The Supremes

[Brisketexan 103,660]

3 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Republicans:

The simple truth is that because their desired system is so completely incompatible with a system of modern "liberal democracy" that both allows for individual voter power and preservation of the common good, they have to destroy that system in order to replace it with their authoritarian oligarchy.

If you want to see what the GQP vision is for the US, just look at Putin's Russia.  That's the inevitable result of their desired system.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12,301]

4 hours ago, David Dennison said:

 

 

Our system of government is under extreme duress.

this can not be overstated.

[Pods 7,499]

5 minutes ago, Hookah Horns said:

That's correct, BLM makes BLM regulations like the one that extends state and local law to their lands despite the property clause.

I understand and we're on the same page on that part. The BLM administratively agreed to enforce state laws on BLM land, because there hasn't really been a reason not to. Some of the other federal agencies also did so.  

Where we disagree is where you said state law controls on BLM property. It doesn't. Federal law "controls", state law is also allowed to be enforced. That's an important distinction. 

I'm also saying as someone that has directly dealt with the BLM in multiple states, that this is done as a courtesy and has little practical effect. The state has zero role in our permitting process. They are federal permits agreeing to follow federal laws on federal land. The specimens are all curated in federally regulated repositories. The federal government laws "control". The state has nothing to do with it and has no say in the process. 

The extended courtesy means if one of the crew broke a state law, the state could also charge them, but the feds are very much in charge of who does what and when on their land. 

Further, this courtesy of also extending state laws to BLM lands could be modified, or rescinded with a meeting, or executive order from Biden. 

[Goofyboy 3,013]

Was this posted?? We have a QAnon moron for a Justice:

“They object on religious grounds to all available COVID–19 vaccines because they were developed using cell lines derived from aborted children,” Justice Clarence Thomas said of the petitioners. | Drew Angerer/Getty Images

From here:

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/30/clarence-thomas-claims-covid-vaccines-are-derived-from-the-cells-of-aborted-children-00043483

[Guest]

2 hours ago, TexEx15 said:

About that…

 

Good god. Just looked at NC. Went to Trump at 49.9/48.6. Has a Dem governor that won 51.5/47.0. It's the definition of a "purple" state.

The state's House of Reps? It's 57.5% Republican to 42.5% Democrat. The state Senate is 56% Republican and 44% Democrat.

How on Earth can that even happen? Thing is, the map I saw doesn't look that gerrymandered at first glance compared to Texas. 

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

23 minutes ago, Pods said:

I understand and we're on the same page on that part. The BLM administratively agreed to enforce state laws on BLM land, because there hasn't really been a reason not to. Some of the other federal agencies also did so.  

Where we disagree is where you said state law controls on BLM property. It doesn't. Federal law "controls", state law is also allowed to be enforced. That's an important distinction. 

I'm also saying as someone that has directly dealt with the BLM in multiple states, that this is done as a courtesy and has little practical effect. The state has zero role in our permitting process. They are federal permits agreeing to follow federal laws on federal land. The specimens are all curated in federally regulated repositories. The federal government laws "control". The state has nothing to do with it and has no say in the process. 

The extended courtesy means if one of the crew broke a state law, the state could also charge them, but the feds are very much in charge of who does what and when on their land. 

Further, this courtesy of also extending state laws to BLM lands could be modified, or rescinded with a meeting, or executive order from Biden. 

The larger issue would be that physicians are licensed by the state.

[Neonmoon 38,126]

10 minutes ago, Goofyboy said:

Was this posted?? We have a QAnon moron for a Justice:

“They object on religious grounds to all available COVID–19 vaccines because they were developed using cell lines derived from aborted children,” Justice Clarence Thomas said of the petitioners. | Drew Angerer/Getty Images

From here:

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/30/clarence-thomas-claims-covid-vaccines-are-derived-from-the-cells-of-aborted-children-00043483

The dumbest people 

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

15 minutes ago, Goofyboy said:

Was this posted?? We have a QAnon moron for a Justice:

“They object on religious grounds to all available COVID–19 vaccines because they were developed using cell lines derived from aborted children,” Justice Clarence Thomas said of the petitioners. | Drew Angerer/Getty Images

From here:

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/30/clarence-thomas-claims-covid-vaccines-are-derived-from-the-cells-of-aborted-children-00043483

I am pretty sure that is him citing petitioner's reasoning.  Not him adopting it.  

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

Good god. Just looked at NC. Went to Trump at 49.9/48.6. Has a Dem governor that won 51.5/47.0. It's the definition of a "purple" state.

The state's House of Reps? It's 57.5% Republican to 42.5% Democrat. The state Senate is 56% Republican and 44% Democrat.

How on Earth can that even happen? Thing is, the map I saw doesn't look that gerrymandered at first glance compared to Texas. 

Geesh. Georgia is even worse. State went to Biden, Went for a Republican Governor by 1.5 points... and the state Senate is 60/40 Republican. That's criminal man.

[4th&Five 41,246]

 

[Mdhorn 5,838]

1 minute ago, 4th&Five said:

 

But no asian carp so win.  

[Pods 7,499]

19 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

 

The Cuyahoga River has caught on fire 13 times, going back to 1868.

Quote

The Cuyahoga River was once one of the most polluted rivers in the United States as represented by the multitude of times it has caught fire, a recorded number of thirteen starting in 1868.  The most potent blaze occurred in 1952 which caused over $1.3 million in damages however, the most fatal fire happened in 1912 with a documented five deaths.  The 1969 fire, which did not incur maximum damages or fatally wound any citizen, was the most covered incident occuring on the river.  This was in part because of the developing precedence that sanitation held over industrial actions; the United States was becoming more eco-aware.  Also, due to the shift from industry to technology, waste dumping to recycling Time Magazine produced an article about the incident.  This brought mass amount of attention to the Cleveland area and added pressure for hygienic regulation.

Supreme Court 2022 - Rivers catching on fire are protected, because they are deeply rooted in this nation's history and traditions. 

Edited June 30, 2022 by Pods

[Hookah Horns 2,923]

57 minutes ago, Pods said:

 

Where we disagree is where you said state law controls on BLM property. It doesn't. Federal law "controls", state law is also allowed to be enforced. That's an important distinction. 

 

This is an impressive level of pedantry, sir. You're right, I should have used a word other than controls. I wouldn't call it a disagreement, though; I was clear that the BLM chose to create the regulation despite the property clause and they can just as easily repeal it. The end.

[elfenix 34,136]

38 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

 

[Pods 7,499]

2 hours ago, Hookah Horns said:

State law controls on BLM property 

That is where we disagree. This is a definitive statement and it is definitely wrong. State law does not "control" on federal land, federal laws do. State laws also apply due to a regulatory decision, but full control of nearly all federal areas is retained by the feds. The regulations, rules, permits etc are all done by the feds. In our case, I doubt the state even knew we were there. 

Your post is clearly implying that the Feds could not build abortion facilities on BLM land, because those lands are somehow controlled by state laws. This is 100% false and even if that were true and those state laws conflicted with federal laws, the federal laws have priority due to the Supremacy clause. 

 

[Hank Scorpio 17,691]

 

[Biff Tannen 45,232]

2 hours ago, elfenix said:

Such a metal logo.

[TwiceHorn 30,851]

Fuckers also denied cert in American Axle, refusing to untuck the mess they made of US patent law.

[Carl Spackler 3,458]

2 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

I am pretty sure that is him citing petitioner's reasoning.  Not him adopting it.  

I'm no fan of Clarence Thomas, but that was my initial thought as well, though he certainly was less than adroit in how he phrased it.  

And it wouldn't shock me at all if Thomas does, in fact, agree with that nutty theory.

 

[Goofyboy 3,013]

I'm no fan of Clarence Thomas, but that was my initial thought as well, though he certainly was less than adroit in how he phrased it.  
And it wouldn't shock me at all if Thomas does, in fact, agree with that nutty theory.
 

I believe you are correct. I tried to go edit, but option is gone.

[Mrs Whiggins 13,049]

2 hours ago, 4th&Five said:

 

Los Angeles 1975:

[Carl Spackler 3,458]

1 minute ago, Goofyboy said:

I believe you are correct. I tried to go edit, but option is gone.

I don't think you need to edit anything.  You quoted the article that, in turn, quoted a portion of Thomas' dissent containing the passage in question.  Given the way Thomas phrased that sentence, someone might reasonably interpret it as setting forth his own views rather than describing the petitioners' assertions in that case.  If anyone needed to edit anything, it was Thomas. 

[Mrs Whiggins 13,049]

Dallas smog:

 

[washparkhorn 9,921]

https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/democracy/the-lewis-powell-memo-a-corporate-blueprint-to-dominate-democracy/
 

Edited July 1, 2022 by washparkhorn
Link to the Powell Memo

[Beantown Express 2.0 6,529]

2 hours ago, 4th&Five said:

 

“It’s about time the Supreme Court started taking down that commie liberal organization known as the EPA.  As you know it was created by that libtard, socialist, (checks notes)….Richard Nixon.  Well, he was a RINO and was a Democrat plant apparently who just wanted to hurt those good wholesome oil and coal companies” - every current dumb ass Republican today

[chainsaw 9,668]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Fuckers also denied cert in American Axle, refusing to untuck the mess they made of US patent law.

What is that about

[TwiceHorn 30,851]

10 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

What is that about

If you really want to know, Section 101 of the Patent Act defines what subject matter is eligible for patent protection.  For more than 200 years, it and its analogs basically forbade things that were physically impossible, or so abstract that they could not be reduced to a physical object or method steps, and occasionally discovered laws of nature.  So it was only used against crackpot inventors by the Patent Office to deny them patents on perpetual motion machines and weird-ass ideas.  Completely non-controversial.

Starting about 10 years ago, in response to the made up software patent/troll crisis, the Court took it upon itself to make Section 101 a weapon against software and business method patents, allowing wholesale infringers like Google and Apple to knock off patent owners early in a litigation.

But the courts have lost control of the doctrine almost entirely, it's a meaningless gobbledygook that seriously undermines the patent system with unpredictability, both in the getting of patents at the PTO, and the suing over them in the courts.  It's so bad that even the advocates for it in the first place, big tech, and everyone else are begging the courts for clarity and resolution.  The lower courts have basically thrown up their hands and said "our hands are tied by the Supreme Court."  

American Axle was a case over a patent on automotive drive shafts and optimizing them for vibration.  It presented a fairly golden opportunity for the court to clarify the law.

 

Edited July 1, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[chainsaw 9,668]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

If you really want to know, Section 101 of the Patent Act defines what subject matter is eligible for patent protection.  For more than 200 years, it basically forbade things that were physically impossible, or so abstract that they could not be reduced to a physical object or method steps, and occasionally discovered laws of nature.  So it was only used against crackpot inventors by the Patent Office to deny them patents on perpetual motion machines and weird-ass ideas.

Starting about 10 years ago, in response to the made up software patent/troll crisis, the Court took it upon itself to make Section 101 a weapon against software and business method patents, allowing wholesale infringers like Google and Apple to knock off patent owners early in a litigation.

But the courts have lost control of the doctrine almost entirely, it's a meaningless gobbledygook that seriously undermines the patent system with unpredictability, both in the getting of patents at the PTO, and the suing over them in the courts.  It's so bad that even the advocates for it in the first place, big tech, and everyone else are begging the courts for clarity and resolution.  The lower courts have basically thrown up their hands and said "our hands are tied by the Supreme Court."  

 

Maybe they are waiting for a case with sexier facts.

[TwiceHorn 30,851]

1 minute ago, chainsaw said:

Maybe they are waiting for a case with sexier facts.

Patent facts are never sexy.  In fact, one of the things that made this such a golden opportunity is that the technology was so concrete and not abstract or difficult to understand.

[chainsaw 9,668]

7 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Patent facts are never sexy.  In fact, one of the things that made this such a golden opportunity is that the technology was so concrete and not abstract or difficult to understand.

I guess they were too busy trying to revive slavery.

[gmr548 16,316]

4 hours ago, 4th&Five said:

 

Make America Gross Again!

[troph 24,028]

8 hours ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

 

***steps on soapbox***

Look, i know shit is fucked right now. There are really smart people here, but pushing bad narratives and opinions furthers nothing. We have to show restraint and wait for facts, like statements from the actual person we're looking to for answers. 

***steps off soapbox***

 

Does he, they, we not realize the first moment the republicans need the kill the filibuster it’s gone? Geezus. Voting rights, reproductive rights, climate change, all subordinate to a procedural rule that will be blown out of the water as soon as McConnell decides it’s expedient to do so. Checkers vs demonic chess fellas and chicas - we are out matched and have been for decades. 

[WhatTheBuck 28,620]

3 hours ago, Pods said:

The Cuyahoga River has caught on fire 13 times, going back to 1868.

Supreme Court 2022 - Rivers catching on fire are protected, because they are deeply rooted in this nation's history and traditions. 

This is a pretty decent beer.

[troph 24,028]

10 hours ago, Js1 said:

Oh boy!

 

 

9 hours ago, David Dennison said:

 

 

11 hours ago, Jive Turkey said:

 

 

10 hours ago, David Dennison said:

Oh, good.

 

I know it’s been coming, but I really can’t believe it. It’s here and it’s scarier than I thought it would be. 
 

meanwhile dems won’t do shit. It’s time to push the red button first, nuke the filibuster get on the podium explain the history and pack the fucking court. The court is the ace card without it and with justices ignoring the rule of law and precedent it’s time to PRESS THE RED BUTTON NOW!!!

[South Austin 51,681]

8 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

This is a pretty decent beer.

Does it have cinnamon in it?

Edited July 1, 2022 by South Austin

[WhatTheBuck 28,620]

1 minute ago, South Austin said:

Does it have cinnamon in it?

HA! Hilarious! Did it take you the whole 8 hours to come up with that witty retort?

No, it doesn’t, but it kicks Shiner’s ass. 

[South Austin 51,681]

2 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

HA! Hilarious! Did it take you the whole 8 hours to come up with that witty retort?

No, it doesn’t, but it kicks Shiner’s ass. 

It’s Friday, but somebody still has a case of the Mondays.

[Guest]

10 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/democracy/the-lewis-powell-memo-a-corporate-blueprint-to-dominate-democracy/
 

aggy coach?  

[Mrs Whiggins 13,049]

It is so comforting to know that after the last two years of plunging the already struggling healthcare system in America into an exhaustive nightmare that SCOTUS can wave away the invisible fog of chemicals that Texas children breathe. And then some time in their lifespan when the leukemia appears, no culprit can be found for it is not as evident as the eensy fibers of asbestos and their scarring trail. But hey, it's just air right?

[immamac 41,753]

3 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

It is so comforting to know that after the last two years of plunging the already struggling healthcare system in America into an exhaustive nightmare that SCOTUS can wave away the invisible fog of chemicals that Texas children breathe. And then some time in their lifespan when the leukemia appears, no culprit can be found for it is not as evident as the eensy fibers of asbestos and their scarring trail. But hey, it's just air right?

I'm very much starting to believe the next generation may be the last. 

[Mrs Whiggins 13,049]

3 minutes ago, immamac said:

I'm very much starting to believe the next generation may be the last. 

 P.D. James, and Margaret Atwood---two women who were/are holding up mirrors to society but sadly, we cover our eyes.

The late biologist Rachel Carson had an impact through her works but her influence has been weakened by a long and protracted erosion. As much as she energized a generation into activism for our planet and its inhabitants, the immediacy of greed began its assault.

[Js1 83,695]

26 minutes ago, immamac said:

I'm very much starting to believe the next generation may be the last. 

To live on this planet before 

And then we’ll just find a new planet to export our amazing capitalist society on. And if there’s another species, we’ll just enslave them! 

[Mrs Whiggins 13,049]

[SKJ 1,298]

On 6/24/2022 at 10:11 AM, Johnny Sack said:

Alito dunking on the dissent with stone cold facts:

The dissent is very candid that it cannot show that a constitutional right to abortion has any foundation, let alone a “‘deeply rooted’” one, “‘in this Nation’s history and tradition.’” Glucksberg, 521 U. S., at 721; see post, at 12–14 (joint opinion of BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ.). The dissent does not identify any pre-Roe authority that supports such a right—no state constitutional provision or statute, no federal or state judicial precedent, not even a scholarly treatise. Compare post, at 12–14, n. 2, with supra, at 15–16, and n. 23. Nor does the dissent dispute the fact that abortion was illegal at common law at least after quickening; that the 19th century saw a trend toward criminalization of pre-quickening abortions; that by 1868, a supermajority of States (at least 26 of 37) had enacted statutes criminalizing abortion at all stages of pregnancy; that by the late 1950s at least 46 States prohibited abortion “however and whenever performed” except if necessary to save “the life of the mother,” Roe, 410 U. S., at 139; and that when Roe was decided in 1973 similar statutes were still in effect in 30 States. Compare post, at 12–14, nn. 2–3, with supra, at 23–25, and nn. 33–34.47

The dissent’s failure to engage with this long tradition is devastating to its position. We have held that the “established method of substantive-due-process analysis” requires that an unenumerated right be “‘deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition’” before it can be recognized as a component of the “liberty” protected in the Due
Process Clause. Glucksberg, 521 U. S., at 721; cf. Timbs, 586 U. S., at ___ (slip op., at 7). But despite the dissent’s professed fidelity to stare decisis, it fails to seriously engage
with that important precedent—which it cannot possibly satisfy The dissent attempts to obscure this failure by misrepresenting our application of Glucksberg. The dissent suggests that we have focused only on “the legal status of abortion in the 19th century,” post, at 26, but our review of this Nation’s tradition extends well past that period. As explained, for more than a century after 1868—including “another half-century” after women gained the constitutional right to vote in 1920, see post, at 15; Amdt. 19—it was firmly established that laws prohibiting abortion like the Texas law at issue in Roe were permissible exercises of state regulatory authority. And today, another half century later, more than half of the States have asked us to overrule Roe and Casey. The dissent cannot establish that a right to abortion has ever been part of this Nation’s tradition. 

It's hilarious that we allow them to come up with new tests for whichever way they want to go politically. 

The truth is that it's all political. 

The history of the anti abortion movement was born out of racism. This is a good read: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/08/abortion-us-religious-right-racial-segregation

[Captainant 26,927]

32 minutes ago, immamac said:

I'm very much starting to believe the next generation may be the last. 

It's interesting how both the Expanse and Star Trek (and pop culture generally) all predicted a major social upheaval in the 21st century. In The Expanse it was the icecaps melting and flooding the planet, until they could adapt. In Star Trek, it was a global nuclear war and fascism.

We're lucky enough to get all of the above!

[hobbes2702 12,536]

11 hours ago, troph said:

Does he, they, we not realize the first moment the republicans need the kill the filibuster it’s gone? Geezus. Voting rights, reproductive rights, climate change, all subordinate to a procedural rule that will be blown out of the water as soon as McConnell decides it’s expedient to do so. Checkers vs demonic chess fellas and chicas - we are out matched and have been for decades. 

If pubs take control of the Senate the filibuster will be gone. And that’s really all it will take to seize control forever

[formermav43 4,599]

19 minutes ago, Captainant said:

It's interesting how both the Expanse and Star Trek (and pop culture generally) all predicted a major social upheaval in the 21st century. In The Expanse it was the icecaps melting and flooding the planet, until they could adapt. In Star Trek, it was a global nuclear war and fascism.

We're lucky enough to get all of the above!

At least we missed the Eugenics Wars of the 1990s.

[Captainant 26,927]

2 minutes ago, formermav43 said:

At least we missed the Eugenics Wars of the 1990s.

DS9 pretty well nailed 2024 lol

 

[troph 24,028]

Took less than a week for a court to use the Dobbs rational for other culture war issues - Alabama Supreme Court cited Dobbs as the reason why the State can deny gender affirming care - because such care isn’t deeply rooted in our nations history.  

(the court also lied and said there wasn’t consensus about medical treatment - you know kind of like evolution is just a theory and climate change is natural an ice age is coming soon too whackadoo conservative thought)

put aside the debate about should minors get affirming care - which we’ve had on this issue - There is not one progressive cause past or present that is “deeply rooted in our nations history” when the starting point for our history says IN OUR FUCKING CONSTITUTION THAT BLACK MEN ARE 3/5 OF A HUMAN AND IMPLICITLY WITHOUT SAYING IT WOMEN OF ANY COLOR ARE 0/5 HUMAN. 
 

the Supreme Court is a council of Baptist Deacons, except they don’t just pass the plate around for money and scowl at you if you don’t pay they can take your life liberty and pursuit of happiness away from you because yours isn’t deeply rooted in our nations history.
 

we are all so fucked. So fucked.

 

https://apple.news/ASMR-GkZ0Q7O4LxtFATI9rQ

Edited July 1, 2022 by troph

[troph 24,028]

11 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

If pubs take control of the Senate the filibuster will be gone. And that’s really all it will take to seize control forever

With the court doing their bidding they will kill the filibuster pass the laws and the court will affirm them all. We are so fucked so so so so fucked.

im starting to think moving to a blue state really isn’t enough.  God dammit.