OT SCOTUS Thread

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
THE HCP said:
..."going to"???????
Click to expand...

We have already taken several steps back since Trump took office. But, that is nothing compared to what will happen when Barrett gets her hands on the SC. Every case since the 1950's for civil rights, woman's rights, gray/LGBTQ rights, immigrant rights, etc will all be overturned.
 


Have they no fucking shame
 
Like anyone in the world would believe the Republicans at this point. Let alone Ted Cruz

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/28/cru...ting-conditions-if-obamacare-struck-down.html

“Every Republican agrees we’re going to protect preexisting conditions,” Cruz said, while criticizing Democrats for trying to make Barrett’s nomination into a referendum on health care. “What they’re talking about is what they think politically resonates, but 100 out of 100 senators agree we’re going to protect preexisting conditions regardless of what happens with Obamacare.”

My question is this then. Why strike down the ACA? Why not make changes to it that would make it better and strengthen it? Why all the work to kill it? If they put this much effort into making it stronger and better there would be no problems.
 
kjironman1 said:
Like anyone in the world would believe the Republicans at this point. Let alone Ted Cruz

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/28/cru...ting-conditions-if-obamacare-struck-down.html

“Every Republican agrees we’re going to protect preexisting conditions,” Cruz said, while criticizing Democrats for trying to make Barrett’s nomination into a referendum on health care. “What they’re talking about is what they think politically resonates, but 100 out of 100 senators agree we’re going to protect preexisting conditions regardless of what happens with Obamacare.”

My question is this then. Why strike down the ACA? Why not make changes to it that would make it better and strengthen it? Why all the work to kill it? If they put this much effort into making it stronger and better there would be no problems.
Click to expand...
They are killing it to illustrate just how cynical the Republicans are about voter intelligence. These clowns expect the voters to actually believe they will do what they say they will do. This despite blatant examples of outright lying including the egregious Lindsey Graham flip flop on filling the Supreme Court slot. They say whatever the voters want to hear, and then conveniently forget about it when reelected. Or worse, they come up with some bull shit rationalization that that’s even more unbelievable than their promises. They’re hell bent on striking down the ACA because it is Obama’s signature accomplishment. In their tiny little minds we should have never had a black man for president, so let’s erase his victories and pretend he never existed. The supreme irony is that is exactly what is going to happen to Donald J. Trump when he is finally evicted from the People’s House he has been squatting in (and trashing)....It is so mind boggling how uninformed and sheeplike the American right wing is. And these are the folks who are going to make America great again???? No wonder we’re not only in the toilet, but halfway to the sewer........
 
Lanny said:
There are conditions to everything but you don't have to prove them for a right, you do have to prove them for a privilege. To deprive a right you have to prove a condition was not met.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
She is endorsed by openly racist anti immigration group.

She ruled against granting a green card to the wife of a naturalized citizen from Yemen. ICE had denied the request by claiming they had tried to smuggle their two children into the US. Although the couple provided absolute proof that the children tragically had died in an accident.

A Trumper.
 
2 years, 10 months, 23 days.

This is how long Amy Coney Barrett has been a judge.

It was October 31, 2017 when she was confirmed as a circuit judge for 1st judgeship.

Does this seem a little light on experience?

Can you guess who she was appointed by?
 
White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany is claiming that Amy Coney Barrett is a Rhodes scholar because she went to Rhodes college in Tennessee.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany is claiming that Amy Coney Barrett is a Rhodes scholar because she went to Rhodes college in Tennessee.
Click to expand...

'She also is a Rhodes scholar,' McEnany said of Trump's nominee. Barrett actually received her BA from Rhodes College in Tennessee.

'You said Justice Barrett was a Rhodes scholar. I don't know if that's true,' Bloomberg's Justin Sink said to the press secretary.

'That's what I have written here,' McEnany replied.​

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ompting-furious-tirade-Fox-News-reporter.html
 
Reminiscent of when Thurgood Marshall left the court. Like Ginsburg he had been a towering figure in civil rights long before his appointment. Bush I wanted a hard right justice to replace him. Politically it had to be a Black hard right justice. The pool was limited, so we got saddled with mediocrity Clarence Thomas (whose wife, BTW, is head of a task force in White House investigating career, not political, staff to remove anyone not sufficiently personally loyal to Trump.)

Trump needs a female reactionary to replace an icon and gave us coat hanger Coney.
 
Liberals Weigh Jurisdiction Stripping to Rein in Supreme Court

Read more at: https://www.bloombergquint.com/busi...ome-democrats-consider-jurisdiction-stripping

(Bloomberg Businessweek) -- In 1982 a young lawyer at the U.S. Department of Justice wrote a series of memos defending an unorthodox proposal to limit the power of the U.S. Supreme Court. It was nine years after the court’s landmark Roe v. Wade decision, which granted women a constitutional right to abortion, and Republicans in Congress had recently introduced more than 20 bills seeking to divest
None of those bills passed. But the DOJ memos offered a sophisticated legal defense of jurisdiction stripping, arguing that “clear and unequivocal language” in Article 3 of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to shield certain laws from Supreme Court review.
The author of the memos was John Roberts. Forty years later, Roberts is the Supreme Court’s chief justice and the leading defender of its institutional legitimacy, and the push for judicial reform has migrated from the right to the left, with an array of reform ideas under discussion, including jurisdiction stripping.
A handful of academics and liberal thinkers are arguing for drastic structural changes that would strip away power from the judiciary, embracing the approach that conservatives championed in the 1980s.
 
Court declined to block civil suit against Kim Davis. She is former county clerk who become a Christian martyr when, despite her own four marriages and having a child by a man not her husband, was too "moral" to issue a marriage license to a same sex couple.

In dissent, Thomas and Alito made it clear they would like to revisit and overturn Obergefell, which allowed same sex couples to marry, as our marriages persecute Christians. With the addition of Coat Hanger, who considers our existence an abomination, and Kavanaugh, who vowed to use his seat to get vengeance on those who opposed him, they only need Gorsuch or Roberts to reverse Obergefell.

Most probably not via outright ban but in decision allowing any person, organization, government office or business to not recognize a couple's marriage if Jesus.

So everyone we meet would become a self appointed judge of the reality of our marriages.
 
Last edited:
crandc said:
Court declined to block civil suit against Kim Davis. She is former county clerk who become a Christian martyr when, despite her own four marriages and having a child by a man not her husband, was too "moral" to issue a marriage license to a same sex couple.

In dissent, Thomas and Alito made it clear they would like to revisit and overturn Obergefell, which allowed same sex couples to marry, as our marriages persecute Christians. With the addition of Coat Hanger, who considers our existence an abomination, and Kavanaugh, who vowed to use his seat to get vengeance on those who opposed him, they only need Gorsuch or Roberts to reverse Obergefell.

Most probably not via outright ban but in decision allowing any person, organization, government office or business to not recognize a couple's marriage if Jesus.

So everyone we meet would become a self appointed judge of the reality of our marriages.
Click to expand...
I, along with about 70% of the rest of the population including many denominations which would include mine, are fully supportive of gays and lesbians having the same rights as everyone else and that includes marriage. I've never been to a gay or lesbian wedding but if it were someone I knew well and liked I would gladly and proudly attend!

To those who would restrict the rights of gays and lesbians I say, go to hell. They are people who have the same identical hopes, fears, desires and love interests as anybody else. It makes no sense to make them less than human just like it makes no sense to make any minority less than human.

Sorry, but this subject pisses me off as it does my wife. This is yet another reason why I hate Trump and view him as evil.
 
crandc said:
If I meet the right woman I will invite @Lanny to the wedding.

And make the cake of course.
Click to expand...
I'll be their if I have to drag my medical team with me.
By the way, I've got old army buddy that lives down there somewhere in the Bay area. Smartest guy I've ever met. A conscientious objector who went through 5 months of Officer's Candidate School, OCS, before finding himself. A graduate of Boston College who once studied for the priesthood and a true intellectual's intellectual. haven't seen him in nearly 50 years but I do miss him.
I'd bake the cake but you wouldn't want to look at it let alone eat the dam thing. No, you'll have to settle for something wrapped in wedding gift paper with ribbon that looks like it was applied by a five year old child unless I let my wife wrap it..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top