What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

joecct said:
Even King Canute could not command the tide.
Click to expand...

Did you vote for him?

Would you vote for him again?
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Lol. It's ****ing Texas. This will get laughed out of a real court.
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

joecct said:
What the F are you talking about???
Click to expand...
Obergefell pretty clearly established that the 14th Amendment extended all the rights and privileges of marriage to same-sex couples. A state somehow says "well no" and you're jumping up and down. Your hypocrisy is showing.
 
Jimjamesak said:
Obergefell pretty clearly established that the 14th Amendment extended all the rights and privileges of marriage to same-sex couples. A state somehow says "well no" and you're jumping up and down. Your hypocrisy is showing.
Click to expand...

Please point out in my post where I was "jumping up and down".

Feel free to annotate my post to show where I did.
 
joecct said:
That's what I said.
Click to expand...

If that's what you meant by your 9-0 comment, you're way off on that. It'll be 5-4 with Kennedy and the liberals in the majority; Roberts and Alito proved that with the last follow up to Obergefell when they still voted against it.
 
unofan said:
If that's what you meant by your 9-0 comment, you're way off on that. It'll be 5-4 with Kennedy and the liberals in the majority; Roberts and Alito proved that with the last follow up to Obergefell when they still voted against it.
Click to expand...

I still think it will be closer to 9-0 than 5-4. The far reaching implications mandate that Texas gets told to shut the F up.
 
joecct said:
I still think it will be closer to 9-0 than 5-4. The far reaching implications mandate that Texas gets told to shut the F up.
Click to expand...

I thought the last one could've been 7-2, too. It wasn't. There's no reason to think Roberts (or Alito) would change his mind now. And Gorsuch is closer to Thomas than Alito so far.
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Today is the argument in Gill v Whitford, the Wisconsin partisan gerrymandering case. The vote seems certain to be 5-4, with Kennedy the only undecided. The liberal justices' argument amounts to "duh, it's a violation of one man one vote," since it, you know, is. The "conservative" argument amounts to, "it helps our side; leave it alone." There have even been statements from Republican water carriers that this would open up too many challenges to Republican redistricting to be practical. It's probably not the strongest argument to say you cheat so much that stopping you would be onerous. :p

Anyway, Tony has been cautious about sticking the Court into this before, which is bad. But he's also a drama queen, which means he's likely to come up with one of his patented off-the-cuff, spur of the moment ridiculous rulings, which -- well, given the status quo, couldn't hurt.
 
Last edited:
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Anyone still think Gorsuch and Thomas aren't the same guy? Cause everything I read points that they are. Which means that we got the biggest right wing whack job we could out of Obama's third Supreme Court placement.
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

ScoobyDoo said:
Anyone still think Gorsuch and Thomas aren't the same guy? Cause everything I read points that they are. Which means that we got the biggest right wing whack job we could out of Obama's third Supreme Court placement.
Click to expand...

Duh. Staying home because you're not "inspired" is always the right move.
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

ScoobyDoo said:
Anyone still think Gorsuch and Thomas aren't the same guy?
Click to expand...

Thomas is an ideologue who thinks he's making America a shining city on a hill. Alito is a politician pushing a party agenda without any goal but power.

Remains to be seen which Gorsuch is.
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Kepler said:
Thomas is an ideologue who thinks he's making America a shining city on a hill. Alito is a politician pushing a party agenda without any goal but power.

Remains to be seen which Gorsuch is.
Click to expand...

He's Thomas. There is enough evidence now. The jury came back.
 
Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

ScoobyDoo said:
Anyone still think Gorsuch and Thomas aren't the same guy? Cause everything I read points that they are. Which means that we got the biggest right wing whack job we could out of Obama's third Supreme Court placement.
Click to expand...

Serves the left properly for murdering a justice in order to try to take control.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top