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

[China]

It's not just about the President.  It doesn't matter if there's a Democrat in the White House if they can't push anything through the Senate.  They need to figure out how to get 60 Democrats elected to the Senate (since they won't eliminate the filibuster).

 

 

Edited June 30, 2022 by China

[mistertim]

15 hours ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

This guy needs to go. He can’t run again, he’s simply not up for the fight that this moment demands 

 

 

 

I don't think SCOTUS needs Biden's help when it comes to undermining public trust in the institution. They're doing quite a good job of that themselves.

[Cooked Crack]

 

[mistertim]

   

 

Thomas literally cited a debunked right wing conspiracy theory in an official SCOTUS dissent.

[Llevron]

12 minutes ago, mistertim said:

   

 

Thomas literally cited a debunked right wing conspiracy theory in an official SCOTUS dissent.

Right. What the **** is up with this guy 

[The Evil Genius]

18 minutes ago, mistertim said:

   

 

Thomas literally cited a debunked right wing conspiracy theory in an official SCOTUS dissent.

 

[88Comrade2000]

50 minutes ago, Llevron said:

They never anticipated the Republicans to be this radical or go this far. And at some level I can understand that. I assumed a lot of this stuff was just politics and posturing myself. 
 

But they work in the same building as those **** suckers. They should know if anyone. 

Well assumed wrong. Why do think the gop focused on the courts and winning the at the state level.  
 

 

Remember Bush won re-election in 2004 partly on banning gay marriage. There were several states that had that on the ballot that year.

 

 

The gop has been telling you for years what they would do, if they got power.

Now, we are seeing that come into full fruition and if they get full control in 25 and keep control at the state level; you will see what they will do.

[bcl05]

The crazies on the court weren't satisfied with just being a dire threat to women's lives, now they are a danger to the whole damn planet.  

[tshile]

ok. I’ll play along

 

How do you test a vaccine on an aborted child?

edit: ok I misunderstood. I guess it’s the stem cell thing. I thought he was saying it was tested that way. My bad. 

Edited June 30, 2022 by tshile

[mistertim]

4 minutes ago, tshile said:

ok. I’ll play along

 

How do you test a vaccine on an aborted child?

 

 

I assume he means something about stem cells?

 

Or he's just a ****ing lunatic.

[Fan since a Fetus]

9 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

I assume he means something about stem cells?

 

Or he's just a ****ing lunatic.

I think it’s both

[@DCGoldPants]

They never did say what his extended hospital say was about. I'd guess stroke and his brain is in bad shape. But that doesn't explain the previous decades.

[Corcaigh]

1 hour ago, mistertim said:

   

 

Thomas literally cited a debunked right wing conspiracy theory in an official SCOTUS dissent.

You have this all wrong. As Thomas, Alito and Gorsich were the only three who dissented, Kavanaugh, Barrett and Roberts are in favor of using aborted. children in medical experiments (along with the libs of course).

[CousinsCowgirl84]

16 hours ago, Llevron said:

If Dems just bow out of the way of an 100 year old man I don’t know what I’ll do but it will start with lots of bourbon

You guys should be careful what you wish for. Biden was the most centrist candidate and he barely won in quite a few important states. Who do you think will appeal to voters like he did? I think it’s too easy to say not him without knowing  what the alternative is. Harris vs DeSantis probably isn’t a favorable matchup.

Edited June 30, 2022 by CousinsCowgirl84

[tshile]

I don’t think Harris vs anyone is a good idea for the dems. She doesn’t appear all that popular, or well liked, and I’m not even sure what you can point to as being successful or meaningful during her tenure as VP…

[Llevron]

32 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

You guys should be careful what you wish for. Biden was the most centrist candidate and he barely won in quite a few important states. Who do you think will appeal to voters like he did? I think it’s too easy to say not home without knowing  what the alternative is. Harris vs DeSantis probably isn’t a favorable matchup.

I’m not super hot on Harris either honestly. 
 

And me not wanting the Dems to roll over for Biden doesn’t mean I wouldn’t vote for him if I had to. But we have a primary process for a reason. I just don’t want it to be a ‘look at all we accomplished’ thing this year. They have to get more **** done and if that means he needs some competitors to bring more ideas to the table then I’m all for it. I just don’t want them to start the process with the ending already planned out. I always feel like they do that and I don’t think it’s a good idea right now

14 minutes ago, tshile said:

I don’t think Harris vs anyone is a good idea for the dems. She doesn’t appear all that popular, or well liked, and I’m not even sure what you can point to as being successful or meaningful during her tenure as VP…

I would be thrilled if Biden replaced her 

 

Im the burn the house down type of guy tho I guess. And I’m putting zero analysis into any of my opinions at the e moment. Just feeling. 

[88Comrade2000]

44 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

You guys should be careful what you wish for. Biden was the most centrist candidate and he barely won in quite a few important states. Who do you think will appeal to voters like he did? I think it’s too easy to say not home without knowing  what the alternative is. Harris vs DeSantis probably isn’t a favorable matchup.

Harris will never be the nominee.  Only way she gets to be president is if Biden dies in office.

 

The gop is the heavy favorites in 24. Whoever is the Dem candidate; has Biden’s presidency hanging around them.

Biden has a poor record and at 82; he won’t have ability to defend it or fight against the gop. The Dem candidate will likely lose in 24; but the Dems are better off with someone other than Biden in 24.

[Riggo-toni]

What we need is about a 12 year one term for the justices, and a mandatory retirement age at 70.

[China]

On 6/24/2022 at 1:43 PM, Fan since a Fetus said:

I got a vasectomy last week. During the operation, the doctor asked me questions about the Supreme Court, such as what I think about people going to their houses and protesting, etc…

 

I was uncomfortable to say the least. I was under the impression that he was Republican prior to the surgery.  Not that that should matter, I still went to him, but it does matter when someone is operating on you. I told my wife, that when we do sperm count, I will be getting a second test to confirm his. 
 

I am still have a complications from the surgery. I’m told to be patient, but everyone I know that has had one hasn’t had complications……only brought this up because of the abortion issue. 

 

 

Men rush to get vasectomies after Roe ruling

 

Thomas Figueroa always knew he didn’t want children. Growing up in Central Florida, he remembers his classmates getting pregnant as early as middle school, and had considered getting a vasectomy for the past few years.

 

But after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade on Friday, he rushed to schedule one. He registered Monday for a vasectomy with Doug Stein, a Florida urologist known as the “Vasectomy King” for his advocacy of the procedure.

 

“It is something I put on the back-burner of my mind until very recently, when the Supreme Court decision happened,” said Figueroa, 27, who lives in Tampa. “That was basically the triggering factor right there. It pushed my mind to say: ‘Okay, I really do not want children. I’m going to get this vasectomy now.’ ”

 

Figueroa is not alone. Urologists told The Washington Post that they have seen a spike in requests for the procedure in response to the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

 

Stein said that before Friday, he received four or five vasectomy requests a day. Since the court’s decision was announced, that number has spiked to 12 to 18 requests per day.

 

“It was very, very noticeable Friday, and then the number that came in over the weekend was huge and the number that is still coming in far exceeds what we have experienced in the past,” Stein told The Post. “Many of the guys are saying that they have been thinking about a vasectomy for a while, and the Roe v. Wade decision was just that final factor that tipped them over the edge and made them submit the online registration.”

 

Stein said his practice is booked through the end of August with vasectomy appointments, prompting him to open up more days in his schedule to accommodate patients who have recently registered. He and his associate, John Curington, said the decision overturning Roe has directly factored into their patients’ requests for vasectomies. Men under the age of 30 who do not have children are requesting vasectomies in greater numbers than before, the physicians said.

 

“I’d say at least 60 or 70 percent are mentioning the Supreme Court decision,” Curington said. “And a few of them have such sophistication as young men that they actually are thinking about Justice Thomas and his opinion that contraception may fall next. And that’s shocking. That’s something that doesn’t enter into our conversations ever, until this week.”

 

Click on the link for the full article

 

 

 

[The Evil Genius]

46 minutes ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

Harris will never be the nominee.  Only way she gets to be president is if Biden dies in office.

 

The gop is the heavy favorites in 24. Whoever is the Dem candidate; has Biden’s presidency hanging around them.

Biden has a poor record and at 82; he won’t have ability to defend it or fight against the gop. The Dem candidate will likely lose in 24; but the Dems are better off with someone other than Biden in 24.

 

Thr incumbent always has the advantage.  Even in a down economy (it isn't down really).

 

That said,  don't ever rule out a younger Dem candidate capturing lighting (like Bubba and Obama) did. Is that Gavin Newsom? Meh. I like him. But will everyone? He's brash. He's definitely skilled. But he also has skeletons that Fox News will run ad nauseum while ignoring Trump/DeSantis's major skeletons. 

 

Edit..this isn't the thread for this discussion though. Maybe a 2024 thread needs to be started.  🤔

Edited June 30, 2022 by The Evil Genius

[tshile]

I say no to thread. Too far out. Not enough to discuss. Wait until at least candidacies start being declared 

[gbear]

I still like Mayor Pete.

[The Evil Genius]

 

 

In more positive news...

Edited June 30, 2022 by The Evil Genius

[The Sisko]

4 hours ago, Llevron said:

They never anticipated the Republicans to be this radical or go this far. And at some level I can understand that. I assumed a lot of this stuff was just politics and posturing myself. 
 

But they work in the same building as those **** suckers. They should know if anyone. 

I honestly don't fault them for that, at least to some degree anyway. I knew they'd have no problems gutting pretty much any freedoms using the garbage SCOTUS. However, my concept of how far they'd go in the other two branches was completely and totally out of step with reality and I didn't realize they were willing to go full fascist until Tя☭mp. It's possible that his election and subsequent unpunished malfeasance opened their eyes to the scale of the advantage they've created for themselves and their base's blind loyalty and it emboldened them. Either way, the day of Tя☭mp's election should have been a wake up call for everyone that this is actually war and needs to be approached that way.

 

4 hours ago, Llevron said:

Right. What the **** is up with this guy 

His sole purpose is to be a troll. He's definitely done a good job of that.

 

Regarding the reversal of Roe, the evisceration of the separation of church and state and now this, I think the best way to fight back is to make a mockery of the whole thing. As my 7th grade algebra teacher used to say "Use the test to take the test". So in states where Roe is/will be illegal due to ridiculous personhood law, sue to make them provide "birth"/death certificates and public services for every embryo whenever it passes their threshold. Likewise, embryos brought about in infertility treatments, even the frozen ones, should be treated similarly. As a person at that point, those embryos have constitutional rights. Public services is just a start. A LOT of mayhem can be caused with personhood. For their BS religious freedom rulings, it means their kids' little Xtian minds can be assaulted with Muslim or even Church of Satan prayers...assuming (which I don't) the garbage SCOTUS won't just disregard that whole prohibition on state establishment of religion. In the end, the unintended consequences that will follow from these rulings for certain segments of society are what will give us an admittedly small chance to beat the fascists in elections.

I've said it before, but another alternative is for states to simply stop adhering to the garbage SCOTUS' rulings. If the Anti-Freedom party wants to play it this way, then burn the rule of law down and let's see where that goes. It certainly wouldn't be pretty because red states would most certainly go nuts with their fascist agendas too, but that's where we are.

Edited June 30, 2022 by The Sisko

[China]

How the Supreme Court ruling will gut the EPA's ability to fight the climate crisis

 

The Supreme Court on Thursday dealt a major blow to climate action by handcuffing the Environmental Protection Agency's ability to regulate planet-warming emissions from the country's power plants, just as scientists warn the world is running out of time to get the climate crisis under control.

 

It is a major loss for not only the Biden administration's climate goals, but it also calls into question the future of federal-level climate action and puts even more pressure on Congress to act to reduce emissions.

Experts tell CNN it could set the US back years on its path to rein in the climate crisis and its deadly, costly impacts.

The opinion makes it "more difficult to achieve larger-scale emissions reductions," Andres Restrepo, senior attorney for the Sierra Club's Environmental Law Program, told CNN. "To avoid the worst impacts of climate change we need to do a lot more and move a lot faster. That's why today's ruling is such a setback."

 

At the heart of Thursday's opinion was a question over the EPA's authority to regulate planet-warming emissions from power plants, which are a huge contributor to the climate crisis.

 

"Failing to regulate heat-trapping emissions will harm people and ecosystems worldwide," said Kristina Dahl, a senior climate scientist with the Union of Concerned Scientists. "We're already dangerously behind what the science shows is necessary, and the court's majority has made solving the problem much more difficult."

 

The Supreme Court said the Clean Air Act does not give EPA broad authority to regulate planet-warming emissions from power plants. The agency still has options to regulate emissions, but the court said that the law does not empower the agency to put a limit on emissions and force power plants to move away from fossil fuels and toward renewable energy.

"The one thing EPA won't be able to do is what the Clean Power Plan did," Richard Revesz, an environmental law expert at NYU School of Law told CNN.

 

Click on the link for the full article