Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

    Originally posted by unofan View Post
    On the ultimate decision, it was 5-4 ideological lines, with Roberts siding with the liberals. But just barely.
    Roberts found a technicality like in the ACA case to do 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


    • Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

      Originally posted by unofan View Post
      No. Question is a no-go for now, but it's possible it could still be added.

      Basically, the department needs to explain why it wants it without lying. And that reason has to be legal under the APA.

      Here, the departments reason was a lie, so it couldn't satisfy the APA. But it could presumably try to add it again.
      You gave us your real reason and that's unconstitutional so come back with a lie and we'll buy it.
      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


      • Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

        Originally posted by unofan View Post
        No. Question is a no-go for now, but it's possible it could still be added.

        Basically, the department needs to explain why it wants it without lying. And that reason has to be legal under the APA.

        Here, the departments reason was a lie, so it couldn't satisfy the APA. But it could presumably try to add it again.
        How could they possibly get away with that though on a lower court level now that the cat's out of the bag? It seems the court took into account the info found on the dead Gooper operative's computer even though it hadn't formally been presented as evidence yet. Something that Thomas noted in his dissent. If Ross goes to court and argues differently he ought to walk out of there in leg irons after being arrested for perjury. The reasons behind adding the citizenship question are now clear and well known.
        Legally drunk???? If its "legal", what's the ------- problem?!? - George Carlin

        Ever notice how everybody who drives slower than you is an idiot, and everybody who drives faster is a maniac? - George Carlin

        "I've never seen so much reason and bullsh*t contained in ONE MAN."

        Comment


        • Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

          And in an anti climatic end,the Indian case will be set for reargument next term.

          Comment


          • Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

            Originally posted by Kepler View Post
            You gave us your real reason and that's unconstitutional so come back with a lie and we'll buy it.
            I'm not sure Roberts likes being lied to. IIRC the court had as similar ruling when states tried to shut down abortion clinics using zoning rules. In essence it was don't BS us about your real motivations. Similar to the ACA ruling as well.
            Legally drunk???? If its "legal", what's the ------- problem?!? - George Carlin

            Ever notice how everybody who drives slower than you is an idiot, and everybody who drives faster is a maniac? - George Carlin

            "I've never seen so much reason and bullsh*t contained in ONE MAN."

            Comment


            • Originally posted by joecct View Post
              Kep

              For the record - I'm a Roman Catholic who is very skeptical of the Jesuits. VERY SKEPTICAL. If they're for it, I don't take it as gospel they're right. I'm also very skeptical of the government. I believe it needs to be limited in its intrusion beyond "life, liberty, and the *pursuit* of happiness (emphasis mine)". I believe in strong states and the 10th amendment. I believe in a Congress and an Executive Branch working together with the SCOTUS playing umpire. The Voters are VAR.

              So with that, while disappointed in the gerrymander case, I think the SCOTUS was right. Leave it to the voters (who in my state, are disgusted with everyone's gerrymander but their own). As to what level the disgust has to rise to in order to replace the political inertia is something we have to watch. I'm not optimistic for Maryland.
              By leaving it to the voters, do you mean having voters implement independent districting commissions? Because outside of that, data mining has allowed republicans to maintain large majorities in certain state governments despite slight to overwhelming defeats in the popular vote. So outside of large demographic movements, it will be almost impossible to defeat those.
              Go Green! Go White! Go State!

              1966, 1986, 2007

              Go Tigers, Go Packers, Go Red Wings, Go Pistons

              Comment


              • Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

                Originally posted by Rover View Post
                I'm not sure Roberts likes being lied to. IIRC the court had as similar ruling when states tried to shut down abortion clinics using zoning rules. In essence it was don't BS us about your real motivations. Similar to the ACA ruling as well.
                That's one trait I can appreciate.
                **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


                • Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

                  Supreme Court allows partisan gerrymandering. Of ****ing course
                  "I went over the facts in my head, and admired how much uglier the situation had just become. Over the years I've learned that ignorance is more than just bliss. It's freaking orgasmic ecstasy".- Harry Dresden, Blood Rites


                  Western Michigan Bronco Hockey- 2012 Mason Cup Champions

                  Comment


                  • Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

                    Does the Court have to accept the state's argument as if it were true and then rule on that or can it say, "no, we know the state is lying"?

                    My layman's understand is juries decide fact and judges decide law, therefore the state can lie before a judge and get away with it. In the Census case the state is obviously lying. The sole purpose is to suppress brown votes. They have documented evidence. It's inarguable. But if the state brings in a completely concocted argument does the Court have any means of declaring the state is in bad faith? Does the other attorney have a method of making that the pivot of the decision?
                    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


                    • Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

                      Originally posted by Spartanforlife4 View Post
                      By leaving it to the voters, do you mean having voters implement independent districting commissions?
                      IINM they almost ruled that independent districting commissions were unconstitutional -- Kennedy stopped them and then only because it was a referendum. With Drunky McRapist on the Court who knows?

                      It's a slow moving coup but it's not really that slow.
                      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


                      • Originally posted by bronconick View Post
                        Supreme Court allows partisan gerrymandering. Of ****ing course
                        One article I saw said its not a federal issue. So this becomes a state issue only then?
                        “Demolish the bridges behind you… then there is no choice but to build again.”

                        Live Radio from 100.3

                        Comment


                        • Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

                          Originally posted by aparch View Post
                          One article I saw said its not a federal issue. So this becomes a state issue only then?
                          Yes States can decide it the SC said it wasnt an issue for the Federal Court to decide.
                          "It's as if the Drumpf Administration is made up of the worst and unfunny parts of the Cleveland Browns, Washington Generals, and the alien Mon-Stars from Space Jam."
                          -aparch

                          "Scenes in "Empire Strikes Back" that take place on the tundra planet Hoth were shot on the present-day site of Ralph Engelstad Arena."
                          -INCH

                          Of course I'm a fan of the Vikings. A sick and demented Masochist of a fan, but a fan none the less.
                          -ScoobyDoo 12/17/2007

                          Comment


                          • Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

                            Originally posted by Handyman View Post
                            Yes States can decide it the SC said it wasnt an issue for the Federal Court to decide.
                            Lovely. Liberal states courts will strike liberal partisan gerrymandering down but conservative state courts will let conservative partisan gerrymandering stand.

                            Once again, the dummies beat the smarties because they have no conscience.
                            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


                            • Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

                              Originally posted by unofan View Post
                              No. Question is a no-go for now, but it's possible it could still be added.
                              I'll be shocked if it's not added. This isn't 1979. It doesn't take almost a year to hold the presses and get their story straight.

                              Even if it doesn't go out the ruling is a ceramic dalmatian compared to the gerrymandering verdict.

                              Comment


                              • Re: SCOTUS 14: Confirming a Rabid Partisan to Own the Libs

                                Originally posted by sagard View Post
                                I'll be shocked if it's not added. This isn't 1979. It doesn't take almost a year to hold the presses and get their story straight.

                                Even if it doesn't go out the ruling is a ceramic dalmatian compared to the gerrymandering verdict.
                                Gerrymandering is about the GOP cheating in some states now. Census is about the GOP cheating in all states in the future. The consequences of the latter are far more devastating. Combined with their Gestapo raids on Latino homes they're on their way to their white nationalist homeland.

                                It's really noteworthy how no conservative will stand up against them. What a bunch of cowards.
                                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