Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

SCOTUS: No longer content with stacking, they're now dealing from the bottom of the deck

Burgold

By Burgold
in The Tailgate

 Share

Recommended Posts

AsburySkinsFan

AsburySkinsFan

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, visionary said:

I do feel like we should cut Kennedy some slack at his age though.  so I sort of agree with the first part of your post.

If I were on the bench and I even remotely considered myself a moderate I'd die on there before allowing Trump to replace me.

Kennedy is surrendering his seat to hardliners.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AsburySkinsFan

AsburySkinsFan

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

I wonder if the Bernie bros see a difference between HRC and Trump now...

One more time...it's not their fault that Trump won. 

It's Hillary's fault that she couldn't muster enough votes to over come their protest votes.

It's the Democrats fault for not nominating the socialist old geezer.

It's the Hillary voter's fault for...well I was never quite clear on that part.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
visionary

visionary

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

Quote

Minutes after Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement on Wednesday, the conservative legal powerhouse Alliance Defending Freedom blasted out a lengthy statement criticizing Kennedy’s votes on LGBT and abortion rights — but predicting his replacement could change all of that.

 

"He deeply disappointed many Americans with his constitutional jurisprudence favoring abortion and same-sex marriage," said ADF president Mike Farris, who also argued in 2003 at the Supreme Court that gay sodomy should be a jailable crim

 

Meanwhile at the Heritage Foundation, a stone's throw from the Senate office buildings, staff cherished an opening to reshape the court and pave new ground where Kennedy had blocked their path.

 

Appointed by President Reagan, Kennedy had become the court’s regular “swing vote” — he agitated Christian conservatives when he wrote the landmark same-sex marriage ruling in 2015, and since then, he's proven a frustrating bulwark for gay rights.

 

"Kennedy would naturally feel protective of the decision that he authored, and it was a signature of his jurisprudence," Elizabeth Slattery, a legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation, told BuzzFeed News shortly after his announcement.

 

"It's only a matter of time until one of these cases comes back to the court, and it could be that Justice Kennedy didn't want to be there for that big issue,” she said.

 

One of those cases was at the Supreme Court this year — the high profile lawsuit involving a Christian baker, represented by ADF, who turned away a gay couple getting married.

 

ADF had hoped the case, like its cases involving a florist and calligrapher, could limit how gay couples celebrate their marriage. Gay couples may be able to marry legally, the group argued, but businesses could deny them the accessories of that union: flowers, custom cakes, invitations, or more.

 

Edited by visionary
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AsburySkinsFan

AsburySkinsFan

Posted
Posted (edited)

I feel like I'm going to puke.

Literally, I feel ill from this Kennedy announcement.

These people are disgusting excuses for human beings. They trade off fear, racism and hatred. They serve only to make the poor poorer and the rich richer. They want to force women to bear the children of their rapists. They want to discriminate against gays, and anyone non-white and non-Christian.

They fear NOTHING like they fear the loss of their privilege and authority. 

Edited by AsburySkinsFan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
visionary

visionary

Posted
Posted
Just now, The Evil Genius said:

40% of the Senate represents 10% of the population. 60% of it represents only 24% of the population. Always nice to have 1 in 4 people as the majority.

 

How ****ing stupid are we?

The senate isn't supposed to be representative.  That's what the House is for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
88Comrade2000

88Comrade2000

Posted
Posted

I expect the new judge to be seated in time for when the next term starts in October.  The next judge will shift things to hard right.

 

You will just have to vote Dems in the next few elections and have them win at all levels,.

 

What we need is a constitutional  admendment to get rid of lifetime appointments for judges.  Give them a 10 year term and then after 10 years, you could renominate them or pick someelse but you need to get rid of lifetime appointments for judges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
88Comrade2000

88Comrade2000

Posted
Posted

I think the evangelicals are orgasmic today.  It will not shock, if 9 months from now; you will see an increase in births.

 

This is what evangelicals have been waiting for.  To be able to put a right wing judge that will change the direction of the court.  Abortion gone. Gay marriage gone.  Thier White Christian theocracy dreams, finally able to be realized.

 

 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcdiscokid

dcdiscokid

Posted
Posted

So sad for my daughter growing up in this climate thats about to be created.  All though she is Jewish, she I suppose is fortunate enough to have my German last name and not look traditionally Jewish.  So terrible that what the people wanted is not represented in the outcome...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bearrock

bearrock

Posted
Posted

 It would also be nice to have constitutional amendments and legislative actions be source of changes too, but I doubt there's enough appetite on either side.  I mean if Ireland can pass a constitutional amendment on abortion, why can't US?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Rdskns2000 said:

Democrats sat out the 2014 midterms and lost the Supreme Court for a generation

 

This is a very good article and I want to highlight this part

 

Quote

Turns out the Supreme Court was the point. The lure of an open Supreme Court seat is why many conservatives turned out for Donald Trump in an exceptionally close election; it’s possible that McConnell’s gambit elected Trump.

 

I’ve said it a few times. I think people are over estimating people in the rights’ change in attitude towards trump. I’m willing to bet that while many dislike the way in which trump is doing things, they are generally pleased with the results (dismantling of govt agencies and roll backs of regulations, scotus and federal judgeships)

 

everywhere I read is that the left will landslide trump in 2020. The left might be energized to get out and vote and win, but I think the right will ultimately find trump to be more for their views than the dems and will vote for him. Even if they think he, as a person, is despicable 

 

(I don’t know if the blame assigned to the dems for the political environment in 2014 is fair, I feel like it was entirely the gop’s fault, I also think the gop may have dumbly found luck in results as opposed to having this big evil plan to hijack the courts)

Edited by tshile
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
twa

twa

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

Can't you do this in another thread that we all can ignore because you started it?

 

We could talk about Ann Coulter's merits. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, Rdskns2000 said:

What we need is a constitutional  admendment to get rid of lifetime appointments for judges.  Give them a 10 year term and then after 10 years, you could renominate them or pick someelse but you need to get rid of lifetime appointments for judges.

 

Ismt the entire point of the lack of term limits to prevent gaming the body because you don’t like the political leanings of the people that make it up? :rofl89:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcdiscokid

dcdiscokid

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, tshile said:

 

This is a very good article and I want to highlight this part

 

 

I’ve said it a few times. I think people are over estimating people in the rights’ change in attitude towards trump. I’m willing to bet that while many dislike the way in which trump is doing things, they are generally pleased with the results (dismantling of govt agencies and roll backs of regulations, scotus and federal judgeships)

 

everywhere I read is that the left will landslide trump in 2020. The left might be energized to get out and vote and win, but I think the right will ultimately find trump to be more for their views than the dems and will vote for him. Even if they think he, as a person, is despicable 

The problem is he's also rolling back many important things, if we dont address climate change, there will be many more flood events around the coasts.  There will be many more people impacted by flint type issues. You cant tell the EPA to have a blind eye, that impacts all Americans and sadly stupid things like abortion trump important things like environmental and health protections.  Who the hell cares that a 16 year didnt ruin her life and have an abortion to save the fact she would have no chance of not being a drag on society. And potentially the father too.. Thats just insane to me, but this also illustrates the difference in the sides.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, dcdiscokid said:

The problem is .... Thats just insane to me, but this also illustrates the difference in the sides.

 

I agree with you but the people on the right want all those things you and I think are bad. 

 

They want the epa dismantled. They thing climate change is something you can choose to not believe in. 

 

 

Edited by tshile
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lombardi's_kid_brother

Lombardi's_kid_brother

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Popeman38 said:

The man is 81 and has served honorably (and obstinately) for 30 years.  Trump didn't nominate a troll the first time, there is hope he will nominate a moderate.

 

I said hope visionary. Might not be much hope.  My main point is that Kennedy should not be derided for retiring...

 

There is no ****ing hope. He has outsourced his judicial nominees to the Federalist Society and they are not going to **** this up. There are people who have spent 35 years waiting for this one moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...