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

[Captain Wiggles]

🙄

 

[TheDoyler23]

1 hour ago, Captain Wiggles said:

🙄

Tuckkker Carlson vid 

 

[Long n Left]

2 hours ago, Captain Wiggles said:

🙄

 

Number one on my punch in the neck list

[Larry]

Does she need the long form LSAT?  

[Larry]

Or maybe "I'll release them after I'm in office."

[The Evil Genius]

 

 

 

 

Spoiler

 

 

[PeterMP]

delete

 

An attempt at humor but not sure it will come across right on the internet and all.

Edited March 4, 2022 by PeterMP

[China]

The Supreme Court Is Poised To Shift Executive Branch Power To Itself

 

The Supreme Court conservatives, exuding the heady self-confidence of a team that knows it cannot lose, haven’t been coy about the jurisprudence they want to reshape or tear down. 

Religious liberty, abortion, guns — the Court has recently taken up and dispensed with a whole swath of cases at astonishing speeds, often dramatically changing the bench’s long-held posture in relative silence through the shadow docket. 

 

But perhaps on no topic has the Court telegraphed its intent more clearly than the administrative state, the power of federal agencies to regulate and make rules. The dry name belies a system absolutely critical to every corner of American life.

 

“If I want to dump chemical waste in a swamp, I’d prefer that the federal government not have power to regulate that,” Julian Davis Mortenson, professor at the University of Michigan Law School, told TPM. “If I want to pay people working in my factory a miserably tiny wage, or employ 12 year-olds, I’d rather the federal government not have the power to make a rule against that.” 

 

The Court is now stocked with justices hungry to shift the power back in the direction of those nonregulatory interests. In doing so, they’ll really be shifting power to themselves. 

 

“If the Supreme Court truly honored the rule of law and precedent, then they would acknowledge the power of the agencies that was granted to them by Congress in order to save our environment,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) told TPM of a recent illustrative case involving the Environmental Protection Agency. “But this is an extremist Supreme Court, so I’m very worried about the outcome.”  

 

Because Congress is already paralyzed on critical issues, the prospect of a future in which the administrative state is rendered toothless is also a future in which unelected, conservative Justices become the arbiters of what the government can and can’t do. It’s a right-wing fantasy, cherished and developed for decades, come to life.

 

Click on the link for the full article

[88Comrade2000]

That Michigan professor should be given the boot.

[PleaseBlitz]

The LSAT stuff is hilarious. I honestly don’t even remember what my LSAT score was. It is that unimportant. If any lawyer actually bragged to me their LSAT score, i think i would reflexively punch them in the dick. 

Edited March 5, 2022 by PleaseBlitz

[China]

Supreme Court denies GOP challenges to congressional maps in North Carolina and Pennsylvania

 

The Supreme Court on Monday night denied requests from Republicans challenging congressional maps in North Carolina and Pennsylvania that had been approved by state courts, in two rulings that could benefit Democrats in the midterm elections.

 

The North Carolina congressional map drawn by state judges would likely give Democrats at least another seat in Congress next year. The court -- over the noted dissents of Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch -- turned away an emergency request from Republican legislators to use a different map that would be more favorable to their party.

 

Click on the link for the full aritcle

[Long n Left]

On 3/4/2022 at 11:28 PM, 88Comrade2000 said:

That Michigan professor should be given the boot.

I think someone needs to check their sarcasm filter.

[China]

How Supreme Court Radicalism Could Threaten Democracy Itself

 

In the last six years, confidence in our fragile election system in the United States has been battered by a flood of election misinformation and disinformation spread on social media, cable television stations, podcasts, and videos. Headed into the 2022 elections, now is the time for Congress and states to pass meaningful reforms to shore up that confidence and help preserve American democracy. Although partisan gridlock and fights over the fairness of the 2020 election already make new legislation a longshot, the biggest impediment may well be a supermajority of conservative justices on the Supreme Court, whose part-time libertarian views of the First Amendment could doom meaningful reform.

 

As I argue in my new book, Cheap Speech, false claims about the fairness and integrity of the American election system pose a huge risk for American democracy. As millions of Trump supporters continue to believe the false claims that the 2020 election was stolen, and as false and incendiary election-related speech flows anonymously and virally across portions of social media, public confidence in the fairness of our election system has crumbled among Republicans. With purveyors of the Big Lie poised to take over the running of elections in some places before the 2024 elections, we can expect confidence on the left to take a similar beating. A democracy cannot function without fair elections and when losers do not accept election results as legitimate.

 

Although law is only part of the answer to how to deal with this crisis in election legitimacy, it is an important piece. Congress or states could do much to assure that voters have good access to fair and truthful information to make decisions about how to vote consistent with their values and interests, and so that they can have confidence that elections are being conducted fairly and results reported accurately. And this can be done while maintaining a strong commitment to robust speech protections during campaigns.

 

Some of the laws I propose in Cheap Speech could likely pass constitutional muster, such as a ban on false election speech about when, where, and how people are meant to cast their votes. These laws protect the public’s compelling interest in assuring voters can meaningfully exercise the franchise. Already the federal government is prosecuting a Trump supporter for social media posts targeted at Black voters falsely telling people they could vote for president by text. The Supreme Court wrote in a 2018 case, Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, that “We do not doubt that the State may prohibit messages intended to mislead voters about voting requirements and procedures.”

 

Many necessary laws to support election integrity, however, would be at risk of being held unconstitutional by a Supreme Court that often adopts a naïve libertarian “marketplace of ideas” approach to the First Amendment that presumes without evidence that the truth will rise to the top.

 

Click on the link for more

[spjunkies]

 

 

[China]

1 minute ago, spjunkies said:

 

 

 

Just die already.

[skinsmarydu]

Did I tell y'all about when I met Thomas's mom?  She managed the visitor room in the hospital in Savannah where my husband had colon surgery.  There was a huge framed photo of him on her little desk. 

[Fergasun]

I saw an interesting rebuttal to McConnell complaining about former public defender Jackson being on the Supreme Court and the number of public defenders in the Federal Courts. 

 

3 members of the current Supreme Court worked for the Bush side in Bush v. Gore.  Kavanagh, Robers and Barrett. Seems like these folks are way over represented on the Supreme Court. 

[Chew]

 

[The Evil Genius]

 

 

No.

[Simmsy]

Ok, do we know that he is vaxxed? Time to make up for RBG.

[Larry]

34 minutes ago, Simmsy said:

Ok, do we know that he is vaxxed? Time to make up for RBG.

 

Might want to wait till he dies, before filling the seat.  Lots of people don't die, you know.  

[China]

29 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

 Lots of people don't die, you know.  

 

On the contrary.  Everybody dies...eventually.

Edited March 21, 2022 by China

[Renegade7]

All the SCOTUS justices are vaxxed and boosted from my understanding...

 

Having said that, @China is right and Thomas is now the oldest SCOTUS justice on the bench.

 

It could end up being RGB all over again, this time for conservatives, and wouldn't put it past Dems is if they have power when he dies, to push through a nominee before 2024 election jus to make sure its a liberal justice.

 

That would bring it down to 5-4...next oldest is Alito, who's two years younger then Thomas...

Edited March 21, 2022 by Renegade7

[The Sisko]

2 hours ago, Larry said:

Might want to wait till he dies, before filling the seat.  Lots of people don't die, you know.  

Why do you always have to be a buzzkill? Given the prior post about all the SCOTUS judges being fully vaxxed, I’m rooting for whatever the infection is.

 

OMG @skinsmarydu ! I wish I had known this a few years ago. On one of my many trips down there I would’ve asked her if she’d have him autograph a pic of him for me.

 

[Simmsy]

7 hours ago, Larry said:

 

Might want to wait till he dies, before filling the seat.  Lots of people don't die, you know.  

A few years ago I was talking with my roommate at the time (who taught government at a highschool) about the SCOTUS and RBG dying under Trump. In so many words, he told me to chill, Thomas is old and would be right behind any justice that would go down.

 

What scares me the most is are the Dems going to **** out when the time comes to push their person thru? WIll Manchin and Sinema allow that to happen? We need to get these DINOs out of the party immediately.