Official 930 Supreme Court thread

[ye-ole-hatch ıll|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|̲̅̅=̲̅̅|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|llıl]

Interesting....
Congress set the number of justices on the Supreme Court in 1869 at nine to match the number of circuits in the federal court system.
 
Guess how many circuit courts there are today?


13

[kosmo vinyl]

SCOTUS rules in favor of Greenhouse Gases and then throw Biden a bone regarding his ending of the "Remain in Mexico" policy... Biden can and did act properly to end said 45** policy

[kosmo vinyl]

changing my user name to Eeyore

Minority rule could be on it's way!!!

JUST IN: The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case that involves the independent legislature doctrine. That is the feverish idea that state legislatures should have unfettered control over how elections are run and regulated.


https://twitter.com/boltsmag/status/1542527685498486784?s=20&t=MOFOxNoLU60oTpiqQyNkhQ

"The doctrine, if adopted, would provide new legal cover for Republicans to use their vast powers in states to subvert elections, shield aggressive gerrymanders, and restrict access to the vote in Democratic strongholds at the local level,"

among other things this would allow state legislations to go around their state courts

YIPPEE

at least i can stream music from a French company

[sweetcell]

at least i can stream music from a French company

for now

[ye-ole-hatch ıll|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|̲̅̅=̲̅̅|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|llıl]

yikes...but States run elections, not the federal gov't
it's caused LOTS of problems, but I don't think the Federal Gov't is the solution
I don't have a good answer, but I think we need to as the GQP wants to make it absurd


although...he is not wrong
Michael Harriot@michaelharriot
Slavery, segregation, voting rights, gerrymandering and abortion all have one thing in common:

“States rights.”

Since the first draft of the constitution, “Leave it up to the states” has been code for “Leave it up to the racists.”

[kosmo vinyl]

Yes States run re-elections but this case is whether or not State Legislatures can do an end run around that States Courts...

i guess a scenario would be... Further restrictions would be placed by a State Legislature that is QOP controlled, but that state's courts lean liberal.. by this doctrine no one could bring a lawsuit in that State Court to challenge that restriction

shit is complicated and it makes my head hurt, but it's yet another minority rule fever dream likely rubberstamped by the current court...

[Space Freely]

https://jezebel.com/biden-set-to-appoint-anti-abortion-kentucky-judge-to-li-1849126339

What's he thinking with this one?

[ye-ole-hatch ıll|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|̲̅̅=̲̅̅|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|llıl]

That no one will notice

You have to give a little to get anything
They are not honest brokers is the issue

[kosmo vinyl]

https://jezebel.com/biden-set-to-appoint-anti-abortion-kentucky-judge-to-li-1849126339

What's he thinking with this one?

This what I was referring to as rapidly spreading misinformation about Biden. Apparently, whom ever made this initial report has walked this back. But, it didn't stop any of a number of outlets to post sensational click bait headlines about the story..  it's all about the clicks without doing the due diligence on a story.

[vansmack]

This is an absurd request, especially after the football coach decision on first amendment rights:

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/02/politics/supreme-court-justices-homes-maryland/index.html

[kosmo vinyl]

Hogan goes full Republican....

"In light of a recent Supreme Court ruling and to ensure compliance with the Constitution, I am directing the Maryland State Police to suspend utilization of the ‘good and substantial reason’ standard when reviewing applications for Wear and Carry Permits."

so much fuckery because of a poor written statement.. as someone pointed it's virtually impossible to update the US constitution, like other developed democracies..

 

[ye-ole-hatch ıll|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|̲̅̅=̲̅̅|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|llıl]

so I think a 'reason' for owning the gun is a weird thing and I don't think that has to be a part of why you are getting a gun

Background checks and red flag laws yes, but a 'reason' just seems silly and I'm sure all you need to say is "for protection'

[sweetcell]

so I think a 'reason' for owning the gun is a weird thing and I don't think that has to be a part of why you are getting a gun

Background checks and red flag laws yes, but a 'reason' just seems silly and I'm sure all you need to say is "for protection'

i can assure you this is a uniquely american point of view.  in every other western country i'm aware of, you can't just buy a high-powered gun - especially handguns - without providing a valid reason.  "personal protection", without being able to identify a specific threat, doesn't cut it. 

for folks from other countries, it's bewildering how normalized gun ownership is in the US.  but here we are.

[ye-ole-hatch ıll|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|̲̅̅=̲̅̅|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|llıl]

well I get that...but we are discussing how we do things in the US, so doesn't really matter what they do in Siam

also try as we might, I think putting the genie back in the bottle is impossible

we need to focus on getting some gun safety laws passed and not dither on the fringes of what would be the 'perfect solution'

of all the things we are going to parse, that people have to put a 'reason' seems like the most useless one out there

[grateful]

well I get that...but we are discussing how we do things in the US, so doesn't really matter what they do in Siam

This may be the stupidest thing I've read on this board.

Other countries are case studies on what works and what doesn't. American exceptionalism doesn't apply. We're doing it wrong here.