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.

SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dump just made his 200th judicial appointment. He has already made more Appellate appointments than Obama.

Even if we can take all three branches in November we are going to have to de-Nazify the courts somehow. I recommend we just nullify the entire Dump term and impeach his entire slate of judges and replace them.

McConnell's coup requires a counter-coup. Then we can make it impossible for the orcs to ever do it again.
 
Last edited:
Roberts concurs with the liberals in striking down Louisiana's abortion ruling, says he thinks it was wrongly decided in 2016 and it's about upholding precedent right now.
 
Last edited:
Final opinion of the day: By a 5–4 vote, the conservatives rule that the CFPB's structure is unconstitutional—but sever the unlawful provision, allowing the agency to stand while permitting the president to fire its director for any reason. ​
 
bronconick said:
Final opinion of the day: By a 5–4 vote, the conservatives rule that the CFPB's structure is unconstitutional—but sever the unlawful provision, allowing the agency to stand while permitting the president to fire its director for any reason. ​
Click to expand...

So now the question will be how does this impact other agencies like the Fed that are supposed to be independent.
 
bronconick said:
Roberts concurs with the liberals in striking down Louisiana's abortion ruling, says he thinks it was wrongly decided in 2016 and it's about upholding precedent right now.
Click to expand...

There was an Iowa Supreme Court case a few years ago where a Justice made a similarly chicken**** argument regarding gay marriage. Aka well I guess it's precedent, so I'll agree with the liberals even though I would've decided it differently. At least that guy was a new justice and hadn't literally argued the opposite in the last case.

I'm glad Roberts did it, because it's absolutely the right call, but watering it down by saying he still thinks the last case was wrongly decided to try to appease his base is just gonna piss off everyone. The conservatives will bitch he didn't uphold the law and changed his vote to protect his legacy (absolutely true in this case, btw), the liberals will bitch because he was so wishy washy and didn't come out more forcefully.

Just say "did we stutter? The answer is no." and move on. Don't water it down by saying how you disagree but need to vote this way anyway.
 
So Roberts does the right thing, but leaves just enough wiggle room for all the Pro/Anti abortion rights activists to continue their war so America will not be able to move on. Sweet.
 
unofan said:
There was an Iowa Supreme Court case a few years ago where a Justice made a similarly chicken**** argument regarding gay marriage. Aka well I guess it's precedent, so I'll agree with the liberals even though I would've decided it differently. At least that guy was a new justice and hadn't literally argued the opposite in the last case.

I'm glad Roberts did it, because it's absolutely the right call, but watering it down by saying he still thinks the last case was wrongly decided to try to appease his base is just gonna **** off everyone. The conservatives will ***** he didn't uphold the law and changed his vote to protect his legacy (absolutely true in this case, btw), the liberals will ***** because he was so wishy washy and didn't come out more forcefully.

Just say "did we stutter? The answer is no." and move on. Don't water it down by saying how you disagree but need to vote this way anyway.
Click to expand...

The part of me that's viewed the Supremes as more and more political since Bush/Gore makes me wonder if he thinks striking it down would bring a 2008 Obama+ turnout and it's wishy washy enough to kill it when Ginsburg croaks if Trump survives. That's also why I expect him to remand the Trump tax cases until 2021 on some technicality and he doesn't have to do anything.
 
bronconick said:
Roberts concurs with the liberals in striking down Louisiana's abortion ruling, says he thinks it was wrongly decided in 2016 and it's about upholding precedent right now.
Click to expand...

Throw us the social bones while bleeding us dry on the economics.
 
bronconick said:
Final opinion of the day: By a 5–4 vote, the conservatives rule that the CFPB's structure is unconstitutional—but sever the unlawful provision, allowing the agency to stand while permitting the president to fire its director for any reason. ​
Click to expand...

I'm thinking this is a very bad thing.
 
ScoobyDoo said:
I'm thinking this is a very bad thing.
Click to expand...

Certainly not unexpected. Anything that stands in the way of Wall Street's ability to grind an individual citizen's face in the glass must be eliminated.

Governance as sociopathy.
 
Last edited:
These are about as good of a ruling as we can reasonably expect. Was worried about CFPB because it sticks it to corporations and you have 5 corporate cons on the court. Get rid of chump and that agency can properly function. Abortion law is a bit of a surprise as it required Roberts to reverse his own ruling but it seems clear he did not want to relitigate every Kennedy written 5-4 decision over the last 30 years. Whatever his motivations, good for him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top