Should take 10 minutes, tops. NEXT!
I think that the fact that they should have put out this decision in a day or two after hearing arguments tells you what the story is. They can’t rule in DJT’s favor, but they can run out the clock for him for months. Look for a decision on the very last session in June which will be based on some minor technicality which will quickly be corrected leading to reimposition of tariffs and a new suit to stop him.
Another SCOTUS loss for Trump:
Stay tuned.
What were the pretzel knots used by the three dissenters?
I did not expect that.
Now the big question is will Trump abide by their ruling? That same court gave him carte blanche to do whatever he wants. This will be interesting.
So far, we’re hearing Kavanaugh’s take: It’d be really, really messy [referring to whether or not refunds are indicated and how they’d be executed].
Sound jurisprudence, but – Hey – he likes beer!!
The Supreme Court would have no credibility left if they had ruled otherwise, since the emergency powers act was very clearly intended for a national emergency which clearly does not exist. I’m not surprised that the two predictable fascists and the rapist voted against the majority, but this is a great ruling.
Well, that’s somewhat refreshing.
How long before “I don’t know who appointed those losers”?
Barrett in particular has been a sound and moderate voice. She did vote with the conservative majority on the immunity ruling, but took care to note that it was to be strictly and carefully interpreted.
Kavanaugh (“it’s OK to violate someone’s 4th Amendment rights for racist reasons”) is saying that, as long as the unconstitutional action is hard to unwind, it’s fine?
Imagine the stream of angry late night Truth Social posts that are on the way.
Perfectly understandable rationale from someone who’d have trouble walking a straight line on the side of the road.
How come the dissenters didn’t refer to their “big issue” doctrine that they made up to strike down Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan? Did they already forget about that, or does it only apply to Dems? Because Trump’s reinterpretation of the 1970s legislation was certainly a big issue, and the effect on the economy was far greater than the loan forgiveness would have been.
I have not seen the dissent yet (TBF I have not looked very hard). I am curious what those opposed said.
Is there a quick summary of that somewhere (I know…I should look myself but currently at work in my busiest part of the day).
No raging Twuths on Truth Social yet, but in a meeting this morning with state governors the Orange One called the ruling “a disgrace”. And announced that it doesn’t matter because he has “a backup plan”. I’m going to guess that the “backup plan” is also illegal, but will take another year to wind its way up to the Supreme Court, so … win!
Trump-101. He’s been doing pretty much that his whole life. And it seems it works.
I understand that a van full of catsup stain remover has just driven up to the White House.
What, he gave those loser judges the job of their lifes and they don’t bow to him? That is how they pay him back? HIM!?!? They are fired! All of them! The ruling does not count! It’s a disgrace, that would neer have happened to Buddy Vladimir. Now how does he look in his eyes?
Spoiler: Like a loser himself, which is what he is and always has been despite the cheating.
She has absolutely been more sound and moderate than one might expect, but given rulings like the one you yourself noted, she’s definitely not sound and moderate overall.
Given this decision anyone want to start a bingo card for what Trump does at the State of the Union address next Tuesday?