Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SCOTUS, Now with KBJ

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 13 to go, there will be opinions today and tomorrow for sure, and likely next week as well.

    1st one today is Berger v. North Carolina NAACP. This was a procedural question about whether the Republican legislature could intervene in a federal case even though the Democratic AG was already defending the law on behalf of the state. 8-1 says yes, they can intervene. Sotomayor dissented.

    There will be at least one more today.

    Comment


    • Next up is a death penalty case, also procedural in nature. 5-4 by Kagan (Roberts and Kavanaugh joined the liberals). Court had previously set forth a framework for challenging methods of execution under the 8th amendment, and previously said that when a state already allowed for alternative methods, a 1983 action was appropriate. This decision says the same 1983 framework is appropriate when an inmate proposes a means outside of what is already allowed by the state.

      There will be at least one more today.

      Comment


      • 3rd one out was the Miranda case. 6-3 along usual ideological lines. Court held a violation of Miranda is not automatically a violation of the constitution, thus a violation of Miranda by itself is not sufficient to maintain a 1983 action.

        There will be at least one more.

        Comment


        • They’ll drop roe next week to rev everyone up for their July 4 celebrations.

          Comment


          • Last up is a biggie by Thomas: Bruen v. NY Rifle. 6-3 along ideological lines. Individuals have a 2nd amendment right to carry firearms outside the home. there are multiple concurrences. Breyer wrote the dissent for the liberal wing.

            Comment


            • Whew I was worried the second amendment wasn’t going far enough

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Deutsche Gopher Fan View Post
                Whew I was worried the second amendment wasn’t going far enough
                No doubt New York’s gun laws will sweep across the country with this new, final ruling by a federal court that supersedes state laws. Also, quit whining.

                Comment


                • I’ve got mixed feelings on it. I don’t love the idea of tons of people carrying guns in public but I also don’t think someone should go to jail for it if they’re not committing another crime.
                  Originally posted by BobbyBrady
                  Crosby probably wouldn't even be on BC's top two lines next year

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by unofan View Post
                    Last up is a biggie by Thomas: Bruen v. NY Rifle. 6-3 along ideological lines. Individuals have a 2nd amendment right to carry firearms outside the home. there are multiple concurrences. Breyer wrote the dissent for the liberal wing.
                    So ****ing smart for a non-political branch of government to issue a political decision on such an important issue. Next time someone says the Supreme Court isn't political laugh in their face.
                    **NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.

                    Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
                    Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.

                    Comment


                    • Not that it is a legal argument or anything, but other than uniformed law enforcement who carry a firearm openly as part of their job and uniform, I have never known any civilian who does that who isn't a d ic k of the largest kind.

                      The very first thing I would ban if I could change gun laws are laws permitting the routine open carry of firearms. No one does it for any other reason than to prove they are tough and to cheese off the libs. I have personally owned firearms (pistols) all of my adult life and there has never been one second of that time where I felt I needed to strap it to my belt and walk around publicly like that.

                      Comment


                      • Held: "New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense"
                        https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1539979989197766657

                        Basically what that says is you have a right to shoot someone under the 2nd and Fourteenth Amendments. (yes, I stole that from the writer of the tweet).

                        This was the tweeters prediction before the case was announced today.

                        I figure Bruen will be 6-3 with Thomas writing some majority opinion that fully adopts the public defenders brief and turns every state into Texas... which will be in direct conflict with Dobbs's "return to the states" logic but conservatives won't care because they're hypocrites
                        Nailed it.
                        **NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.

                        Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
                        Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by ScoobyDoo View Post

                          So ****ing smart for a non-political branch of government to issue a political decision on such an important issue. Next time someone says the Supreme Court isn't political laugh in their face.
                          Anyone left in this country who believes the Supreme Court has not been corrupted by politics, and is in fact as political as the legislative and executive branches of the government, is naive. Even a casual observer should be able to predict where 98% of the votes will end up just basing it on who appointed each justice.

                          Comment


                          • SCOTUS: These things should be up to the states, or better yet, local municipalities who are closer to the people.

                            Also SCOTUS: Not THOSE things!!!!
                            If you don't change the world today, how can it be any better tomorrow?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by LynahFan View Post
                              SCOTUS: These things should be up to the states, or better yet, local municipalities who are closer to the people.

                              Also SCOTUS: Not THOSE things!!!!
                              Funny how that works, isn't it? They're as consistent as a 5 year old.
                              **NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.

                              Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
                              Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by ScoobyDoo View Post

                                Funny how that works, isn't it? They're as consistent as a 5 year old.
                                They're perfectly consistent. Rules for thee but not for me.
                                Cornell University
                                National Champion 1967, 1970
                                ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
                                Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X