Legal/scotus thread

In a weird way it may make the court more right wing bc nobody wants to be associated voting along with her

Not defending KBJ here, but I do find it a bit rich to use a ruling from your own SCOTUS session to castigate someone for defending something that’s unconstitutional. She didn’t think the map was unconstitutional a couple months ago, and I don’t see why a Justice should need to adhere to precedent that they themselves just voted against.
 
Not defending KBJ here, but I do find it a bit rich to use a ruling from your own SCOTUS session to castigate someone for defending something that’s unconstitutional. She didn’t think the map was unconstitutional a couple months ago, and I don’t see why a Justice should need to adhere to precedent that they themselves just voted against.
Her vote is one thing (though her job is uphold the law, which she voted against).

Its her dissent and reasoning and how she invokes her feelings of justice into all her rulings. She is an embarrassment
 
Her vote is one thing (though her job is uphold the law, which she voted against).

It’s her dissent and reasoning and how she invokes her feelings of justice into all her rulings. She is an embarrassment
Sure, I was just also taken aback by the footnote as I find it silly to suggest that a justice ruling in accordance with their own ruling from several months ago is in itself controversial. Good, bad or indifferent, I’d argue that SCOTUS justices really needn’t be bound by precedent they had personally ruled against in the first place barring some new information.
 
Words are just so much meaner than slitting a throat to a leftist



First I dont support hate crime laws because it will inevitable be used against people for not using someone's crazy pronouns but that couple got what they deserved. Prison is for people like them. Second, how do you not understand you are being fed propaganda. He was found incompetent to stand trial. Tgat does not mean they let him go.
 


I agree she is retarded but I don't necessarily disagree here. Just because the losing side hasn't said they are going to continue the case why shouldn't they wait the full 32 days as the rule requires to see if they do? Alito says this could just run out the clock so the old maps have to be used. We'll too fucking bad. When Trump was trying to run out the clock the sane court was insistent everything proceed 1 level at a time despite the fact that it was going to the Supreme Court eventually anyways. So if they are going to key Trump abuse the legal system to avoid answering his criminal charges why should we throw out the rules now because it might run out the clock?


And the whole court is an embarrassment. Thomas and Jackson both need to go. Alison so badly wants to be respected but he is a partisan actor. That's why they were all put there.
 
Back
Top