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, Now with KBJ

Status
Not open for further replies.
ticapnews said:
The 4th Amendment has been null and void since 9/11. The police don't even need a warrant.

The most unbelievable scene in Seven is when the cops need to manufacture an excuse to break down John Doe's door.
Click to expand...

Seven was before 9/11.

But yes, I take your point.
 
ticapnews said:
The 4th Amendment has been null and void since 9/11. The police don't even need a warrant.

The most unbelievable scene in Seven is when the cops need to manufacture an excuse to break down John Doe's door.
Click to expand...

The 4th Amendment began its emasculation with the war on drugs and all the exceptions to the warrant requirement. The automobile exceptions are just one line of cases illustrating the point.

The war on drugs has been such a miserable failure on so many levels. More funds for prisons, badges, and guns and fewer for social workers and programs to help people with substance abuse and their families.
 
Last edited:
burd said:
The 4th Amendment began its emasculation with the war on drugs and all the exceptions to the warrant requirement. The automobile exceptions are just one line of cases illustrating the point.

The war on drugs has been such a miserable failure on so many levels. More funds for prisons, badges, and guns and fewer for social workers and programs to help people with substance abuse and their families.
Click to expand...

On the contrary. It is working exactly as intended.
 
burd said:
The 4th Amendment began its emasculation with the war on drugs and all the exceptions to the warrant requirement. The automobile exceptions are just one line of cases illustrating the point.

The war on drugs has been such a miserable failure on so many levels. More funds for prisons, badges, and guns and fewer for social workers and programs to help people with substance abuse and their families.
Click to expand...

Who gives a shit about families? Zygote's are where it's at.
 
ticapnews said:
I have argued for years that the target wasn't Roe but Griswold. I was wrong. The target is Brown. It is only a matter of time before SCOTUS brings back Jim Crow. See also: Miranda, Obergefell, Gideon... Kiss them all goodbye.
Click to expand...

I don't think Griswold was a target preferred over Roe, though it certainly had a foundational role in Roe. To these folks, all minority rights are a threat, and they probably see it all as a house of cards.

That's why they cannot come to terms with Marbury v. Madison and the concept that protecting the counter-majoritarian view (S. Ct.) has a value.
 
Last edited:
burd said:
I don't think Griswold was a target preferred over Roe, though it certainly had a foundational role in Roe. To these folks, all minority rights are a threat, and they probably see it all as a house of cards.

That's why they cannot come to terms with Marbury v. Madison and the concept that protecting the counter-majoritarian view (S. Ct.) has a value.
Click to expand...

They care nothing for majorities. They can’t cope with any view other than White Christian Fascist Nationalism, regardless of the vote counts.
 
LynahFan said:
They care nothing for majorities. They can’t cope with any view other than White Christian Fascist Nationalism, regardless of the vote counts.
Click to expand...

White christians are the only majority they've known or are willing to recognize.

The counter-majoritarian function comment was intended to refer to judicial review, as partly described in Marbury. Many on the right do not understand that just because Texas passes a law based on age-old prejudices does not mean the Supremes should not have the final say whether that law offends the constitution.

There, I've said it. Now don't question it.
 
Last edited:
There's sufficient evidence to impeach Thomas for sedition and Kavanaugh and Barrett for lying to Congress during their confirmation hearings. Replace 3 works just as well as +6. We're at a hinge moment for American democracy. Either we use legal means to save it or Bannon's "all hell breaks loose."
 
Looks like there will be a bunch of cases today. 29 to go heading into today. 3 out so far, just from Barrett and Sotomayor, so all the senior justices could still have some on the way.

Apparently they just release 1 every ten minutes these days, so next one will be out on the half hour.
 
4th one out from Alito. Still none of the major cases, but still have potentially Roberts, Thomas, Breyer, and more Alito to go. There will be at least one more.
 
Last one of the day is by Thomas. Still nothing major. 24 to go in total. Next round will be released Wednesday.
 
unofan said:
4th one out from Alito. Still none of the major cases, but still have potentially Roberts, Thomas, Breyer, and more Alito to go. There will be at least one more.
Click to expand...

Seeing any trends? Lurch to the Right? Full on theocracy? Asking for a friend.
 
Kepler said:
Seeing any trends? Lurch to the Right? Full on theocracy? Asking for a friend.
Click to expand...

These were all fairly minor - a couple of related immigration cases, an international arbitration case, a habeas one, and a criminal case that implicated tribal rights.

Nothing stood out except for Gorsuch's dissent voicing his long standing support for tribal rights. It's a wierd niche of his.

I mean, it's apparent the Court is shifting right, but we won't know how much until the major cases come out.
 
unofan said:
These were all fairly minor - a couple of related immigration cases, an international arbitration case, a habeas one, and a criminal case that implicated tribal rights.

Nothing stood out except for Gorsuch's dissent voicing his long standing support for tribal rights. It's a wierd niche of his.

I mean, it's apparent the Court is shifting right, but we won't know how much until the major cases come out.
Click to expand...

Is he about tribal rights v. federal the way many Rs are about states' rights v. federal?

Indian law is fascinating stuff. Tragic and shameful, but fascinating.
 
Last edited:
3 more out this morning with at least 1 more to come. Still minor stuff, though in another tribal case Gorsuch was able to bring Barrett with him for a 5-4 ruling in favor of the tribe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top