Jump to content

The Supremes

tx 3 putt

By tx 3 putt
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

wildcat09

wildcat09 29,344

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

I'm not a lawyer but curious about input from our surly legal team regarding the 6-3 decision on eviction moratorium ruling last night?

It wasn't as grossly offensive to the rule of law as their decision a couple of nights ago requiring the administration to reinstate the remain in Mexico policy, but it was pretty bad. There's a decent argument to be made that Congress didn't give the CDC director the power to issue a nationwide eviction moratorium, though the last Congress did implicitly endorse the CDC director's power to do so when it extended the original CDC moratorium in December 2020. The bigger problem is explained well in this article:

Quote

It also fell on Breyer to point out that his conservative colleagues were, once again, abusing the shadow docket—those emergency orders issued without full briefing or oral argument. SCOTUS cannot intervene at this early stage in litigation unless it is “demonstrably” clear that the lower court misapplied “accepted standards.” This standard should limit premature intervention to the rarest, most extreme open-and-shut cases. But the federal appeals courts split on the legality of the moratorium, illustrating the reasonable judges could disagree on the question. Almost by definition, a legal dispute that divided the lower courts cannot have a “demonstrably” right and wrong answer. Nonetheless, the conservative justices broke the court’s own rules once again to rush out a decision well before they had any license to.

Since the GOP stole a Supreme Court seat, the number of cases in which the Court has flagrantly violated its own rules to issue emergency relief in inappropriate circumstances, but circumstances in which the relief is consistent with the majority's own partisan political views, has skyrocketed. This wasn't quite as bad as most, since it was the rare shadow docket case in which the majority bothered to even explain themselves at all. But it was still a gross abuse of power for political purposes.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 12.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Brisketexan
Brisketexan

Some people and posts above see this for the incredibly dangerous thing it is.  See the whole forest, not just the tree.  Roe is built on the bedrock of the 14th amendment and the inherent right to pr

Ghost of LL
Ghost of LL

The whole episode is pretty bad for the Court.  The leak is embarrassing.  But the decision is catastrophic. You've got a 5-4 decision to get rid of a something that has been settled as a constit

sidis
sidis

in one of the many instances in which i debunked your oversimplified, unsupported bullshit and you simply never responded, i addressed your absolutist contention that religious are more charitable tha

Posted Images

babysdaddy

babysdaddy 2,719

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

It wasn't as grossly offensive to the rule of law as their decision a couple of nights ago requiring the administration to reinstate the remain in Mexico policy, but it was pretty bad. There's a decent argument to be made that Congress didn't give the CDC director the power to issue a nationwide eviction moratorium, though the last Congress did implicitly endorse the CDC director's power to do so when it extended the original CDC moratorium in December 2020. The bigger problem is explained well in this article:

Since the GOP stole a Supreme Court seat, the number of cases in which the Court has flagrantly violated its own rules to issue emergency relief in inappropriate circumstances, but circumstances in which the relief is consistent with the majority's own partisan political views, has skyrocketed. This wasn't quite as bad as most, since it was the rare shadow docket case in which the majority bothered to even explain themselves at all. But it was still a gross abuse of power for political purposes.

thanks for responding.  I was under the impression Biden readily admitted the extension was probably against the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys

OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys 2,061

Posted
Posted

just saw this on reddit.  this is the least capable united government in our history, i would imagine.  these stupid articles that come out threatening this sort of thing -- oh you've done it now! i'm going to get 100 supreme court justices just like RBG! -- are absolutely laughable.  we can't pass shit.  you think we're going to do something this drastic?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31,438

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 8/27/2021 at 4:07 PM, babysdaddy said:

thanks for responding.  I was under the impression Biden readily admitted the extension was probably against the law.

There are two issues here.  One is the ultimate "legality" or power of the CDC to impose an eviction moratorium, or any other question "on the merits."

What's going on here that's infuriating is that various lower courts are enjoining (halting) various laws and staying orders enjoining (starting back up) various laws on a temporary basis, before the ultimate legality is decided.  By strategically staying or refusing to stay various lower court orders, the conservative majority can effectively change the law without actually ruling on it on the merits, or even issuing an opinion explaining the reasoning.

I don't know how inconsistent they are being with their own precedent, but they are definitely pulling their punches along partisan lines with the "shadow docket" of these stay orders.  The nationwide injunction thing is some rank hypocrisy, though.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
elfenix

elfenix 34,223

Posted
Posted

Stay issued in execution of Texas man, not because the potential for additional due process (not granted) or because of the potential for additional pain due to covid interaction (denied), but because the condemned wants his priest to lay hands on him at the moment of death (granted).

This court is really transparent in what it thinks are important rights and what it doesn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29,344

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, elfenix said:

Stay issued in execution of Texas man, not because the potential for additional due process (not granted) or because of the potential for additional pain due to covid interaction (denied), but because the condemned wants his priest to lay hands on him at the moment of death (granted).

This court is really transparent in what it thinks are important rights and what it doesn't.

Except for when another death row inmate who happened to be Muslim requested the same fucking thing two years ago.

For the conservatives on SCOTUS, the law is whatever most white, conservative Christians want it to be at any moment in time.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Macanudo

Macanudo 12,975

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, elfenix said:

Stay issued in execution of Texas man, not because the potential for additional due process (not granted) or because of the potential for additional pain due to covid interaction (denied), but because the condemned wants his priest to lay hands on him at the moment of death (granted).

This court is really transparent in what it thinks are important rights and what it doesn't.

It will be fun to see what happens when a Satanist wants his priest in the room next.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
Incredulity

Incredulity 11,650

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

this court is surrounded by bad energy. i disagree with alito, they are fixing to become a very very dangerous cabal. im curious how far and how deep they're going to go. 

 

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/01/politics/supreme-court-unhappy-justices/index.html

interdasting.

 

We just got condescended to that CNN is total hyperbole...so now serious?

 

someone better phone the borg.

 

 

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6,925

Posted
Posted

They’ll have to weigh in eventually:

AUSTIN – A federal judge late Wednesday temporarily blocked enforcement of a Texas abortion law that effectively bans the procedure, delivering an early victory to the Biden administration in its legal challenge to the law. 

In a 113-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Robert Pitman of Austin said the law is an "offensive deprivation of such an important right" and said state actors, including judges and court clerks, can no longer enforce its provisions.

"From the moment (the law) went into effect, women have been unlawfully prevented from exercising control over their lives in ways that are protected by the Constitution," Pitman wrote.

Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed the legislation, known as the "fetal heartbeat" bill, into law in May — forcing the issue of reproductive rights back into the political spotlight. The law bans abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected, usually around six weeks of pregnancy and before many people realize they are pregnant. There are no exemptions in cases of rape or incest.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/10/06/federal-judge-blocks-texas-restrictive-abortion-law/6030311001/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gap03

Gap03 3,303

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, elfenix said:

Salon: Justice Alito complains, but the evidence is clear: This Supreme Court was built by dark money.

https://www.salon.com/2021/10/14/justice-alito-complains-but-the-evidence-is-clear-this-was-built-by-dark-money/

Sheldon Whitehouse bringin' the heat - wish this sort of thing would get more play.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29,344

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Gap03 said:

Sheldon Whitehouse bringin' the heat - wish this sort of thing would get more play.  

For all the talk of the evil biased liberal media, it's telling that a fucking Senator can only get this published in Salon. Why isn't he booked on all the Sunday morning news shows to talk about this? Because Chuck Todd and his peers keep giving Republican operatives huge audiences to broadcast their election lies to. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
Neonmoon

Neonmoon 38,129

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, NWBuck said:

I'm not a constitutional rocket surgeon, but isn't the third word of the 2nd Amendment "regulated"?

Regulations are always bad, always. Our rights should never be restricted. (Except, obviously, as it pertains to voting, abortion, learning about racism, books, local governance)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
wildcat09

wildcat09 29,344

Posted
Posted

The really cool part is how public education collapses trying to determine how to comply with numerous nonsensical, ambiguous, and frequently contradictory SCOTUS opinions that aren't concerned with anything but giving taxpayer dollars to Christian schools. 

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chad Fuck

Chad Fuck 17,659

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

The really cool part is how public education collapses trying to determine how to comply with numerous nonsensical, ambiguous, and frequently contradictory SCOTUS opinions that aren't concerned with anything but giving taxpayer dollars to Christian schools. 

Yup.  They never wanted the public educated anyhow.  

This SCOTUS gives two shits about precedent.  They've go their agenda and they're rolling with it, law be damned.  When you have to get up in front of your home team and proclaim, "we aren't political shills!"...Honey, you're political shills.  

We had a nice two hundred year run of separation of church and state.  Guess we'll just have to see how being a religious autocracy works out.  

  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BHMCruiser

BHMCruiser 1,813

Posted
Posted
On 10/14/2021 at 12:27 PM, wildcat09 said:

For all the talk of the evil biased liberal media, it's telling that a fucking Senator can only get this published in Salon. Why isn't he booked on all the Sunday morning news shows to talk about this? Because Chuck Todd and his peers keep giving Republican operatives huge audiences to broadcast their election lies to. 

Because he's a lying idiot and everybody knows it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29,344

Posted
Posted

Jesus, after oral arguments I was a tiny bit hopeful they'd enjoin state judges and/or clerks. This really is essentially the worst case scenario:

 

Any questions about whether ACB and Kavanaugh are willing to risk the Court's reputation and integrity have been answered. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...