Faceplams Faceplams:  0
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 93

Thread: The Supreme Court thread

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    12,600
    Mentioned
    848 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Deacon Blackfire View Post
    lmao I can't even get real about the fact I don't think I'm gonna make it past fifty in the climate change ravaged world we've got coming without getting aggressively talked down to by the Democratic defense league. and I thought I was depressed before!

    that's all for me folks, why the fuck do I even bother.
    Dude, I’m not even a Democrat. And that wasn’t wholly addressed at you. One or two lines were. I don’t believe that Democrats aren’t on board with doing something about climate change, but that’s drift in the SCOTUS thread.

    I’m just as depressed as you are. We all are.

    This is the SCOTUS thread. There is nothing unconstitutional or illegal occurring right now. It’s too late to fix this. The 2016 election determined this outcome.

    And, there is also no guarantee that a majority conservative SCOTUS will toe Trump’s line in all instances; Roberts is the Chief Justice. He doesn’t even have to accept a Writ in the instance of an alleged “election dispute.”

    We’ve HAD a conservative SCOTUS court many times in the past. They don’t last if Dems last 2 terms in the WH and are in the Senate. Thomas and Alito are old, Thomas wants to retire.
    Last edited by allegro; 09-25-2020 at 11:55 AM.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    12,600
    Mentioned
    848 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sebek View Post
    This is so fucking depressing. It's not going to happen overnight but they're going to slowly chip away at Roe v Wade until there's not much left of it. My one year old daughter is going to have her choices on how to manage her body removed by the time she's an adult.
    FWIW:

    13 states and the District of Columbia have laws that protect the right to abortion, by statute.

    2 states and the District of Columbia have codified the right to abortion throughout pregnancy without state interference.

    11 states explicitly permit abortion prior to viability or when necessary to protect the life or health of the woman.

    If Roe is overturned by the SCOTUS, nothing will change in those states and the District of Columbia.

    See "What if Roe Fell."

    Further, it would be entirely possible for other states to pass legislation that legalizes abortion per a revision in those states' respective constitutions (or codification).

    Please note that Amy Coney Barrett has indicated that she subscribes to the doctrine of stare decisis, and has further indicated that she does not believe that Roe (or Casey) will ever be overturned; she said the only future argument would be as to whether or not the federal government has a responsibility to pay for abortions, which is not covered by Roe or Casey. Coney Barrett doesn't like late-term abortions, but both Roe and Casey enable states to limit or ban late-term abortions, which pro-life people so conveniently fail to mention (or just don't know, since they don't sit down and READ Roe or Casey, which of course isn't the case with Coney Barrett but she would appeal to pro-life voters by vocalizing opposition to late-term abortions, which people also fail to mention are extremely rare and damned near unobtainable).

    Note that Coney Barrett, like Clarence Thomas, is NO friend to qualified immunity, nor does she always side with the government and the prosecutors.

    Edit: Coney Barrett hates the ACA, but that doesn’t mean she would be able to get rid of it (depends on the cases against it). This conservative court doesn’t look good for universal healthcare, though.
    Last edited by allegro; 09-26-2020 at 12:07 AM.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    5,216
    Mentioned
    66 Post(s)
    Trump Selects Amy Coney Barrett to Fill Ginsburg’s Seat on the Supreme Court

    ETA--looks like it's not 100% confirmed, but looking like it will be her.
    Last edited by GulDukat; 09-25-2020 at 06:14 PM.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    7,588
    Mentioned
    423 Post(s)
    it's gonna be her, unless they find some horrifying skeleton in her closet during this rushed vetting process.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    277
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Jinsai View Post
    it's gonna be her, unless they find some horrifying skeleton in her closet during this rushed vetting process.
    Everyone has a closet full of skeletons. It's the imperfect nature of human existence. We all have flaws. And the magnitude of the flaws we harbor is subject to interpretation. But she sure seems young for filling this position. Much younger than I am, although I suppose that no longer has much relevance. Her age could portend a very long tenure.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    7,588
    Mentioned
    423 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by zero View Post
    Everyone has a closet full of skeletons. It's the imperfect nature of human existence. We all have flaws. And the magnitude of the flaws we harbor is subject to interpretation. But she sure seems young for filling this position. Much younger than I am, although I suppose that no longer has much relevance. Her age could portend a very long tenure.

    That's the appeal... it's why she's so young, and Kavanaugh was young too. It's not a coincidence. You'll be living with these decisions for the rest of your life.

    "BUT I WANTED TO SAY THAT I DIDN'T LIKE HILLARY! AND SHE HAD EMAILS OR SOMETHING!!!!! BENGHAZI!!!!!"

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    12,600
    Mentioned
    848 Post(s)
    Justice Kagan was appointed to the SCOTUS at 50.

    Justice Sotomayor was appointed to the SCOTUS at 55.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    183
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    god motherfucking jesus shit dicks damnit fuck.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    5,216
    Mentioned
    66 Post(s)
    I think that our best hope at this point is that more Supreme Court Justices are added to offset the 6-3 super majority that the conservatives are about to have. Let's hope for a massive blue-wave in November.

    VOTE!
    VOTE!
    VOTE!
    VOTE!
    VOTE!
    VOTE!
    VOTE!
    VOTE!
    VOTE!
    VOTE!
    VOTE!
    VOTE!
    VOTE!
    VOTE!
    VOTE!
    VOTE!
    VOTE!
    VOTE!

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    7,588
    Mentioned
    423 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by allegro View Post
    Justice Kagan was appointed to the SCOTUS at 50.

    Justice Sotomayor was appointed to the SCOTUS at 55.
    Same strategy, same reasoning behind it. You don't nominate a very old Justice for that reason. I think RBG was 60 when she was appointed?

    All I'm saying is that I am hearing way too many people underestimating the importance of the Supreme Court, just like they did in 2016, and they're these idealists whining into the void about the impotency of incrementalism... If Hillary FUCKING Clinton was elected, we at least wouldn't be looking at this aspect to the insanity.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    12,600
    Mentioned
    848 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Jinsai View Post
    Same strategy, same reasoning behind it. You don't nominate a very old Justice for that reason. I think RBG was 60 when she was appointed?

    All I'm saying is that I am hearing way too many people underestimating the importance of the Supreme Court, just like they did in 2016, and they're these idealists whining into the void about the impotency of incrementalism... If Hillary FUCKING Clinton was elected, we at least wouldn't be looking at this aspect to the insanity.
    Yup, absolutely.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    5,216
    Mentioned
    66 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Jinsai View Post
    Same strategy, same reasoning behind it. You don't nominate a very old Justice for that reason. I think RBG was 60 when she was appointed?

    All I'm saying is that I am hearing way too many people underestimating the importance of the Supreme Court, just like they did in 2016, and they're these idealists whining into the void about the impotency of incrementalism... If Hillary FUCKING Clinton was elected, we at least wouldn't be looking at this aspect to the insanity.
    I get pissed when I hear some people say "(Clinton/Biden) hasn't earned my vote. So I'm either going to vote for (Stein, Hawkins) instead." Just think of The Supreme Court, ffs.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    7,588
    Mentioned
    423 Post(s)
    she's got Michelle Bachmann eyes... yeah, I'm not feeling this.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,489
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Jinsai View Post
    she's got Michelle Bachmann eyes... yeah, I'm not feeling this.
    i try not to judge based on looks but i see what you’re saying.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    1,905
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    I'm not going to share that fucking Notorious ACB shirt, but my god, what a thirsty fucking clown thing to do. We gotta get as many of these fuckers out of office as we can.

  16. #76
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    W/A
    Posts
    3,797
    Mentioned
    115 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by zero View Post
    Everyone has a closet full of skeletons. It's the imperfect nature of human existence. We all have flaws. And the magnitude of the flaws we harbor is subject to interpretation. But she sure seems young for filling this position. Much younger than I am, although I suppose that no longer has much relevance. Her age could portend a very long tenure.
    Is it any weirder than appointing a Chief Justice? I seem to recall that being a point of contention.


  17. #77
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    7,588
    Mentioned
    423 Post(s)
    well, while on one hand I think a SCOTUS nominee should be able to pronounce "poignant," I am not gonna die on that hill

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    5,216
    Mentioned
    66 Post(s)

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    1,143
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    of course she doesn't commit.

    she knows what she plans on doing.

    probably part of the deal she struck when Trump "interviewed" her for the job.

    really really hope there's a strong democrat voter turnout in texas and florida. I don't trust the governors of either state and expect some bs to happen.

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    5,790
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)

  21. #81
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    W/A
    Posts
    3,797
    Mentioned
    115 Post(s)


    The most confusing thing I've read so far today.

  22. #82
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Ontari-ari-ario
    Posts
    4,690
    Mentioned
    188 Post(s)


    Fucking finally. I hope this shit works!

  23. #83
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Chicago, USA
    Posts
    962
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    These fuckers did it...

  24. #84
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,122
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by hellospaceboy View Post
    These fuckers did it...
    Win presidency.
    Win Senate.
    Eliminate filibuster.
    Expand to 13.
    Force Breyer to retire.
    DC & PR statehood.
    Do it all in 2021. No waffling. Playing nice doesn't work anymore and that should be the party line and not some radical left <gasp!> <clutch pearls!> pipe dream. Do the above and ensure no GOP majority in the Senate for the foreseeable future. Only then can we start getting shit done.

  25. #85
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    W/A
    Posts
    3,797
    Mentioned
    115 Post(s)

  26. #86
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    12,600
    Mentioned
    848 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by cdm View Post
    Win presidency.
    Win Senate.
    Eliminate filibuster.
    Expand to 13.
    Force Breyer to retire.
    DC & PR statehood.
    Do it all in 2021. No waffling. Playing nice doesn't work anymore and that should be the party line and not some radical left <gasp!> <clutch pearls!> pipe dream. Do the above and ensure no GOP majority in the Senate for the foreseeable future. Only then can we start getting shit done.
    I'll go further.

    Expand Federal Circuit to 15 (it's currently 13, packed with Republican-appointed justices, too small), appoint additional Justices.

    Expand SCOTUS to 15.

  27. #87
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,122
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by allegro View Post
    I'll go further.
    I'll allow it.

  28. #88
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Bayonne Leave It Alone
    Posts
    4,402
    Mentioned
    82 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by cdm View Post
    Win presidency.
    Win Senate.
    Eliminate filibuster.
    Expand to 13.
    Force Breyer to retire.
    DC & PR statehood.
    Do it all in 2021. No waffling. Playing nice doesn't work anymore and that should be the party line and not some radical left <gasp!> <clutch pearls!> pipe dream. Do the above and ensure no GOP majority in the Senate for the foreseeable future. Only then can we start getting shit done.
    They will only POSSIBLY do the filibuster and DC & PR statehood. Current Dem leadership clearly does not have the will for court reform in any way. They are absolutely terrible and spineless. They could have blocked Barrett at least for the rest of the year, if not for good, and CHOSE not to do the aggressive tactics they could have employed to do so. Feckless, the lot of them. Schumer and Pelosi needed to be catapulted into the sun.

  29. #89
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    1,905
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bobbie solo View Post
    They will only POSSIBLY do the filibuster and DC & PR statehood. Current Dem leadership clearly does not have the will for court reform in any way. They are absolutely terrible and spineless. They could have blocked Barrett at least for the rest of the year, if not for good, and CHOSE not to do the aggressive tactics they could have employed to do so. Feckless, the lot of them. Schumer and Pelosi needed to be catapulted into the sun.
    They can’t even do statehood with the eliminated filibuster because the 6-3 conservative court will strike down every bit of legislation after the GOP challenges. Expand the court and rebalance it.

  30. #90
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    12,600
    Mentioned
    848 Post(s)
    The Senate Dems tried blocking Barrett. (The House can't do shit, they have zero Constitutional power re SCOTUS.)

    The Senate Dems didn't show up for the vote, so the Senate wouldn't have quorum. The Republicans proceeded ANYWAY, without quorum. Which the Republicans did with Kavanaugh.

    https://www.justsecurity.org/72521/s...court-nominee/

    The time to block a Republican SCOTUS pick was the 2016 Presidential election.

Posting Permissions