Supreme Court Watch

Formerly Anthony Kennedy: US supreme court justice to retire. Goodbye Roe v Wade, Obergefell

For discussion of politics, and what's going on in the world today.

Moderators: Blip, The_Metatron

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#681  Postby felltoearth » Oct 17, 2020 8:57 pm

Anything Young Turks related puts me off. Can you summarize?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 13821
Age: 53

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Supreme Court Watch

#682  Postby Rachel Bronwyn » Oct 17, 2020 9:27 pm

I'm so relieved to hear someone else say that.
what a terrible image
User avatar
Rachel Bronwyn
 
Name: speaking moistly
Posts: 13448
Age: 32
Female

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#683  Postby arugula2 » Oct 17, 2020 9:42 pm

If it's the TYT Investigates video - that's just a recording of Whitehouse's presentation in the first day of the Barrett hearings. Nothing to do with the platform. In other words, the first video and the second only differ in the logo you see in the corner. It's the smallest obstacle. And PBS can be pretty atrocious, too.

Summary: Whitehouse identifies the organizations actively involved in getting their preferred judges seated, their cross-organizational promiscuity, the scope of the funding; and also the way SCOTUS judges reciprocate by signaling (often in written opinions in unrelated cases) which topics they're eager to rule on. Those signals will invariably target laws meant to protect the public. For example, the Voting Rights Act, gay marriage, a woman's right to seek an abortion, and collective bargaining.

Visceral responses to branding aside... I'll take this opportunity to point out that TYT Investigates can be thought of as its own entity. Check it out sometime. Put your thumb over the 'TYT' logo if it helps. ;) The two main contributors to the editorialized stuff (which the video I posted is not, it's just raw video), Jonathan Larsen & Ti-Hua Chang, are serious journalists.

ETA: Hmm... glancing at their video page, it looks like you have to go back 2 months for an example. Everything since then has been raw clips of statements by public officials & personalities. Because of election season, I suppose. Or logistical difficulties. Larsen & Chang tend to do in-depth stories based on first-hand interaction.
arugula

Podrán cortar todas las flores, pero no podrán detener la primavera.
User avatar
arugula2
 
Posts: 1743

Antarctica (aq)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#684  Postby Seabass » Oct 18, 2020 7:50 pm

Another monstrous Christian on the SCOTUS.

Amy Coney Barrett attacked for ‘cruelty’ over role in overturning prison inmate rape damages
“After a 19-year old pregnant prison inmate was repeatedly raped by a prison guard, Amy Coney Barrett ruled that the county responsible for the prison could not be held liable because the sexual assaults fell outside of the guard's official duties,”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court-prison-case-rape-damages-b1109734.html
"No, no, no, not God bless America. God damn America!" —Reverend Jeremiah Wright
User avatar
Seabass
 
Name: Antifa Provocateur
Posts: 3312

Country: Covidiocracy
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#685  Postby Alan C » Oct 18, 2020 11:29 pm

Guess she'll have no problems working with Brett 'I LIEK BEER' Kavanaugh then.
Lose it - it means go crazy, nuts, insane, bonzo, no longer in possession of one's faculties, three fries short of a happy meal, WACKO!! - Jack O'Neill
User avatar
Alan C
 
Posts: 2474
Age: 44
Male

New Zealand (nz)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#686  Postby OlivierK » Oct 19, 2020 12:06 am

Seabass wrote:Another monstrous Christian on the SCOTUS.

Amy Coney Barrett attacked for ‘cruelty’ over role in overturning prison inmate rape damages
“After a 19-year old pregnant prison inmate was repeatedly raped by a prison guard, Amy Coney Barrett ruled that the county responsible for the prison could not be held liable because the sexual assaults fell outside of the guard's official duties,”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court-prison-case-rape-damages-b1109734.html

I'm not a lawyer, nor an American, but it seems odd to me that the county (in addition to the individual) would be liable for such a crime. It's my understanding that corporate liability for acts committed by employees usually requires those actions to be committed for the benefit of the corporation (eg fraud, bribery, regulatory breaches, etc), or committed at the direction of the corporation, neither of which seem to apply here. :dunno:
User avatar
OlivierK
 
Posts: 9808
Age: 54
Male

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#687  Postby Svartalf » Oct 19, 2020 8:40 am

That ruling is pure dreck. Sure, the guard acted completely beyond and outside of his duties, but it was within said duties he had access to the inmate, so the crime was indeed also a matter of the county that employed him although he was unsuitable, I mean, he WAS guilty of similar offences and HAD been convicted of felonious conduct in public office, which proves that his criminal behavior was indeed a matter of his duties. I don't know if that decision can still be reversed, but I hope it can and does.

As for ACB, I hope she gets nominated chief trash bin emptier in Podunk Wi.
PC stands for Patronizing Cocksucker Randy Ping

Embrace the Dark Side, it needs a hug
User avatar
Svartalf
 
Posts: 2435
Age: 51
Male

Country: France
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Supreme Court Watch

#688  Postby felltoearth » Oct 19, 2020 7:51 pm

arugula2 wrote:
Summary: Whitehouse identifies the organizations actively involved in getting their preferred judges seated, their cross-organizational promiscuity, the scope of the funding; and also the way SCOTUS judges reciprocate by signaling (often in written opinions in unrelated cases) which topics they're eager to rule on. Those signals will invariably target laws meant to protect the public. For example, the Voting Rights Act, gay marriage, a woman's right to seek an abortion, and collective bargaining.


Thanks!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 13821
Age: 53

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Supreme Court Watch

#689  Postby felltoearth » Oct 19, 2020 7:52 pm

..
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 13821
Age: 53

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#690  Postby arugula2 » Oct 27, 2020 6:15 am

Well, at least there's Al & his skill at asking real questions. Oh wait. :doh:



Goddamn worthless Dems.

arugula

Podrán cortar todas las flores, pero no podrán detener la primavera.
User avatar
arugula2
 
Posts: 1743

Antarctica (aq)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#691  Postby Agi Hammerthief » Oct 27, 2020 6:22 am

arugula2 wrote:Well, at least there's Al & his skill at asking real questions. Oh wait. :doh:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDBvYZH6xo0

Goddamn worthless Dems.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0ppyJekLko

remember Kavanaughs performance?
really think tougher questions would have made a difference?
* my (modified) emphasis ( or 'interpretation' )

meh
User avatar
Agi Hammerthief
 
Posts: 2713
Age: 47
Male

Country: .de
Germany (de)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#692  Postby arugula2 » Oct 27, 2020 6:31 am

Only to the public discourse. My lamentation was that hardly anyone got to hear good questions, in what was already decided (by Dems) to be a losing strategy anyway. Elevating public discourse leads to greater accountability.
arugula

Podrán cortar todas las flores, pero no podrán detener la primavera.
User avatar
arugula2
 
Posts: 1743

Antarctica (aq)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#693  Postby Animavore » Oct 27, 2020 9:42 am

Utter spite from the Republucans.

House Judiciary Republicans mockingly tweet 'Happy Birthday' to Hillary Clinton after Barrett confirmation

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5228 ... ry-clinton
A most evolved electron.
User avatar
Animavore
 
Name: The Scribbler
Posts: 44386
Age: 42
Male

Ireland (ie)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#694  Postby OlivierK » Oct 27, 2020 10:52 am

Yeah, saw that. What a bunch of cunts. Wonder how that plays with independent voters a week out from an election? Surely the only people who wouldn't find that repulsive are people already decided to vote for Trump (who no doubt think it's marvellous).
User avatar
OlivierK
 
Posts: 9808
Age: 54
Male

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#695  Postby The_Metatron » Oct 27, 2020 3:06 pm

Someone is going to start solving these problems with a rifle. It is a certainty.
I AM Skepdickus!

Check out Hack's blog, too. He writes good.
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 20965
Age: 57
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Supreme Court Watch

#696  Postby laklak » Oct 27, 2020 3:22 pm

I'm so fucking glad I have permanent residency in a civilized country. Now if we could just get out of this shithole and back to Eswatini.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 20816
Age: 66
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#697  Postby arugula2 » Oct 27, 2020 3:45 pm

The Hillary Clinton who just endorsed a hypocrite, red-baiting, BLM false-flagging incumbent LA councilman, essentially because he cancelled a Bernie rally in 2016? Meh. Gross corrupt politicians mocking another gross corrupt politician.
arugula

Podrán cortar todas las flores, pero no podrán detener la primavera.
User avatar
arugula2
 
Posts: 1743

Antarctica (aq)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#698  Postby arugula2 » Oct 27, 2020 4:19 pm

Also, to underline: Barrett is now a SCOTUS judge with the tacit approval of Dem leaders, given all the procedural roadblocks they skipped or outright squelched. This is still Hillary Clinton’s party, now being transitioned to Biden control. She is maybe the 3rd most influential member of the party outside of office (whatever that may mean). Exactly what strings did she pull to oppose this outcome? Let them all fade into the sunset already, they’re so fucking useless to the country. Worse than useless.
arugula

Podrán cortar todas las flores, pero no podrán detener la primavera.
User avatar
arugula2
 
Posts: 1743

Antarctica (aq)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#699  Postby The_Piper » Oct 27, 2020 4:39 pm

Much worse than useless. It's basically a reality tv show. I'd rather have Judge Judy on the bench. Not irony.
"If an argument lasts more than five minutes, both parties are wrong" unknown
Self Taken Pictures of Wildlife
Self Taken Pictures of Scenery
User avatar
The_Piper
 
Name: Fletch F. Fletch
Posts: 28122
Age: 46
Male

Country: Chainsaw Country
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#700  Postby arugula2 » Oct 27, 2020 5:25 pm

The Al Frankenstein soliloquy is rather good in highlighting just some of Barrett’s hypocrisies - worth a listen, and entertaining. The hypocrisy of “originalist” and “textualist” judges more broadly goes beyond this.

And yes, autocorrect changed the spelling of his name, but I think it’s funny so I’m leaving it in.
arugula

Podrán cortar todas las flores, pero no podrán detener la primavera.
User avatar
arugula2
 
Posts: 1743

Antarctica (aq)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to News, Politics & Current Affairs

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest