Look man, if god has an issue with dog toys having a higher priority then him. Well he's a strong, independent god that don't need no man to solve his problems for him. If he feels it needs to be addressed he'll get around to it.
On a more series note, the shadow docket is already in the crosshairs for reform and people have noted many of the most controversy decisions in recent history have been a result of the shadow docket. I'd love to see Congress and the Presidency declare that anything made under the shadow docket is null and void. If it's to be the law of the land, the backers of something better have the fucking spine to put their name on it. If they can't do that, that should tell them that it probably shouldn't be the law of the land.
Good work, McConnell. You now have people playing legal Calvinball on the SCotUS. This is going to hurt for a while.
Working as intended.
SCOTUS is just legal Calvinball. From Madison on.
Stop thinking about it as more than that, and think of how to win in that context. Because sure as shit they only embrace the meaningful parts when it supports them.
The entire game here is to make a specific flavour of christianity and it's attendant moral beliefs the dominant legal religion and legal framework in the US and the rest is just a pantomime to get to that end.
Good work, McConnell. You now have people playing legal Calvinball on the SCotUS. This is going to hurt for a while.
Working as intended.
SCOTUS is just legal Calvinball. From Madison on.
Stop thinking about it as more than that, and think of how to win in that context. Because sure as shit they only embrace the meaningful parts when it supports them.
The entire game here is to make a specific flavour of christianity and it's attendant moral beliefs the dominant legal religion and legal framework in the US and the rest is just a pantomime to get to that end.
which will be given lip service and used to oppress, while the in group continues to worship their true god Mammon. :P
Good work, McConnell. You now have people playing legal Calvinball on the SCotUS. This is going to hurt for a while.
Working as intended.
SCOTUS is just legal Calvinball. From Madison on.
Stop thinking about it as more than that, and think of how to win in that context. Because sure as shit they only embrace the meaningful parts when it supports them.
The entire game here is to make a specific flavour of christianity and it's attendant moral beliefs the dominant legal religion and legal framework in the US and the rest is just a pantomime to get to that end.
Good work, McConnell. You now have people playing legal Calvinball on the SCotUS. This is going to hurt for a while.
Working as intended.
SCOTUS is just legal Calvinball. From Madison on.
Stop thinking about it as more than that, and think of how to win in that context. Because sure as shit they only embrace the meaningful parts when it supports them.
The entire game here is to make a specific flavour of christianity and it's attendant moral beliefs the dominant legal religion and legal framework in the US and the rest is just a pantomime to get to that end.
Lochner Jesus
Is he the first cousin of Supply Side Jesus or his dad. I can't keep the lineage straight.
All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
Good work, McConnell. You now have people playing legal Calvinball on the SCotUS. This is going to hurt for a while.
Working as intended.
SCOTUS is just legal Calvinball. From Madison on.
Stop thinking about it as more than that, and think of how to win in that context. Because sure as shit they only embrace the meaningful parts when it supports them.
The entire game here is to make a specific flavour of christianity and it's attendant moral beliefs the dominant legal religion and legal framework in the US and the rest is just a pantomime to get to that end.
Lochner Jesus
Is he the first cousin of Supply Side Jesus or his dad. I can't keep the lineage straight.
It's like the trinity thing along with Bootstraps Jesus. They're all the same but different in ineffable ways.
Good work, McConnell. You now have people playing legal Calvinball on the SCotUS. This is going to hurt for a while.
Working as intended.
SCOTUS is just legal Calvinball. From Madison on.
Stop thinking about it as more than that, and think of how to win in that context. Because sure as shit they only embrace the meaningful parts when it supports them.
The entire game here is to make a specific flavour of christianity and it's attendant moral beliefs the dominant legal religion and legal framework in the US and the rest is just a pantomime to get to that end.
Lochner Jesus
Is he the first cousin of Supply Side Jesus or his dad. I can't keep the lineage straight.
It's like the trinity thing along with Bootstraps Jesus. They're all the same but different in ineffable ways.
Which sucks because I want them the eff out of the law.
First opinion of the day is in Jones v. Mississippi. By a 6–3 vote with Kavanaugh writing, the court rules that a sentencer need NOT make a separate factual finding of permanent incorrigibility before sentencing a defendant under 18 to life without parole.
To put this in very stark terms, the appointment of Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett are THE reason why the Supreme Court just effectively reinstated juvenile life without parole. Kennedy had taken huge strides toward abolishing it, and they just undid his handiwork.
The threat started with the first tweet also goes over the other two cases released today. They are less barbarously decided. The idea that we can send a 15 year old child to life imprisonment on the whim of an old white guy isn't something to be taken lightly. And we already know that it's not going to be something decided consistently along any sort of racial, economic, or other lines. Meaning this isn't a decision that someone like Rittenhouse is going to have to ever worry about.
All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
1) Father abused his mother extremely violently
2) Mother left the father, married another man who...abused the kid (he's ~15 at this point)
3) Kid takes a swing at stepfather, is sent to live with grandparents
4) Kid invites his girlfriend to join him at grandparents without telling them
5) Grandpa figures it out, gets angry, they get in a fight in the kitchen, kid stabs his grandfather several times in the altercation. Then tries to do CPR but fails. Grandpa dies, kid...wanders around with a bloody shirt, tries to hitch a ride to his grandma to tell her what happened. Like clearly did a stupid and terrible thing because he was an idiot teenager who was frequently abused.
6) Is picked up by police, doesn't ask for a lawyer or anything, confesses
7) Sentenced to life without parole as a 15 year old
8) Is a model prisoner by basically all accounts
9) Is resentenced to LWOP despite clear SCOTUS precedent that children cannot receive that sentence unless they are corrupted beyond redemption. Despite the testimony of his grandmother (the man who was killed's widow, remember) that he should be given the chance for parole.
10) Sues not for immediate release, but for the opportunity to someday get parole (he's now 31 and has spent more than half his life in prison).
11) Kavanaugh and the conservatives are like "nah" and we're overturning precedent but not going to say those previous cases were wrongly decided. We're just going to kind of ignore them because fuck black kids in the South.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
1) Father abused his mother extremely violently
2) Mother left the father, married another man who...abused the kid (he's ~15 at this point)
3) Kid takes a swing at stepfather, is sent to live with grandparents
4) Kid invites his girlfriend to join him at grandparents without telling them
5) Grandpa figures it out, gets angry, they get in a fight in the kitchen, kid stabs his grandfather several times in the altercation. Then tries to do CPR but fails. Grandpa dies, kid...wanders around with a bloody shirt, tries to hitch a ride to his grandma to tell her what happened. Like clearly did a stupid and terrible thing because he was an idiot teenager who was frequently abused.
6) Is picked up by police, doesn't ask for a lawyer or anything, confesses
7) Sentenced to life without parole as a 15 year old
8) Is a model prisoner by basically all accounts
9) Is resentenced to LWOP despite clear SCOTUS precedent that children cannot receive that sentence unless they are corrupted beyond redemption. Despite the testimony of his grandmother (the man who was killed's widow, remember) that he should be given the chance for parole.
10) Sues not for immediate release, but for the opportunity to someday get parole (he's now 31 and has spent more than half his life in prison).
11) Kavanaugh and the conservatives are like "nah" and we're overturning precedent but not going to say those previous cases were wrongly decided. We're just going to kind of ignore them because fuck black kids in the South.
Very much so and if you read anything of the decision, you should read Sotomayor's extra-spicy dissent.
Today, however, the Court reduces Miller to a decision requiring “just a discretionary sentencing procedure where youth [is] considered.” Ante, at 11. Such an abrupt break from precedent demands “special justification.” Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U. S. ___, ___ (2020) (KAVANAUGH, J., con-curring in part) (slip op., at 6) (internal quotation marksomitted). The Court offers none. Instead, the Court at-tempts to circumvent stare decisis principles by claiming that “[t]he Court’s decision today carefully follows both Mil-ler and Montgomery.” Ante, at 19. The Court is fooling no one. Because I cannot countenance the Court’s abandon-ment of Miller and Montgomery, I dissent.
She is calling Kavanaugh out on the gigantic pile of bullshit he used in the majority decision. And kinda flipping the chief justice the finger at the same time over his precious "stare decsis" not being used in this case. She knew she was going down but she went down swinging for the fence.
Martini_Philosopher on
All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
+16
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
why should anyone ever be sentenced to life without the ability to appeal for parole? if they don't deserve parole or are too dangerous to release, reaffirm that decision at points of regular review
i mean
i know the answer, it's because our society sucks but
why should anyone ever be sentenced to life without the ability to appeal for parole? if they don't deserve parole or are too dangerous to release, reaffirm that decision at points of regular review
i mean
i know the answer, it's because our society sucks but
It was basically invented as the compromise to eliminate the death penalty. Even though it is still effectively a death penalty, just much longer than the length of a gallows.
+7
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
I won't defend life without parole but the possibility of appeal makes it much more preferable to the death penalty.
1) Father abused his mother extremely violently
2) Mother left the father, married another man who...abused the kid (he's ~15 at this point)
3) Kid takes a swing at stepfather, is sent to live with grandparents
4) Kid invites his girlfriend to join him at grandparents without telling them
5) Grandpa figures it out, gets angry, they get in a fight in the kitchen, kid stabs his grandfather several times in the altercation. Then tries to do CPR but fails. Grandpa dies, kid...wanders around with a bloody shirt, tries to hitch a ride to his grandma to tell her what happened. Like clearly did a stupid and terrible thing because he was an idiot teenager who was frequently abused.
6) Is picked up by police, doesn't ask for a lawyer or anything, confesses
7) Sentenced to life without parole as a 15 year old
8) Is a model prisoner by basically all accounts
9) Is resentenced to LWOP despite clear SCOTUS precedent that children cannot receive that sentence unless they are corrupted beyond redemption. Despite the testimony of his grandmother (the man who was killed's widow, remember) that he should be given the chance for parole.
10) Sues not for immediate release, but for the opportunity to someday get parole (he's now 31 and has spent more than half his life in prison).
11) Kavanaugh and the conservatives are like "nah" and we're overturning precedent but not going to say those previous cases were wrongly decided. We're just going to kind of ignore them because fuck black kids in the South.
Very much so and if you read anything of the decision, you should read Sotomayor's extra-spicy dissent.
Today, however, the Court reduces Miller to a decision requiring “just a discretionary sentencing procedure where youth [is] considered.” Ante, at 11. Such an abrupt break from precedent demands “special justification.” Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U. S. ___, ___ (2020) (KAVANAUGH, J., con-curring in part) (slip op., at 6) (internal quotation marksomitted). The Court offers none. Instead, the Court at-tempts to circumvent stare decisis principles by claiming that “[t]he Court’s decision today carefully follows both Mil-ler and Montgomery.” Ante, at 19. The Court is fooling no one. Because I cannot countenance the Court’s abandon-ment of Miller and Montgomery, I dissent.
She is calling Kavanaugh out on the gigantic pile of bullshit he used in the majority decision. And kinda flipping the chief justice the finger at the same time over his precious "stare decsis" not being used in this case. She knew she was going down but she went down swinging for the fence.
She’s also writing for future justices. I bet this dissent winds up cited in the case overturning this terrible decision.
[t]he Court’s decision today carefully follows both Mil-ler and Montgomery.
Look if I say it, then it's totally true! This new conservative majority's willingness to just throw out judicial principle when it suits them scares the shit out of me. At least the old conservatives made an attempt to dress up their bullshit in legitimate legal framework - this new method of going "uh yeah this time the law is applied this way, but maybe not for other cases like it, because of reasons that we're going to very noticeably not discuss" seems insane.
[t]he Court’s decision today carefully follows both Mil-ler and Montgomery.
Look if I say it, then it's totally true! This new conservative majority's willingness to just throw out judicial principle when it suits them scares the shit out of me. At least the old conservatives made an attempt to dress up their bullshit in legitimate legal framework - this new method of going "uh yeah this time the law is applied this way but maybe not for other cases like it because of reasons that we're going to very noticeable not discuss" seems insane.
Mark my words, they’re going to de facto overturn roper v Simmons and its progeny so executing juveniles will be constitutional again.
[t]he Court’s decision today carefully follows both Mil-ler and Montgomery.
Look if I say it, then it's totally true! This new conservative majority's willingness to just throw out judicial principle when it suits them scares the shit out of me. At least the old conservatives made an attempt to dress up their bullshit in legitimate legal framework - this new method of going "uh yeah this time the law is applied this way but maybe not for other cases like it because of reasons that we're going to very noticeable not discuss" seems insane.
Mark my words, they’re going to de facto overturn roper v Simmons and its progeny so executing juveniles will be constitutional again.
I imagine you're right. Based on the the barbarism and purposeful blinders put on display in this ruling, I also suspect they're going to rule that anything goes with administering the death penalty; use whatever chemicals you want, cruel and unusual punishment doesn't exist. If some state can get a death penalty case up to them.
Oh I forgot that when he went to live with his grandparents, he couldn't take his anti-depressants with him for whatever reason, so had dropped those cold turkey. Dude had a billion mitigating circumstances and almost definitely deserves to be paroled at some point...possibly like 10 years ago, tbh.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
What kills me is he literally doesn't care. The man is the biggest piece of shit hyprocrit in the world and he doesn't give a flying fuck.
Oh, it's just that Frank Wilhoit quote again.
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
The hypocrisy is a deliberate part of their philosophy.
Oh I forgot that when he went to live with his grandparents, he couldn't take his anti-depressants with him for whatever reason, so had dropped those cold turkey. Dude had a billion mitigating circumstances and almost definitely deserves to be paroled at some point...possibly like 10 years ago, tbh.
The fuck?
Impeach every fucking judge who decided this was remotely permissible and disbar every fucking lawyer who defended it.
Oh I forgot that when he went to live with his grandparents, he couldn't take his anti-depressants with him for whatever reason, so had dropped those cold turkey. Dude had a billion mitigating circumstances and almost definitely deserves to be paroled at some point...possibly like 10 years ago, tbh.
The fuck?
Impeach every fucking judge who decided this was remotely permissible and disbar every fucking lawyer who defended it.
Oh I forgot that when he went to live with his grandparents, he couldn't take his anti-depressants with him for whatever reason, so had dropped those cold turkey. Dude had a billion mitigating circumstances and almost definitely deserves to be paroled at some point...possibly like 10 years ago, tbh.
Holy crap...cold turkey off anti depressants? (Which given his history of abuse i'm going to bet were heavy duty stuff and/or doses) A white kid with a decent lawyer would have been put into some special clinic and back out in society in a year or two.
Late to the scotus committee bit, but in my head I've decided that what they're investigating is Kavanaugh himself to unearth his skeletons. Makes me feel better, esp after this ruling.
The Federal Trade Commission can’t force companies that engage in wrongdoing to pay back consumers or give up ill-gotten profit, the Supreme Court held Thursday, dealing a huge blow to the agency that could hamper its antitrust and privacy cases.
The FTC’s authority under a provision known as Section 13(b) is limited to seeking an injunction to stop illegal actions and doesn’t authorize it to seek monetary remedies like restitution, Justice Stephen Breyer wrote for the unanimous court.
This is utterly fucked, and yet in line with the gooseshit rulings that have basically gutted anti-corruption laws. It also shows why we need justices from places other than Harvard, Yale, or Stanford.
The Roberts court has been one of the most massively pro-corruption supreme courts in history even before any of the Trump nominees (who were all in one way or another directly appointed by corrupt practices). So yeah.
The Roberts court has been one of the most massively pro-corruption supreme courts in history even before any of the Trump nominees (who were all in one way or another directly appointed by corrupt practices). So yeah.
What is disturbing is that many of those rulings were unanimous or close to it. Which illustrates that the problem is deeper than just who is on the Court.
Or maybe it indicates that the law doesn't say what you want it to say. When nine justices agree on something, it's rather bullheaded to insist that their position doesn't have any merit.
The Federal Trade Commission can’t force companies that engage in wrongdoing to pay back consumers or give up ill-gotten profit, the Supreme Court held Thursday, dealing a huge blow to the agency that could hamper its antitrust and privacy cases.
The FTC’s authority under a provision known as Section 13(b) is limited to seeking an injunction to stop illegal actions and doesn’t authorize it to seek monetary remedies like restitution, Justice Stephen Breyer wrote for the unanimous court.
This is utterly fucked, and yet in line with the gooseshit rulings that have basically gutted anti-corruption laws. It also shows why we need justices from places other than Harvard, Yale, or Stanford.
The unanimity suggests the problem is with the written black letter law, not the Court. Seeing how rich people get scammed, Congress will likely fix that fairly quickly.
+20
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
are there other agencies that are responsible for seeking damages or anything of that sort?
9-0 to me tends to signal the process was wrong because there is some other responsible party
Allegedly a voice of reason.
+9
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
are there other agencies that are responsible for seeking damages or anything of that sort?
9-0 to me tends to signal the process was wrong because there is some other responsible party
Light googling says that the FTC can seek damages, but under Section 19 and Section 5(l) which require administrative adjudications to be done first. The FTC was using Section 13(b) which seems to let them go straight to court.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
+1
Options
BrodyThe WatchThe First ShoreRegistered Userregular
As much as I would like to have stronger controls for corporate entities, it sounds like the law as written doesn't provide them the power to do what they were doing, and continuing to allow them to do so would be legislating from the bench, which is bad from either side.
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
The FTC is a toothless organization by design, courts find in favor of intended design, legislature will not do jack shit to give them teeth because then rich donors might get bitten.
why should anyone ever be sentenced to life without the ability to appeal for parole? if they don't deserve parole or are too dangerous to release, reaffirm that decision at points of regular review
i mean
i know the answer, it's because our society sucks but
It was basically invented as the compromise to eliminate the death penalty. Even though it is still effectively a death penalty, just much longer than the length of a gallows.
Posts
that's just people
On a more series note, the shadow docket is already in the crosshairs for reform and people have noted many of the most controversy decisions in recent history have been a result of the shadow docket. I'd love to see Congress and the Presidency declare that anything made under the shadow docket is null and void. If it's to be the law of the land, the backers of something better have the fucking spine to put their name on it. If they can't do that, that should tell them that it probably shouldn't be the law of the land.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
The entire game here is to make a specific flavour of christianity and it's attendant moral beliefs the dominant legal religion and legal framework in the US and the rest is just a pantomime to get to that end.
which will be given lip service and used to oppress, while the in group continues to worship their true god Mammon. :P
Lochner Jesus
Is he the first cousin of Supply Side Jesus or his dad. I can't keep the lineage straight.
It's like the trinity thing along with Bootstraps Jesus. They're all the same but different in ineffable ways.
Which sucks because I want them the eff out of the law.
Link to decision
The threat started with the first tweet also goes over the other two cases released today. They are less barbarously decided. The idea that we can send a 15 year old child to life imprisonment on the whim of an old white guy isn't something to be taken lightly. And we already know that it's not going to be something decided consistently along any sort of racial, economic, or other lines. Meaning this isn't a decision that someone like Rittenhouse is going to have to ever worry about.
1) Father abused his mother extremely violently
2) Mother left the father, married another man who...abused the kid (he's ~15 at this point)
3) Kid takes a swing at stepfather, is sent to live with grandparents
4) Kid invites his girlfriend to join him at grandparents without telling them
5) Grandpa figures it out, gets angry, they get in a fight in the kitchen, kid stabs his grandfather several times in the altercation. Then tries to do CPR but fails. Grandpa dies, kid...wanders around with a bloody shirt, tries to hitch a ride to his grandma to tell her what happened. Like clearly did a stupid and terrible thing because he was an idiot teenager who was frequently abused.
6) Is picked up by police, doesn't ask for a lawyer or anything, confesses
7) Sentenced to life without parole as a 15 year old
8) Is a model prisoner by basically all accounts
9) Is resentenced to LWOP despite clear SCOTUS precedent that children cannot receive that sentence unless they are corrupted beyond redemption. Despite the testimony of his grandmother (the man who was killed's widow, remember) that he should be given the chance for parole.
10) Sues not for immediate release, but for the opportunity to someday get parole (he's now 31 and has spent more than half his life in prison).
11) Kavanaugh and the conservatives are like "nah" and we're overturning precedent but not going to say those previous cases were wrongly decided. We're just going to kind of ignore them because fuck black kids in the South.
Very much so and if you read anything of the decision, you should read Sotomayor's extra-spicy dissent.
She is calling Kavanaugh out on the gigantic pile of bullshit he used in the majority decision. And kinda flipping the chief justice the finger at the same time over his precious "stare decsis" not being used in this case. She knew she was going down but she went down swinging for the fence.
i mean
i know the answer, it's because our society sucks but
It was basically invented as the compromise to eliminate the death penalty. Even though it is still effectively a death penalty, just much longer than the length of a gallows.
She’s also writing for future justices. I bet this dissent winds up cited in the case overturning this terrible decision.
God I fucking hate Kavanaugh.
Look if I say it, then it's totally true! This new conservative majority's willingness to just throw out judicial principle when it suits them scares the shit out of me. At least the old conservatives made an attempt to dress up their bullshit in legitimate legal framework - this new method of going "uh yeah this time the law is applied this way, but maybe not for other cases like it, because of reasons that we're going to very noticeably not discuss" seems insane.
Mark my words, they’re going to de facto overturn roper v Simmons and its progeny so executing juveniles will be constitutional again.
I imagine you're right. Based on the the barbarism and purposeful blinders put on display in this ruling, I also suspect they're going to rule that anything goes with administering the death penalty; use whatever chemicals you want, cruel and unusual punishment doesn't exist. If some state can get a death penalty case up to them.
My anger is incandescent.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
What kills me is he literally doesn't care. The man is the biggest piece of shit hyprocrit in the world and he doesn't give a flying fuck.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Oh, it's just that Frank Wilhoit quote again.
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
The hypocrisy is a deliberate part of their philosophy.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
The fuck?
Impeach every fucking judge who decided this was remotely permissible and disbar every fucking lawyer who defended it.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
We live in an unfathomably cruel country
Holy crap...cold turkey off anti depressants? (Which given his history of abuse i'm going to bet were heavy duty stuff and/or doses) A white kid with a decent lawyer would have been put into some special clinic and back out in society in a year or two.
You can do that to everyone else, though
This is utterly fucked, and yet in line with the gooseshit rulings that have basically gutted anti-corruption laws. It also shows why we need justices from places other than Harvard, Yale, or Stanford.
What is disturbing is that many of those rulings were unanimous or close to it. Which illustrates that the problem is deeper than just who is on the Court.
The unanimity suggests the problem is with the written black letter law, not the Court. Seeing how rich people get scammed, Congress will likely fix that fairly quickly.
9-0 to me tends to signal the process was wrong because there is some other responsible party
Light googling says that the FTC can seek damages, but under Section 19 and Section 5(l) which require administrative adjudications to be done first. The FTC was using Section 13(b) which seems to let them go straight to court.
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
And there’s still a death penalty anyways