Based on their decisions I’ve repeatedly pointed out that the current supreme court is far right idiologically, but not actually partisan towards the Trump party. There is one exception to this however who can almost always be found to hold the Trump line. I guess someone doesn’t like sleeping on the couch.
You want an alternative to court packing? Presuming that the legislature ever had the ability to pass an abortion rights law, they actually have the power to strip the court of the authority to review it.
US Constitution, Article III, Section 2, Clause 2
The legislature can override the court’s authority on other matters, as well. But it takes legislative action.
As for a Clarence Thomas court…
He’s so originalist as to be absurd. He seems to like to quote 18th century dictionaries (e.g. liberty apparently only means not going to jail)
A thought I recently had: according to Thomas, the meaning of words is what they meant when they were written. And so, for example, the 8th amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment can’t possibly include the death penalty, since that was not considered cruel, and was not unusual, in the 18th century.
Under his logic, though, you could change this amendment by passing a new one with the same exact language and, by virtue of the change in society, the amendment could now prohibIt the death penalty.
Same words. Completely different interpretation. Based entirely on what Thomas has determined was meant hundreds of years ago (when, let’s face it, Thomas would not have been considered worthy of this job) versus today.
He’s the oldest Justice, and by all probability will be the next one replaced. It won’t be soon enough.
I’d say let’s hope for a long string of Democratic Presidents but McConnell and his clones would jut keep kicking the affirmation cans down the road until a Republican was elected again.
“Senator, it’s been 22 years since you’ve held an affirmation hearing. We’re down to just two Justices and they aren’t looking so good.”
“We just need to let the voters decide who they want to appoint the next seven justices and they need to decide the right way – oops. Did I say that last part out loud?”
No, they didn’t. They stated from the start that they were talking about the practical effects, not what was literally said.
As stated in Kagan’s dissent, the experts were in fact authorized by Congress. Claiming they weren’t was a smokescreen, similar to them claiming the coach was offering a “silent, private prayer” on the 50 yard line when he was having students join him and even had cameras on him.
I’d also point out that Aspenglow is making claims and backing them up with reasoning and citations, while you are just making short declarative statements without even attempting to back them up. You look like you’re intentionally trying to subtly change the topic so you can defend these guys.
The reality is that people make their decisions based on the consequences. And SCOTUS knew that dismantling this would cause deregulation. Just like the point of overturning Roe was to be able to ban abortions. Just listen to what the side advocating for these positions are actually saying, and not their propaganda, and you might understand. It’s not like people usually tell you what their ulterior motives are.
I’d be happy if they spent more time riding in Helicopters. With Rock Stars.
Upholding gerrymandering, eviscerating [further] the Voting Rights Act.
"With another ruling, the conservative-leaning Supreme Court continues to dilute the power of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. NBC News reports the Lousiana Republican-drawn map will remain in place for the 2022 midterm elections. The high court has placed a temporary hold on a lower order requiring Louisiana to redraw its congressional map and include a second-majority-Black district.
In February, a special session of the Louisiana legislator drew a voting map that excluded the second-Black district voting rights advocates were fighting for. Governor John Bel Edwards vetoed the map, and the Republican-dominated Congress overwrote the veto. Five black voters and voting rights groups filed a lawsuit at the U.S. District Court in Baton Rouge. U.S. District Judge Shelly Dick struck down the Republican-drawn maps citing they most likely violated the Voting Rights Act. After the judge ordered the second Black district to be included, the ruling was appealed.
The Black population in Louisiana is 33%, yet the Republican congressional map retained Republicans’ advantage in five of the state’s six congressional districts."
They gutted the Civil Rights Act because the states wouldn’t be discriminatory any more.
And now that the states are discriminatory again, well, we can’t stop them, because the Civil Rights Act is gutted.
Similar to the way they dismissed the idea that Citizen’s United would lead to corruption because Congress could pass laws to require the donors to be disclosed, then 10 years later invalidated California’s disclosure laws as chilling free speech. Of course one justice wrote a dissent from Citizens United to reject disclosure requirements from the start. Guess which one.
Oh! Oh! Oh! Is it the one with the batshit crazy spouse openly advocating for electoral fraud? What did I win?
Stranger
Aspenglow, you are a muddle headed dipshit. A mod should not insult other posters, even in the pit.
Your junior modding is noted, with all the respect it deserves.
A mod without their Mod Hat™ on may insult another poster in the Pit, just as any non-mod poster may do. I can’t figure out why you seem to be having such a hard time understanding this, especially after the smackdown you got in your ATMB thread about it.
Do you also think that, say, off-duty cops shouldn’t be allowed to use physical force on other people in a partner work drill in their martial arts class?
Because that’s basically what you’re saying here: that because a certain type of poster has official responsibilities for maintaining public order, those posters are not entitled to engage—even outside of their official capacity—in the sort of combative interactions that are permitted to other posters.
Hey guys, lay off carnivorousplant. He’s only been here 22 years, he’s probably still getting the lay of the land.
Perhaps @carnivorousplant is malnourished?
Nonsense. It’s not as if a moderator’s independent statement amounts to an action formally conferring the status of dipshit on the poster in question.
Even if it did, it isn’t necessary. We all know that guy is a mush-brained pinhead, without having to be officially informed.
Do you know who else, besides Chump supporters, shares the blame for this fucked-up Supreme Court? Every single non-Republikan yahoo who voted for hump in the 2016 primaries just so he would be the candidate, thereby ensuring a Hillary win. Fuck all you guys too.
Since ballots are secret that’s a number we’ll never know, but I’m guessing the number of voters who did strategic voting for Trump in the Republican presidential primaries is insignificant compared to the number of low-information voters who voted for him because they think, “he tells it like it is,” based on his actions in The Apprentice.
A bit older but adding for the record.
Surprised he isn’t going for this decision too. 
“Interracial marriage in the United States has been legal throughout the United States since at least the 1967 U.S. Supreme Court (Warren Court) decision Loving v. Virginia (1967) that held that “anti-miscegenation” laws were unconstitutional via the 14th Amendment adopted in 1868.”
From the article,
I do wonder if Nienaber was talking through her hat, trying to make herself seem more important than she is. That being said, if someone were to find proof of the group praying with one or more of the Justices, I would think that would be grounds for impeachment, or at least for some kind of sanction for not recusing themselves.