[SCOTUS] thread we dreaded updates for because RIP RBG

15759616263

Posts

  • TetraNitroCubaneTetraNitroCubane The Djinnerator At the bottom of a bottleRegistered User regular
    edited November 2020
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Alito delivered a keynote speech at a Federalist Society gathering today.

    He railed against same-sex marriage, abortion, contraception, criticism of conservativism in general... oh yeah, and against restrictions put in place by governors to try and combat the spread of COVID.




    Yikes. Alito condemns Obergefell, the same-sex marriage decision, and says it has led to censorship of people who believe marriage is “a union of one man and one woman.” Says freedom of speech is “falling out of favor in some circles.”

    Here is Justice Alito complaining that the Supreme Court’s same-sex marriage decision has crushed the free speech of anti-LGBTQ advocates.

    Mark Joseph Stern is a writer for Slate

    Alito with the nuclear-hot take of "We need to protect the speech of bigots and ensure they can say bigotous things in public".

    TetraNitroCubane on
    VuIBhrs.png
    Commander ZoomZonugalemp123Martini_PhilosopherRhesus PositiveStarZapperBigJoeMDarkPrimusjdarksunApogeeN1tSt4lkerNetscapeMrVyngaard
  • Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    Also with the "letting people marry is stopping other people's freedom of speech because REASONS".

    Solid legal mind right there. Yup. Definitely.

    Captain InertiaTetraNitroCubaneBlackDragon480FencingsaxZonugalMartini_PhilosopherCommander ZoomhonovereElvenshaeRhesus PositiveJaysonFouriTunesIsEvilspool32ShadowfiremonikerDarkPrimusjdarksunDoctorArchApogeeeMoanderDark_Sidedestroyah87N1tSt4lkerCantidekimeNetscapeArdolMrVyngaardshrykeMoridin889CouscousDac
  • emp123emp123 Registered User regular
    So dumb, nobody is saying you cant tell people you believe marriage is/should be between 1 man and 1 woman. Shout that shit from the rooftops so we can know who to avoid.

    Its where your words turn to actions that shit goes south. I can call Justice Alito a piece of shit all I want, its when I try to flush him down the toilet I run into trouble.

  • TetraNitroCubaneTetraNitroCubane The Djinnerator At the bottom of a bottleRegistered User regular
    edited November 2020
    emp123 wrote: »
    So dumb, nobody is saying you cant tell people you believe marriage is/should be between 1 man and 1 woman. Shout that shit from the rooftops so we can know who to avoid.

    Its where your words turn to actions that shit goes south. I can call Justice Alito a piece of shit all I want, its when I try to flush him down the toilet I run into trouble.

    I mean, yeah, that's trouble.

    If you do that, he'll clog up the pipes, for sure.

    TetraNitroCubane on
    VuIBhrs.png
    Commander ZoomdiscriderShadowfireMrVyngaardMoridin889Tastyfish
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Alito delivered a keynote speech at a Federalist Society gathering today.

    He railed against same-sex marriage, abortion, contraception, criticism of conservativism in general... oh yeah, and against restrictions put in place by governors to try and combat the spread of COVID.




    Yikes. Alito condemns Obergefell, the same-sex marriage decision, and says it has led to censorship of people who believe marriage is “a union of one man and one woman.” Says freedom of speech is “falling out of favor in some circles.”

    Here is Justice Alito complaining that the Supreme Court’s same-sex marriage decision has crushed the free speech of anti-LGBTQ advocates.

    Mark Joseph Stern is a writer for Slate

    Alito with the nuclear-hot take of "We need to protect the speech of bigots and ensure they can say bigotous things in public".

    Wow.. by that reasoning, wouldn't any minority protection, or in fact any protection at all be "against free speech"?

    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
    JaysonFourzagdrobSoggybiscuitspool32monikerCaptain InertiaBlackDragon480LilnoobsjdarksunmilskiTetraNitroCubaneIlpalaApogeeZonugaltzeentchlingDark_SideIncenjucarMillCommander ZoomN1tSt4lkeremp123Martini_PhilosopherCantideStabbity StyleBrodykimeMunkus BeaverArdolMrVyngaardMoridin889Calicaoverride367MatevDac
  • HonkHonk Honk is this poster. Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    He seems like a bigoted fucking idiot that climbed an employment ladder without actual merit, like bigoted fucking idiots often do.

    PSN: Honkalot
    FencingsaxiTunesIsEvilBigJoeMmonikerCaptain InertiaBlackDragon480LilnoobsjdarksunmilskiTetraNitroCubaneIlpalaDoctorArchSleepApogeetzeentchlingIncenjucarMillCommander ZoomMartini_PhilosopherAistanPhoenix-DCantideDuke 2.0Stabbity StylekimeHacksawZomroNetscapeMayabirdArdolMrVyngaardshrykeMoridin889CalicaMatevCouscousDac
  • TarantioTarantio Registered User regular
    Being considered a bigot infringes free speech!

    What a novel concept in law!

    Now we can't make things legal if people disagree, because laws make people think they're right, and that infringes on the speech of people who disagree!

    All laws are unconstitutional. We finally did it.

    ArbitraryDescriptorJaysonFourautono-wally, erotibot300monikerIncenjucarCommander Zoomemp123AistanCantideStabbity StyleArdolMrVyngaardMoridin889Matev
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    Tarantio wrote: »
    Being considered a bigot infringes free speech!

    What a novel concept in law!

    Now we can't make things legal if people disagree, because laws make people think they're right, and that infringes on the speech of people who disagree!

    All laws are unconstitutional. We finally did it.

    If police puts people in prison, they can not speak freely. Ergo, Prisons are illegal.

    If saying your opinion about anything could theoretically make someone think their own opinion is slightly wrong, you're infringing their free speech. Ergo, saying anything is illegal.

    If doing anything differently than someone else might make them think their own actions are bad, you're infringing on their possibility to speak about their own actions, thus, doing anything is illegal.

    By law, everyone just needs to stay at home, wither and die.

    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
    JaysonFourIncenjucarMrVyngaard
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    It's the natural logic of Jim Crow.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
    ChanusiTunesIsEvilBigJoeMToxspool32ElvenshaeShadowfiremonikerCaptain InertiaDarkPrimusBlackDragon480jdarksunTetraNitroCubaneZonugalDark_SideIncenjucarMillCommander ZoomN1tSt4lkeremp123Martini_PhilosopherAistanCantideDuke 2.0Stabbity StyleBrodyMunkus BeaverHacksawNetscapeMayabirdArdolMrVyngaardshrykeMatevDac
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited November 2020
    It's the natural logic of Jim Crow.

    James Crow, Esq. isn't any smarter, for all the polysyllabic words that get used.

    moniker on
    Captain InertiaBlackDragon480
  • BlackDragon480BlackDragon480 Bluster Kerfuffle Master of Windy ImportRegistered User regular
    Any chance we can appeal for Francis I to excommunicate a couple of the Catholic justices?

    First they came for the Muslims and we said...NOT TODAY MOTHERFUCKERS!
  • jdarksunjdarksun Struggler Registered User regular
    Any chance we can appeal for Francis I to excommunicate a couple of the Catholic justices?
    Basically no, unless they start impersonation Catholic priests, forge official church documents, and / or willfully fuck with with a sacrament.

    monikerBlackDragon480Elvenshaespool32ShadowfireMrVyngaardMoridin889
  • BlackDragon480BlackDragon480 Bluster Kerfuffle Master of Windy ImportRegistered User regular
    edited November 2020
    jdarksun wrote: »
    Any chance we can appeal for Francis I to excommunicate a couple of the Catholic justices?
    Basically no, unless they start impersonation Catholic priests, forge official church documents, and / or willfully fuck with with a sacrament.

    Yeah...I know (i began conversion when engaged to a Catholic, though I've never taken the Eucharist in the Roman church), just like John Paul II Francis does more than just nominally pay lip service to social justice initiatives, even if he is still more doctrinally conservative than the likes of Schonborn. Even old Ratzenger would look askance at some of the People of Praise's concepts and he was head of the modern inquisition.

    BlackDragon480 on
    First they came for the Muslims and we said...NOT TODAY MOTHERFUCKERS!
  • Dark_SideDark_Side Registered User regular
    edited November 2020
    Honk wrote: »
    He seems like a bigoted fucking idiot that climbed an employment ladder without actual merit, like bigoted fucking idiots often do.

    Part of this is the crowd. The conservative justices regularly do this shit where they give red meat religion speeches to conservative crowds. And it's always hypocritical, dumb, and wholly ignorant of the fact that there's more than one religion in the US that they're also empowering. Except for reasons none of those religions or contrary view points count. Another part of this is that Alito seems to have gone off the deep end a bit the last 5 or so years and has started to really begin making the rounds on the conservative speech circuit like Scalia and Thomas are notorious for.

    Dark_Side on
    Rhesus PositivemonikerShadowfireDoctorArchFencingsaxJaysonFour
  • VeeveeVeevee WisconsinRegistered User regular
    Completely resisting the conservative speech circuit is probably something we shouldn't expect a human to be able to do. Knowing that there is all that money just waiting for you, and all you have to do is take your personal beliefs to laughable extremes for an hour or so.

    I have no idea if I could resist that temptation were I in their shoes.

    StarZapperStabbity Style
  • kimekime Queen of Blades Registered User regular
    Veevee wrote: »
    Completely resisting the conservative speech circuit is probably something we shouldn't expect a human to be able to do. Knowing that there is all that money just waiting for you, and all you have to do is take your personal beliefs to laughable extremes for an hour or so.

    I have no idea if I could resist that temptation were I in their shoes.

    1) Especially knowing I had a job guaranteed for the rest of my life, I would find that rather easy. Even without I'd like to think I could, but with it's no longer really hard imo.
    2) These people should be held to higher standards given their power and privilege.

    Battle.net ID: kime#1822
    3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
    Steam profile
    BlackDragon480Phoenix-DHappylilElfmonikerShadowfirejdarksunAistantzeentchlingOrcaJaysonFourMrVyngaardMatevKaputa
  • HappylilElfHappylilElf Registered User regular
    kime wrote: »
    Veevee wrote: »
    Completely resisting the conservative speech circuit is probably something we shouldn't expect a human to be able to do. Knowing that there is all that money just waiting for you, and all you have to do is take your personal beliefs to laughable extremes for an hour or so.

    I have no idea if I could resist that temptation were I in their shoes.

    1) Especially knowing I had a job guaranteed for the rest of my life, I would find that rather easy. Even without I'd like to think I could, but with it's no longer really hard imo.
    2) These people should be held to higher standards given their power and privilege.

    1)They make about 140k/year iirc which while that's a lot more than I do it's not a lot for the DC metro area. That said I don't think any of the current justices were exactly hurting financially when they got nominated (I mean except for the frat boy of course).
    2) Yeah I agree.
    2a) Which is why they should just hire me for these speaking gigs. I have no qualms about bilking money out of rightwing institutions and I've worked in customer service for almost 20 years I'm sure I could convincingly fill them full of shit that I don't believe :P

    kimeMoridin889Matev
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    You make 140k/ year and a speaking gig will run 10k/hour

    wbBv3fj.png
    HappylilElfkimeNetscapeJaysonFourshrykeMoridin889
  • HacksawHacksaw J. Duggan Esq. Wrestler at LawRegistered User regular
    Shit I'd charge waaaaay more than 10k an hour if I were a corrupt SCOTUS justice.

    Matev
  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    Wiki says associate justices make $265,600 a year.

    Switch Friend Code: SW-6732-9515-9697
    moniker
  • BlackDragon480BlackDragon480 Bluster Kerfuffle Master of Windy ImportRegistered User regular
    edited November 2020
    DoctorArch wrote: »
    Wiki says associate justices make $265,600 a year.

    Still not that high for around the Beltway, but twice as much as I make between my primary job and all the coding and DB work I do on the side.

    BlackDragon480 on
    First they came for the Muslims and we said...NOT TODAY MOTHERFUCKERS!
  • StarZapperStarZapper Vermont, Bizzaro world.Registered User regular
    edited November 2020
    Yeah a quarter mill a year to start is not a bad gig for anybody, DC living prices or not. I honestly think they should expand the court to 13 anyway just because there should never be that few amount of people with so much power, it's just ridiculous. It leaves a lot of vulnerability to corruption/bribery. I mean we're dealing more with philosophical stupidity / craziness at the moment more than anything, but a wider bench with term limits would pad against that as well.

    StarZapper on
    kimeOrcaBlackDragon480Viktor WaltersMrVyngaardHacksaw
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    A quarter million is not much more than a lot of first year Associates at Big Law firms make, though. It's just... theoretically Supreme Court Justices should care about more than making bank. Otherwise they should just stay an equity partner somewhere and not put on robes.

    Orcashryke
  • kimekime Queen of Blades Registered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    A quarter million is not much more than a lot of first year Associates at Big Law firms make, though. It's just... theoretically Supreme Court Justices should care about more than making bank. Otherwise they should just stay an equity partner somewhere and not put on robes.

    I'm not arguing they couldn't make more elsewhere. I just don't think the lure of money is irresistable.

    Battle.net ID: kime#1822
    3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
    Steam profile
  • MrMisterMrMister An intelligent and reasonable resistance to certain factsRegistered User regular
    Dark_Side wrote: »
    Honk wrote: »
    He seems like a bigoted fucking idiot that climbed an employment ladder without actual merit, like bigoted fucking idiots often do.

    Part of this is the crowd. The conservative justices regularly do this shit where they give red meat religion speeches to conservative crowds. And it's always hypocritical, dumb, and wholly ignorant of the fact that there's more than one religion in the US that they're also empowering. Except for reasons none of those religions or contrary view points count. Another part of this is that Alito seems to have gone off the deep end a bit the last 5 or so years and has started to really begin making the rounds on the conservative speech circuit like Scalia and Thomas are notorious for.

    Nah. In the speech he approvingly references several religious freedom cases he heard from minority religious perspectives (e.g. keeping a bear for religious practice, Torah study, etc)

    I agree that Obergefell bit is extremely underbaked, though.

  • Dark_SideDark_Side Registered User regular
    edited November 2020
    MrMister wrote: »
    Dark_Side wrote: »
    Honk wrote: »
    He seems like a bigoted fucking idiot that climbed an employment ladder without actual merit, like bigoted fucking idiots often do.

    Part of this is the crowd. The conservative justices regularly do this shit where they give red meat religion speeches to conservative crowds. And it's always hypocritical, dumb, and wholly ignorant of the fact that there's more than one religion in the US that they're also empowering. Except for reasons none of those religions or contrary view points count. Another part of this is that Alito seems to have gone off the deep end a bit the last 5 or so years and has started to really begin making the rounds on the conservative speech circuit like Scalia and Thomas are notorious for.

    Nah. In the speech he approvingly references several religious freedom cases he heard from minority religious perspectives (e.g. keeping a bear for religious practice, Torah study, etc)

    I agree that Obergefell bit is extremely underbaked, though.

    Ok good point, Alito has a small history of ruling for other religions. But the majority of that speech is just a crib notes relitigating of contemporary christian religious rights cases. What if Satanists bring a case to the court? Or Wiccans? What if a large Muslim group sues the Federal government to make daily prayer a federally protected worker's right? What if Native Americans get smart and start litigating to reclaim land based on a historical spiritual connection to it. The problem with Alito IMO is he's full of shit. So is Thomas. They'll spend all day litigating for the religious right, and maybe even throw a few crumbs to other religions, but it's ALL in service to a Christian state.

    Dark_Side on
    IncenjucarJaysonFourPhoenix-DNetscapeBlackDragon480MrVyngaardMoridin889YamiB.
  • MayabirdMayabird Pecking at the keyboardRegistered User regular
    American Catholics used to be very strongly for separation of church and state because they understood that a very large percentage of American Protestants would absolutely genocide all Catholics if given half a chance.

    Those Protestants now call themselves Evangelicals and would still genocide all Catholics if given half a chance, but a lot of Catholics seem to have forgotten, or just think that the Muslims would be genocided first and like so many Americans they're too short-sighted to consider what happens next.

    autono-wally, erotibot300Dark_SideJragghenNetscapemonikerExtreaminatusemp123Stabbity StyleShadowfireBlackDragon480MrVyngaardMillshrykeMoridin889ElvenshaeHacksawMvrckMatevAistanDoctorArchzagdrobVeagle
  • Dark_SideDark_Side Registered User regular
    edited November 2020
    Mayabird wrote: »
    American Catholics used to be very strongly for separation of church and state because they understood that a very large percentage of American Protestants would absolutely genocide all Catholics if given half a chance.

    Those Protestants now call themselves Evangelicals and would still genocide all Catholics if given half a chance, but a lot of Catholics seem to have forgotten, or just think that the Muslims would be genocided first and like so many Americans they're too short-sighted to consider what happens next.

    We already have major religions taking over local state entities in Scientology and Church of Latter Day Saints. When the LDS comes to the supreme court because they want to purge Utah of non believers, how are Alito and Thomas going to rule then?

    Dark_Side on
    MayabirdJaysonFourGONG-00OrcaMrVyngaardMatevNetscapeN1tSt4lker
  • Ninja Snarl PNinja Snarl P My helmet is my burden. Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered User regular
    Dark_Side wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    American Catholics used to be very strongly for separation of church and state because they understood that a very large percentage of American Protestants would absolutely genocide all Catholics if given half a chance.

    Those Protestants now call themselves Evangelicals and would still genocide all Catholics if given half a chance, but a lot of Catholics seem to have forgotten, or just think that the Muslims would be genocided first and like so many Americans they're too short-sighted to consider what happens next.

    We already have major religions taking over local state entities in Scientology and Church of Latter Day Saints. When the LDS comes to the supreme court because they want to purge Utah of non believers, how are Alito and Thomas going to rule then?

    What skin tone are the non-believers?

    MrVyngaardElvenshaeautono-wally, erotibot300Netscape
  • TaramoorTaramoor Storyteller Registered User regular
    edited November 2020


    Economist SCOTUS reporter

    SCOTUS rules 5-4, Roberts and the Liberals on the losing side, that Cuomo can’t limit attendance at Churches/Synagogues regardless of the pandemic.

    Taramoor on
    nUzGRMY.gif
    twitch.tv/Taramoor
    @TaramoorPlays
    Netscape
  • HacksawHacksaw J. Duggan Esq. Wrestler at LawRegistered User regular
    Oh man I bet Roberts is pissed that he's completely lost control of the court.

    IncenjucarOptyMartini_Philosopheroverride367PolaritieForarElvenshaePhoenix-DFencingsaxtzeentchlingMatevZonugalBlackDragon480HappylilElfMunkus BeaverAntinumericShadowfireXaquinJaysonFourmonikerApogeejdarksunDacN1tSt4lkerDoctorArchDocboogedybooMoridin889Etheakime38thDoeHeffling
  • TraceTrace GNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam We Registered User regular
    Taramoor wrote: »


    Economist SCOTUS reporter

    SCOTUS rules 5-4, Roberts and the Liberals on the losing side, that Cuomo can’t limit attendance at Churches/Synagogues regardless of the pandemic.

    Oh wow that's gonna kill a lot of people.

    PolaritieIncenjucarBrodyOrcatbloxhamemp123ElJeffePhoenix-DFencingsaxJragghenElvenshaetzeentchlingMillMatevStarZappernaengwenZonugalBlackDragon480ArdolAistanshrykeKaputaRhesus PositiveShadowfireKamarNetscapeJaysonFourmonikerApogeejdarksunDacMartini_PhilosopherN1tSt4lkerDoctorArchDocboogedybooCaptain InertiazagdrobSleepVeagleAimMoridin889never diekime38thDoeKoopahTroopah
  • jothkijothki Registered User regular
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Oh man I bet Roberts is pissed that he's completely lost control of the court.

    Lost control? He's at the point where he can make the sane vote to make himself look good and still have the conservative side win.

    BrodyOrcashrykesilence1186DarkPrimusNetscapeCaptain Inertia
  • The Dude With HerpesThe Dude With Herpes Registered User regular
    jothki wrote: »
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Oh man I bet Roberts is pissed that he's completely lost control of the court.

    Lost control? He's at the point where he can make the sane vote to make himself look good and still have the conservative side win.

    I'm no fan or defender of Roberts, but come on; this is leaning pretty far into the conspiratorial to be helpful. Roberts stands firmly enough in the shitty, on enough things, that he thus far hasn't needed to hide behind more conservative justices as a shield for his own ego.

    Just because someone isn't shitty all of the time doesn't necessarily imply they're playing 4D chess. I think if he sided with the conservative vote here, he would have voted for it.

    Steam: Galedrid - XBL: Galedrid - PSN: Galedrid
    Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
    Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand

    rahkeesh2000HappylilElfmonikerMartini_PhilosopherN1tSt4lkereMoanderMrMister
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    Trace wrote: »
    Taramoor wrote: »


    Economist SCOTUS reporter

    SCOTUS rules 5-4, Roberts and the Liberals on the losing side, that Cuomo can’t limit attendance at Churches/Synagogues regardless of the pandemic.

    Oh wow that's gonna kill a lot of people.

    I'm at the point where I don't much care about the dumbfucks who are going to MAH FREEDOMS themselves right into the grave.

    But this is going to kill a lot of people whose only sin is being unfortunately adjacent to stupids.

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
    emp123IncenjucarElvenshaeCommander ZoomMatevDark Raven XToxBlackDragon480ArdolMorganVCalicaMunkus BeaverTraceDarkPrimusRhesus PositiveShadowfireKamarNetscapeJaysonFourmonikerSelnerMetzger MeisterjdarksunMartini_PhilosopherN1tSt4lkerDoctorArchCaptain InertiaCojo MojozagdrobXantomasSleepMoridin889Forarnever diekime
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    Oh god, they're going to make it so states have to accept religious exemptions to vaccine requirements.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
    IncenjucarOrcaFencingsaxStarZapperBlackDragon480autono-wally, erotibot300OptyOmnomnomPancakeAistanshrykeKaputaRhesus PositiveShadowfireCouscousJaysonFourmonikerjdarksunDaceMoanderDoctorArchGilgaronzagdrobSleepMoridin889never diekime
  • rahkeesh2000rahkeesh2000 Registered User regular
    jothki wrote: »
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Oh man I bet Roberts is pissed that he's completely lost control of the court.

    Lost control? He's at the point where he can make the sane vote to make himself look good and still have the conservative side win.

    I'm no fan or defender of Roberts, but come on; this is leaning pretty far into the conspiratorial to be helpful. Roberts stands firmly enough in the shitty, on enough things, that he thus far hasn't needed to hide behind more conservative justices as a shield for his own ego.

    Just because someone isn't shitty all of the time doesn't necessarily imply they're playing 4D chess. I think if he sided with the conservative vote here, he would have voted for it.

    Yeah much of this board seems to imagine that the SC justices are still politicians, rather than being in the unique position for life to impose their political vision on the country for generations with zero accountability. They are way beyond giving a shit about how things look or Trumpian whims or who is winning the current election.

  • HenroidHenroid Homeless Soon Enough Registered User regular
    COVID-19 is gonna be around for the rest of our lifetime, isn't that fucking awesome?

    Nobody likes me but that's okay.
    I stream during late night (2am to 6am PST) - /henroidt on Twitch
    I'm in dire need of help with rent. Relevant link is on my Twitch page.
    IncenjucarElvenshaeFencingsaxMatevautono-wally, erotibot300AistanXaquinJaysonFourmonikerjdarksunCaptain InertiaSleepMoridin889
  • TaramoorTaramoor Storyteller Registered User regular
    Henroid wrote: »
    COVID-19 is gonna be around for the rest of our lifetime, isn't that fucking awesome?

    Yeah, I’m guessing this ruling immediately precludes any CDC or Executive Order shutdowns, including all the restrictions in place in Utah, Washington, etc.

    Likely we are irrevocably fucked by this.

    nUzGRMY.gif
    twitch.tv/Taramoor
    @TaramoorPlays
    OrcaMatevBrodyautono-wally, erotibot300NetscapemonikerSleep
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    jothki wrote: »
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Oh man I bet Roberts is pissed that he's completely lost control of the court.

    Lost control? He's at the point where he can make the sane vote to make himself look good and still have the conservative side win.

    I'm no fan or defender of Roberts, but come on; this is leaning pretty far into the conspiratorial to be helpful. Roberts stands firmly enough in the shitty, on enough things, that he thus far hasn't needed to hide behind more conservative justices as a shield for his own ego.

    Just because someone isn't shitty all of the time doesn't necessarily imply they're playing 4D chess. I think if he sided with the conservative vote here, he would have voted for it.

    Yeah much of this board seems to imagine that the SC justices are still politicians, rather than being in the unique position for life to impose their political vision on the country for generations with zero accountability. They are way beyond giving a shit about how things look or Trumpian whims or who is winning the current election.

    SCOTUS justices are politicians. It's foolish to think otherwise. You don't get to the top of the Federalist Society's list without playing politics.

    NetscapemonikerElvenshaeBlackDragon480Martini_PhilosopherBrodyAistanBullheadMillDark_SidetzeentchlingkimeArdolHacksaw
Sign In or Register to comment.