way the threat to our Constitution’s separation of powers is grave. Unable to join in this misuse of our emergency docket, I respectfully dissent.https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a1203_pol1.pdf

[Winehole23]

The equities, too, cut against the Government. While “‘equity does not demand that its suitors shall have led blameless lives’” as to other matters, “it does require that they shall have acted fairly and without fraud or deceit as to the controversy in issue.” Precision Instrument Mfg. Co. v. Automotive Maintenance Machinery Co., 324 U. S. 806, 814–815 (1945) (citing Keystone Driller Co. v. General Excavator Co., 290 U. S. 240, 245 (1933)). The Government has continued to press a plainly pretextual explanation for the mass firings in court, even as the Executive makes inconsistent statements to the public. See supra, at 12–13, and n. 14. That the majority sees fit to repay that obfuscation with emergency equitable relief is troubling.

The relative harms to the parties are also vastly disproportionate. While the Government will, no doubt, suffer pocketbook harms from having to pay employees that it sought to fire as the litigation proceeds, see App. 169a– Cite as: 606 U. S. ____ (2025) SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 19 170a, the harm to this Nation’s education system and individual students is of a far greater magnitude. The Department is responsible for providing critical funding and services to millions of students and scores of schools across the country. Lifting the District Court’s injunction will unleash untold harm, delaying or denying educational opportunities and leaving students to suffer from discrimination, sexual assault, and other civil rights violations without the federal resources Congress intended. The majority apparently deems it more important to free the Government from paying employees it had no right to fire than to avert these very real harms while the litigation continues. Equity does not support such an inequitable result.

* * * The President must take care that the laws are faithfully executed, not set out to dismantle them. That basic rule undergirds our Constitution’s separation of powers. Yet today, the majority rewards clear defiance of that core principle with emergency relief. Because I cannot condone such abuse of our equitable authority, I respectfully dissent.

[Winehole23]

will probably fuck up financial aid for college, too



https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:ozma3timm5c32fa7bimb4zaj/bafkreibjl452mlgrnbgw3myuxopv2ppqoe5rkrv6hshqn7loj utjsxntfa@jpeg
https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:ozma3timm5c32fa7bimb4zaj/bafkreigwg5v2vqrvcjm44ke7i7jzi57o3h37c56w5344tkkm2 vu54ja4hy@jpeghttps://www.vox.com/policy/402336/department-of-education-trump-musk-doge-schools

[Winehole23]

There were a couple cases (https://bsky.app/profile/jaywillis.net/post/3ltxakhbdb227) during the first Trump administration where the Court ruled against him basically because it decided his legal argument was too embarrassing. The rise of the shadow docket has changed all that. When the conservatives don’t have to show their work, we get results like this.

[Winehole23]

Can POTUS unilaterally dismantle a US agency authorized by statute and funded in the normal legislative course by the US Congress, by illegally firing its personnel?

Neither argument, nor any explanation for lower courts appear in the ruling. No acknowledgment at all that two courts thought Trump was likely exceeding the power of his office.

Just a single word for the majority: granted

[Spurs Homer]

There is zero difference between red hatted nazi’s spewing garbage maga conspiracies like pizzagate…

and

the 6 red hatted nazi’s that were installed by the heritage kunts to destroy our democracy from within…

[Winehole23]

I mean, fine if SCOTUS wants to help Trump burn everything to the ground

Just don't expect any respect

[Winehole23]

Since April 4 (https://bsky.app/profile/stevevladeck.bsky.social/post/3ltx5bf74hs2q), #SCOTUS has issued 15 rulings on 17 emergency applications filed by Trump (three birthright citizenship apps were consolidated).

It has granted relief to Trump ... in all 15 rulings.

It has written majority opinions in only 3.

Today's order is the 7th with no explanation *at all.*

[SnakeBoy]

https://i.imgflip.com/8hg3dv.jpg

[Winehole23]

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:twasya42lpacrrncfhcrbjyv/bafkreifvy5gvwbo7nscp2unmj2oyhiacofx4boppeo74t7gm2 drlsz5rfm@jpeg

[Winehole23]

It was Roberts, two short years ago, who held (https://www.lawdork.com/p/6-3-supreme-court-means-what-it-means) that then-president Joe Biden’s administration overstepped when his education secretary interpreted the “waive or modify“ language in the HEROES Act to include forgiving student loans.


That, Roberts wrote (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-506_nmip.pdf) for the court’s 6-3 majority, was not allowed. Here was Roberts on June 30, 2023:

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!fHYZ!,w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_pro gressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fd97aecb f-c61f-4842-bfbd-899a404bc783_1124x362.png
(https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!fHYZ!,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fd97aecb f-c61f-4842-bfbd-899a404bc783_1124x362.png)
Two years and two weeks after that ruling over the word “waive,” the Roberts court gave the Trump administration the go-ahead — on the shadow docket and with no reasoning — to “effectively dismantle” the Education Department, all of the laws to the contrary be damned.
https://www.lawdork.com/p/scotus-allows-education-dept-dismantling

[BadMotorscooter]

Wine with the dumbshit takes as usual...no wonder you dumbfucks are willing to double down on Harris in 2028...

[Winehole23]

BadMotorscooter with no take on anything

[Winehole23]

the fact that the supreme court is allowing the dismantling of the US government on the shadow docket should tell you something about their commitment to the rule of law

[Winehole23]

why shadow docket an d so many unsigned opinions?

it's calvinball


it also needs to be explained *why* they do this, which is a desire to avoid setting any kind of precedent that could be claimed by a future administration who does not share their ideological views

[Winehole23]

overturning precedent de facto via shadow docket, again


By a 6-3 vote, SCOTUS lets Trump fire the Dem members of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, who are protected against removal by statute.

Dissenting, Kagan says the majority is undertaking a “permanent transfer of authority” from Congress to the president.


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreidpn47erz2u5t7b7ngnems6qrlngj7dc4jy34mytbt6r [email protected]/opinions/24p...

[Winehole23]

Justice Kavanaugh would have granted certiorari before judgment -- he seems to think the better practice in a case like this is to resolve the status of the precedent before ruling, but of course he went along with the majority anyway

At least something got written down this time


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:36eqtmzysqf7wsslczw4uxcd/bafkreibijwvs6id7xezklnte23awfoi74hmmfkvm5yhkhlvod nfsgpnqfm@jpeg

[Winehole23]

like everyone at the time pointed out, the most likely result of SCOTUS's presidential immunity ruling was to grease the skids for bad faith actions and illegality committed by the executive branch

SCOTUS has handed the keys to dictatorship over to Donald Trump


“A rule for the ages.” This is what Justice Neil Gorsuch claimed the Supreme Court was deciding (https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/supreme-court-immunity-ruling-jim-crow-rcna160145) when it heard oral arguments on President Donald Trump's claim of “absolute immunity” (https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/supreme-court-trump-ruling-immunity-election-interference-delay-rcna155440) in April 2024. Two months later, the court did indeed hand down such a rule, endorsing Trump’s view that a former president cannot be criminally indicted for “official acts” carried out during the course of his presidency.
The rationale for granting immunity was ostensibly to protect former presidents; without it, the court argued, prosecutions by current administrations of their predecessors “would quickly become routine.”

So much for that. President Trump’s latest accusations that former President Barack Obama committed “treason” in investigating Russia’s election interference in 2016 — accusations made by his own director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, and for which his attorney general has created an investigative “strike force” (https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-formation-strike-force-assess-evidence-publicized-odni) — shows that, far from deterring such prosecutions, the court’s “rule for the ages” has made them easierhttps://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/obama-trump-immunity-epstein-files-rcna220856

[Winehole23]

As it stands, there is absolutely no downside to Trump not only to go after his predecessors, but to also order his intelligence and law enforcement authorities to fabricate “evidence” to substantiate his accusations. It may be true that if Trump’s Justice Department were to try to formally indict Obama, the charges would eventually be dismissed by a court on immunity grounds. But there is a long runway from investigation to formal charges, and investigations alone can harass and intimidate subjects, including former presidents. And if Trump’s officials can make up evidence of wrongdoing, they can certainly do so regarding allegedly “unofficial” acts, which would not have any immunity at all.


The only “protection” afforded by the perverse incentives in the Supreme Court’s immunity decision is for bad-faith actors in the Oval Office — something we are seeing play out in real time.

[Winehole23]

if SCOTUS decides Sec 2 of the VRA is unconstitutional under the 14th and 15th Amendments and rules that birthright citizenship is unconstitutional, it will have overturned pretty much the entire US Reconstruction

Constitutionally speaking, this is consistent with Trump fighting the Civil War and the US War of Independence in reverse


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreifmqtpk2igs2iluwijw6t6gwasshqvuyiu6lvhfv537l 5ujj73epu@jpeg

[Winehole23]

such a radical, unamerican ideology -- to repeal the reconstruction and the US War of Independence -- in favor of Lord Protector Trump

[Winehole23]

Background: A Reagan-appointed federal judge (Judge Young) recently reinstated the NIH grants, ruling that the grant terminations were arbitrary and capricious, not supported by evidence and motived by racist and homophobic animus. Trump made an emergency SCOTUS appeal to freeze the grants while the case is under appeal.

So, for the time being, Trump's arbitrary and capricious policy stands, while his intended victims are unjustly deprived of duly appropriated funding


Supreme Court GRANTS Trump emergency appeal to freeze $783 million in NIH grants for health research

Trump has the SCOTUS majority on speed dial for equitable relief, while those manifestly injured by his illegal actions must wait for justice

Justice delayed is justice denied

SCOTUS is standing up for the rule of Trump, not the rule of law


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:bcen47iol6hccqoufvtk7wt6/bafkreidcs4oyso33jyi6wst2n6afkmdr4eiqljrrsgjnxpmfc iznfxf2bi@jpeghttps://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/25a103_kh7p.pdf

[SnakeBoy]

lol Judge Young

[Winehole23]

you're an airhead, Snake Boy

[Winehole23]

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:phwd3z2467lpso7iza2xmkwk/bafkreic2b4dsmmc7eepclw4y6bkw6llzpj7nva4fzmitb3gq6 ftf32ig2y@jpeghttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2025/aug/21/justice-john-roberts-supreme-court

[Winehole23]

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:3n55ofeg53jvxkslkg3hyayd/bafkreifwwsquwsdeanm73oij2ctrj3ifgxcicfncte65hnyqs hbd7qhvbq@jpeg

[Winehole23]

Here's what this means: it's probably unlawful for POTUS to stop NIH funds from going to medical research, but POTUS can stop that medical research for a lengthy period of time while the Court of Federal Claims hears lawsuits

This, essentially, destroys the capacity for medical research in the US

[Winehole23]

SCOTUS directed judicial purge coming?


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:3n55ofeg53jvxkslkg3hyayd/bafkreigx23sv34s2zo3w3qtx4dpkializdrkqdadm2ecew7jv vgkjji4xq@jpeg

https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/174-justice-gorsuchs-attack-on-lower

[Winehole23]

SCOTUS directed judicial purge coming?


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:3n55ofeg53jvxkslkg3hyayd/bafkreigx23sv34s2zo3w3qtx4dpkializdrkqdadm2ecew7jv vgkjji4xq@jpeg

https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/174-justice-gorsuchs-attack-on-lower

[Winehole23]

Going to be wild to have Clarence Thomas and other members of the court write that even the appearance of impropriety is sufficient to allow the President to remove Federal Reserve members from office, and then head off to Harlan Crow’s yacht

[Winehole23]

Over dissents (https://bsky.app/profile/stevevladeck.bsky.social/post/3lzh4lm4fbc2z) from Justices Sotomayor, Kagan & Jackson, #SCOTUS (https://bsky.app/hashtag/SCOTUS) grants a stay in the Slaughter case (allowing President Trump to remove the last Dem member of the FTC), *and* grants certiorari "before judgment" to decide whether to formally overrule its 1935 ruling in Humphrey's Executor.https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/25a264_o759.pdf

[Winehole23]

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:36eqtmzysqf7wsslczw4uxcd/bafkreibvrzhcd2y5oi6e3clofcpaerdqtszsmma73wvdgr45v rvj4e4ecm@jpeg
https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:36eqtmzysqf7wsslczw4uxcd/bafkreidc2rnqsllcqh5syyxirhlzzv3vpmtlr73f4atwuo7oj ejkldlhoa@jpeg

[Winehole23]

Pocket rescissions approved 6-3

Apparently no one has standing to challenge Trump stealing appropriations.

[Winehole23]

Congressional appropriations are optional

or


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:wjwt7f7tjqgopnisxrkjv777/bafkreig7aycanbh5zmfqxrlkasp4gu42ltlajzuo77xln7q7k kemebfh3m@jpeg

25A269 Department of State v. AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition (09-26-2025) (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/25a269_bp7c.pdf)

[Winehole23]

radical constitutional separation of powers shit going by the boards

[Winehole23]

Congress is letting Trump steal appropriations, SCOTUS is letting him break the law

[Winehole23]

the weird situation is that the district courts are the bulwark against a lawless Supreme Court

[Winehole23]

..with no help from Congress, which could stop it

[Winehole23]

it's no longer overstatement to say that SCOTUS is taking citizenship and racial politics in the USA back to a pre-civil war basis

[Winehole23]

Lisa Cook can keep her job as Fed Governor for now



https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreicxkqfe2y3tjaxg2fmnpc33nizrfanndvf3va26rtna4 tm2bhotgu@jpeg

[Winehole23]

The unitary executive ends where Roberts' IRA begins

[Winehole23]

but Black Dynamite, I live in the economy

[Winehole23]

revocation of humanitarian parole for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreibwzmy5r4nnmektcrgo4nxgx4ny23pmzmhrrduceh3ob i7g4gnqzi@jpeg


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreicazxextkjl3hj5xlzzzicavqofdrffgxbfqewuzqzkk cx7udmes4@jpeghttps://www.documentcloud.org/documents/26180178-25a326-order/

[Winehole23]

the tacit philosophy of the Supreme Court majority seems to be that the US Constitution can be comprehensively violated and the people contemptuously trampled, so long as Trump is doing it

[Winehole23]

Calvinball SCOTUS


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:nwnlnixtjh3qhkwpz2uy5uwv/bafkreid6kp7o2nxqfj7d6fandu74rynhoiywcvpvgrydyxkvm rtabuhety@jpeghttps://www.stevevladeck.com/p/183-the-missing-defenses-of-the-courts

[Winehole23]

the tacit philosophy of the Supreme Court majority seems to be that the US Constitution can be comprehensively violated and the people contemptuously trampled, so long as Trump is doing it

[Winehole23]

In Kennedy v. Bremerton (https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/case-files/kennedy-v-bremerton-school-district-2/), SCOTUS made up evidence


The Supreme Court is so illegitimate that cases are often about fictional matters with plaintiffs who have been harmed in no way, now to the point where they are not aware that they are plaintiffs in a Supreme Court case (https://bsky.app/profile/waldo.net/post/3m2yw5fo2dc2q).


One of them, Albert ‘Skip’ Caissie Jr., 78, said in a phone interview that he wasn’t aware that he was involved in a Supreme Court case.https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/12/us/politics/supreme-court-voting-rights.html

[Winehole23]

went on Fox to sell her memoir and crack back on critics of matters that might come before it again, like Supreme Court Justices do now


Barrett turns to Fox News, rather than the docket, to explain her silence in key rulingshttps://www.lawdork.com/p/barrett-turns-to-fox-news-not-the-docket

[Winehole23]

Would it be an exaggeration to summarize the Louisiana argument to SCOTUS today as this: It's an illusion that the South lost the Civil War. It actually won. And all the Civil War Amendments can now be read as a dead letter, as they were after the Slaughterhouse Cases.https://sherrilyn.substack.com/p/the-two-section-twos

[GAustex]

JUST IN: Liberal SCOTUS Justice Sotomayor's argument in favor of black Congressional districts was just PUMMELED in front of the entire court🔥

SOTOMAYOR: Even white Republicans or white Democrats won't vote for black candidates!

MOOPPAN: If these were white Democrats, there's no reason to think they would have a second district. NONE...their argument is because these Democrats happen to be BLACK, they get a second district! If they were all white, we all agree they wouldn't get a second district. That is *literally* the definition of race subordinating traditional principles.

[BadMotorscooter]

JUST IN: Liberal SCOTUS Justice Sotomayor's argument in favor of black Congressional districts was just PUMMELED in front of the entire court

SOTOMAYOR: Even white Republicans or white Democrats won't vote for black candidates!

MOOPPAN: If these were white Democrats, there's no reason to think they would have a second district. NONE...their argument is because these Democrats happen to be BLACK, they get a second district! If they were all white, we all agree they wouldn't get a second district. That is *literally* the definition of race subordinating traditional principles.

democrats dont like playing by the rules....its why they shame people with white skin. IF you were to get a bunch of white people together and say they were proud to be white....democrats would call you white supremists....but if you get brown and black people to do the same....they would embrace it and encourage it.....that is fact. Im glad the Suprreme Court is putting democrats on notice for their identity politics.

[Winehole23]

DEI is just wrongthink, man

thought crime

[BadMotorscooter]

DEI is just wrongthink, man

thought crime

you cant even make sense anymore.

[Winehole23]

it's a literary allusion, y'all are the thought police


The term “thoughtcrime” is used to describe a thought that’s antithetical to the Party’s teachings and beliefs.https://bookanalysis.com/1984/thoughtcrime/

[Winehole23]

To understand thoughtcrime, it’s important to understand the consequences of committing it. If one were to have illegal thoughts and those thoughts showed on their face, or they expressed them in some way, they’re going to be arrested by the Thought Police. This group is responsible for hunting down thought criminals and bringing them to the Ministry of Love. This aptly named ministry reforms and kills thought criminals.

[BadMotorscooter]

wow....what a dumbass....the thought police.....lmao.

[Winehole23]

wow....what a dumbass....the thought police.....lmao."what is illegal DEI?"

[Winehole23]

The Supreme Court’s majority right wing (http://ttps://bsky.app/profile/radleybalko.bsky.social/post/3m3baead6e22d) indicated in oral arguments that they think racism is over on the same day that the vice president defended the “I love Hitler” guy, and that the NYT reported that the current administration plans to accept only white, English-speaking refugees.

[SnakeBoy]

Projected GOP Gains from eliminating Democrat gerrymandered districts combined if VRA/Sec 2 going down at Scotus:

Probabilities:

Low Range (Limited Overturn: Weakens but doesn't fully gut Section 2; ~10-12 seats flipped via partial redraws)
+12
232 GOP vs. 203 Dem - 29 Seat GOP majority

Mid Range (Full Overturn: Enables standard racial dilution challenges; ~19 seats flipped)
+19
239 GOP vs. 196 Dem - 44 Seat GOP Majority

High Range (Aggressive Maximization: No VRA recourse + mid-decade redraws; ~27 seats flipped)
+27
247 GOP vs. 188 Dem - 59 Seat GOP Majority


If this happens there's a good chance we don't see a democrat house for a generation. And it should happen because Section 2 is racism in action.

[koriwhat]

the tacit philosophy of the Supreme Court majority seems to be that the US Constitution can be comprehensively violated and the people contemptuously trampled, so long as Trump is doing it

Cry me a river. You had 0 energy for Biden's free soeech suppression, horboring/engouraging/aiding illegals, back door deal, fake autopen authorization, and more.

You're a shill!

[Winehole23]

Projected GOP Gains from eliminating Democrat gerrymandered districts combined if VRA/Sec 2 going down at Scotus:

Probabilities:

Low Range (Limited Overturn: Weakens but doesn't fully gut Section 2; ~10-12 seats flipped via partial redraws)
+12
232 GOP vs. 203 Dem - 29 Seat GOP majority

Mid Range (Full Overturn: Enables standard racial dilution challenges; ~19 seats flipped)
+19
239 GOP vs. 196 Dem - 44 Seat GOP Majority

High Range (Aggressive Maximization: No VRA recourse + mid-decade redraws; ~27 seats flipped)
+27
247 GOP vs. 188 Dem - 59 Seat GOP Majority


If this happens there's a good chance we don't see a democrat house for a generation. And it should happen because Section 2 is racism in action.you can shit in one hand and wish in the other

and see which one fills up faster

[Millennial_Messiah]

Projected GOP Gains from eliminating Democrat gerrymandered districts combined if VRA/Sec 2 going down at Scotus:

Probabilities:

Low Range (Limited Overturn: Weakens but doesn't fully gut Section 2; ~10-12 seats flipped via partial redraws)
+12
232 GOP vs. 203 Dem - 29 Seat GOP majority

Mid Range (Full Overturn: Enables standard racial dilution challenges; ~19 seats flipped)
+19
239 GOP vs. 196 Dem - 44 Seat GOP Majority

High Range (Aggressive Maximization: No VRA recourse + mid-decade redraws; ~27 seats flipped)
+27
247 GOP vs. 188 Dem - 59 Seat GOP Majority


If this happens there's a good chance we don't see a democrat house for a generation. And it should happen because Section 2 is racism in action.

I'm not super bullish on those scenarios because of geography hurts the GOP in some instances, and I can see Thompson/Bishop/Clyburn's districts staying, but Alabama is definitely drawing a 7-0 map because they easily can draw a clean-looking 7-0 map and that state legislature is pissed off with those low-rent judges from 2023 and out for blood and revenge and rightfully so. :lol Louisiana will go back to the one-blue-seat map centered around NOLA, Memphis won't be touched, DeSantis has already said he's gerrymandering Florida if California Prop 50 passes, Kansas won't redraw because the courts there are blue (inverse of Maryland), Indiana will draw out Mrvan, Ohio will draw out Kaptur and Sykes, and now we're hearing NC is trying to draw out Don Davis.

[Winehole23]

In a nutshell, SCOTUS is letting Trump coerce and extort the whole country illegally, while trampling the constitution and the people.

[Winehole23]

While wrecking public capacity and purging government along partisan and racial lines

[Winehole23]

too early to call, but it didn't sound very good for Trump's IEEPA tariffs in oral arguments today



https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreia7p2wpsecbqew4uytg767imxp3kc4nemiiubd5lrral ufuqpjpky@jpeghttps://slate.com/news-and-politics/2025/11/supreme-courts-tariffs-trump-fail-kavanaugh.html

[Winehole23]

transcript

https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/24-1287_097c.pdf

[Winehole23]

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:sqrfvc3whmkz5btcmapky63d/bafkreidtu5isc6svpsu7e7sn3dsl53wsnl5pxvnzom3ap5wrh uns2xdxme@jpeg

[Winehole23]

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:ssxnmhdtz6le6nxu7jfhglz6/bafkreicgzcbjuniecraw4vg4jdwlm43ejuscriiahdsodw2ri lyf37ety4@jpeg

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:b2zlnxrfackjw5h3lbemyqg5/bafkreicz3xtnt4m4kbjba6wsj33pz7bpvarooqmoizfy6akmc 6u2ucnfge@jpeg

[Winehole23]

I was impelled to write yet another post (the fourth of this week) in response to the Supreme Court’s Thursday afternoon ruling in (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25a319_i4dj.pdf)Trump (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25a319_i4dj.pdf)v. (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25a319_i4dj.pdf)Orr (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25a319_i4dj.pdf), in which the justices, over a dissent from the three Democratic appointees, put back into effect a Trump administration policy that requires all new passports to reflect the bearer’s biological sex at birth—even if they are transgender or non-binary.


Specifically, as I elaborate upon below, the ruling provides an unusually accessible example of two of the problematic moves a majority of the justices keep making with respect to Trump-related emergency applications (and no others (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5661011)): The assertion without any deep analytical support that the lower-court ruling at issue is inflicting “irreparable harm” on the executive branch; and the refusal to seriously consider whether that harm is more-than-outweighed by the harm it would cause to put the blocked policy back into effect. The ruling also includes one of the uglier sentences I’ve seen a majority of the Supreme Court sign onto in quite some time. Thus, beyond being the 24th consecutive grant of emergency relief to the Trump administration, the cryptic ruling in Orr is a reminder of just how bankrupt the Court’s proffered justifications are in these cases—both legally and in other ways, too.
https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/189-the-breezy-inequity-of-trump