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: kiore, The_Metatron, Blip

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#801  Postby The_Metatron » Jun 24, 2022 8:29 pm

When some motherfucker mows down your kids with an assault weapon, thank a Republican.

When your women, who are now lesser humans in this shithole country, start dying, thank a Republican.

The American Taliban. Make no mistake.
I AM Skepdickus!

Check out Hack's blog, too. He writes good.
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 21542
Age: 59
Male

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

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#802  Postby Caper » Jun 24, 2022 10:52 pm

felltoearth wrote:
Caper wrote:Bader Ginsburg should have resigned while Obama was still president, although it probably would have taken more than that to avoid this.

Senate would have just blocked anyone who even faintly resembled RBG.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Could they have blocked it during Obama's 1st term?
Caper
 
Name: Glenn Smith
Posts: 667

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#803  Postby Caper » Jun 24, 2022 11:09 pm

Caper wrote:
felltoearth wrote:
Caper wrote:Bader Ginsburg should have resigned while Obama was still president, although it probably would have taken more than that to avoid this.

Senate would have just blocked anyone who even faintly resembled RBG.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Could they have blocked it during Obama's 1st term?


Just checked and the Dems had control of the senate for the 1st 6 years of Obama's presidency.
Caper
 
Name: Glenn Smith
Posts: 667

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#804  Postby Macdoc » Jun 25, 2022 2:29 am

Biden could still "flood" the supreme court with "frendlies" but ....... :?
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
 
Posts: 17710
Age: 74
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#805  Postby felltoearth » Jun 25, 2022 3:23 am

Caper wrote:
Caper wrote:
felltoearth wrote:
Caper wrote:Bader Ginsburg should have resigned while Obama was still president, although it probably would have taken more than that to avoid this.

Senate would have just blocked anyone who even faintly resembled RBG.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Could they have blocked it during Obama's 1st term?


Just checked and the Dems had control of the senate for the 1st 6 years of Obama's presidency.

Ah :tup:
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 14664
Age: 54

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#806  Postby Tortured_Genius » Jun 25, 2022 9:44 am

The Supreme Court justices who voted to remove Roe v. Wade flat out lied during their confirmation hearings.

When asked explicitly about their opinion on Roe v. Wade they said their position was that it was settled law, confirmed by precedent and was not subject to revision. This is a matter of public record. Here is a video of them stating this:



They were under oath at the time.

IANAL, but I believe this is called "perjury".

The USA appears to be hurtling full-bore into "failed state" territory with criminals in charge of the principle organs of government including the legal, voting and local government political systems. Power is being blatantly wielded without regard to the constitution or the law.
None are so hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. - Goethe
User avatar
Tortured_Genius
 
Posts: 2324
Age: 60
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#807  Postby chango369 » Jun 25, 2022 3:20 pm

Things could get very dark, very soon.

In an opinion concurring with his conservative colleagues on the Supreme Court to overturn the fundamental right to an abortion, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote on Friday that striking down Roe v. Wade should also open up the high court to review other precedents that may be deemed “demonstrably erroneous.”

Among those, Thomas wrote, was the right for married couples to buy and use contraception without government restriction, from the landmark 1965 ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut.

“In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell,” Thomas wrote on Page 119 of the opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, also referring to the rulings that legalized same-sex relationships and marriage equality, respectively. “Because any substantive due process decision is ‘demonstrably erroneous’ … we have a duty to ‘correct the error’ established in those precedents.”

...


WAPO: Biden, other critics fear Thomas’s ‘extreme’ position on contraception
“Government is the Entertainment division of the military-industrial complex.”

Frank Zappa
User avatar
chango369
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Chris
Posts: 1860
Age: 62
Male

Country: думфукистан
Cuba (cu)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#808  Postby Caper » Jun 25, 2022 4:11 pm

chango369 wrote:Things could get very dark, very soon.

In an opinion concurring with his conservative colleagues on the Supreme Court to overturn the fundamental right to an abortion, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote on Friday that striking down Roe v. Wade should also open up the high court to review other precedents that may be deemed “demonstrably erroneous.”

Among those, Thomas wrote, was the right for married couples to buy and use contraception without government restriction, from the landmark 1965 ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut.

“In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell,” Thomas wrote on Page 119 of the opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, also referring to the rulings that legalized same-sex relationships and marriage equality, respectively. “Because any substantive due process decision is ‘demonstrably erroneous’ … we have a duty to ‘correct the error’ established in those precedents.”

...


WAPO: Biden, other critics fear Thomas’s ‘extreme’ position on contraception


Mixed marriages also seems like something Thomas would be against, except ...
Caper
 
Name: Glenn Smith
Posts: 667

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#809  Postby Tortured_Genius » Jun 25, 2022 4:56 pm

Heck of an extreme way of getting an annulment and avoiding alimony.
None are so hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. - Goethe
User avatar
Tortured_Genius
 
Posts: 2324
Age: 60
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#810  Postby Alan C » Jun 25, 2022 8:34 pm

Note that venal fuck with a treasonous wife hadn't said anything about interracial marriage.
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: 2839
Age: 45
Male

New Zealand (nz)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#811  Postby Calilasseia » Jun 27, 2022 8:46 pm

Welcome to the Christofascist Republic of Gilead.
Signature temporarily on hold until I can find a reliable image host ...
User avatar
Calilasseia
RS Donator
 
Posts: 22250
Age: 60
Male

Country: England
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#812  Postby Seabass » Jun 27, 2022 10:44 pm

"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." —Voltaire
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka
User avatar
Seabass
 
Name: Gazpacho Police
Posts: 3898

Country: Covidiocracy
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#813  Postby The_Metatron » Jun 27, 2022 11:31 pm

Calilasseia wrote:Welcome to the Christofascist Republic of Gilead.

What I like to call Dumbfuckistan.

I fucking hate living here. Not that me or mine are experiencing any fallout from all of the shit we see going on. Yet.

I am afraid.

I am afraid some motherfucker will do something to me or mine, and it will either be the government doing it or the government failing to do something about it. Then, someone will have to fuckin’ pay.

This is my biggest fear, that I will be compelled to act.
I AM Skepdickus!

Check out Hack's blog, too. He writes good.
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 21542
Age: 59
Male

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

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#814  Postby Macdoc » Jun 28, 2022 3:04 am

Interesting approach

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... uch-thomas

What's holding you there Jesse ...Canada needs good people, so does Australia.
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
 
Posts: 17710
Age: 74
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#815  Postby The_Metatron » Jun 29, 2022 3:49 am

It appears I am too old, or not rich enough. My little business concern doesn’t count for much towards a visa in either place.

No, the businesses the immigration agencies are seeking are those with staff and millions of dollars. Entrepreneurs are a dime a dozen, I suppose.
I AM Skepdickus!

Check out Hack's blog, too. He writes good.
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 21542
Age: 59
Male

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

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#816  Postby Macdoc » Jun 29, 2022 9:11 am

Australia is tough and expensive even to apply but you can for sure move to Canada without a lot of headaches. Don't deal with the immigration agents.
Easy to do yourself.
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-re ... nship.html and not expensive like Australia.
10,000 Yanks come in every year.

Depends on your background but this might fast track you
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-re ... entry.html

https://wherecani.live/blog/view/how-to-move-to-canada/

you are not alone
https://nationalpost.com/news/online-se ... ade-ruling
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
 
Posts: 17710
Age: 74
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#817  Postby Caper » Jun 29, 2022 7:47 pm

Calilasseia wrote:Welcome to the Christofascist Republic of Gilead.


My nomination for Youtube comment of the week:

"Would just like to leave a quote from Christopher Hitchens, "How dismal it is to see present day Americans yearning for the very orthodoxy that their country was founded to escape." "
Caper
 
Name: Glenn Smith
Posts: 667

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#818  Postby Macdoc » Jun 30, 2022 12:43 pm

Some sanity surfacing ??

June 27, 2022

NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist National Poll: The Overturning of Roe v. Wade, June 2022

Majority Opposes Overturning Roe v. Wade... More than Six in Ten Say Decision Will Push Them to the Polls in November

In a majority decision, the United States Supreme Court on Friday overturned Roe v. Wade which, for nearly fifty years, guaranteed access to abortion in the United States. However, majorities of Americans oppose the Court’s ruling and have concerns that the decision will have broader constitutional implications. Following the decision, President Joe Biden asserted that Roe will be on the ballot in November. 61% of Americans agree, saying the Court’s decision will make them more likely to vote in this year’s midterm elections, and, by a double-digit margin (15 points), they think the decision will motivate them to vote for a congressional candidate who will support federal legislation that will restore the protections of Roe v. Wade.

more

https://maristpoll.marist.edu/polls/npr ... june-2022/

"With the midterm elections less than five months away, the decision by SCOTUS has sent shockwaves through the electorate," says Lee M. Miringoff, Director of the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion. "Men are +12 points and women are +18 points more likely to support congressional candidates who pledge to codify the protections of Roe v. Wade. Digging deeper, 63% of women, including 74% of suburban women, are also concerned that the Court’s decision is a harbinger of things to come."
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
 
Posts: 17710
Age: 74
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#819  Postby The_Piper » Jun 30, 2022 1:17 pm

I hope it is codified into law, but if it was, there will be another case brought to the same supreme court who will knock it down again. They need to expand the court. Which the geriatric leaders of the Democratic party surely still oppose. Impeaching the 3 justices who lied/were misleading in their confirmation hearings would be nice, but they probably don't have the votes for that either. The justice dept should have been following the thousands of leads against Kavanaugh this whole time, but they probably haven't and won't, because there are people in government who clearly are above the law. Kavanaugh showed in his confirmation that his temperament is not fit for the supreme court. If the supreme court was actually a serious thing, that is. Which it isn't now. <------------- rant included
"There are two ways to view the stars; as they really are, and as we might wish them to be." - Carl Sagan
"If an argument lasts more than five minutes, both parties are wrong" unknown
Self Taken Pictures of Wildlife
User avatar
The_Piper
 
Name: Fletch F. Fletch
Posts: 29664
Age: 47
Male

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

Re: Supreme Court Watch

#820  Postby Spearthrower » Jun 30, 2022 2:03 pm

A step closer to totalitarianism where only one specific group of people is considered 'true Americans' and thus deserving of things like 'rights' or expecting every citizen to each have a vote that counts towards an election.

White evangelicals, nativist, racist, bigoted, anti-democratic, anti-science, denying facts and promoting fiction are the voluntary brownshirts who are very passionate about turning the USA into a theocratic autocracy all the while mouthing stuff about how great the USA will be.

This is inevitably going to lead to an increasingly deep and insurmountable fracture in the nation. The next election will exemplify this - the QAnon troupe of the Republican Party already believe only their candidates are entitled to win, so any other result is a hoax. Meanwhile, the outlandish practices to limit and disenfranchize voting rights in Republican states means that Democrat voters simply cannot trust that their vote has any meaning in deciding election results.

It's a fucking shit-show, and now the SC has involved themselves directly in it.

Too much to say on this issue, but hot air ain't helping.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 31320
Age: 46
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to News, Politics & Current Affairs

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 2 guests