Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Supreme Court discussion thread The Supreme Court discussion thread

09-22-2020 , 10:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by grando1.0
Victor on point here. If you only lived in this forum you'd think US Democrats were crazy left when they're pretty much just right of center at their core
very true

there is a reason joe biden won the nomination -- and it's definitely not because he is far left
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-22-2020 , 11:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by campfirewest
You seem sane and rational but not everyone is that way. I know someone who was way into Words with Friends a few years ago. They always hated Alec Baldwin for political reasons. When they found out he liked the game too (when he got kicked off that plane), they stopped playing and deleted the app.
What % of people do you think are that way?

Not wanting to play scrabble because someone you don't like also likes scrabble still has be an incredibly uncommon mental illness - even for compulsive internet addicts.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 12:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by formula72
What % of people do you think are that way?

Not wanting to play scrabble because someone you don't like also likes scrabble still has be an incredibly uncommon mental illness - even for compulsive internet addicts.
I have no idea. I'd imagine its pretty small, at least I hope it is.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 12:32 AM
Seeing a lot of this:



But seems like a misread of ACB, who wrote a law review article saying a devout judge should recuse if her faith conflicted.

Of course, every originalist Judge believes Roe is wrongly decided because the word “abortion” isn’t in or suggested by anything in the Constitutional text. But almost all of them still wouldn’t touch Roe. ACB probably wouldn’t even sit for a case on Roe.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 12:36 AM
Rightwing Twitter actually hates ACB, too, for her COVID-19 rulings. Lol.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 03:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson
If he thinks Trump is dangerous enough to warrant removal from office via impeachment, there’s no way he should be approving Trump’s SCOTUS picks.
Well, it's probably been a long time since US federal judges where actually picked by a president in anything other than name, so it is likely best to view the president as a glorified pen holder in this regard. It's my understanding that these processes are largely steered by private interest organizations like the Federalist Society, which now holds 5 of its former members on SCOTUS.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 07:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GodgersWOAT
Seeing a lot of this:



But seems like a misread of ACB, who wrote a law review article saying a devout judge should recuse if her faith conflicted.

Of course, every originalist Judge believes Roe is wrongly decided because the word “abortion” isn’t in or suggested by anything in the Constitutional text. But almost all of them still wouldn’t touch Roe. ACB probably wouldn’t even sit for a case on Roe.
Social conservatives migrate to textualism and originalism in part because it is a reliable intellectual framework for reaching outcomes that align with social conservatism.

The chances that ACB would recuse herself on an abortion case for the reason you offer are approximately 1 in 10,000.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 07:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson
If he thinks Trump is dangerous enough to warrant removal from office via impeachment, there’s no way he should be approving Trump’s SCOTUS picks.
Romney should be opposing the confirmation of ACB (or anyone else) as a matter of process until a new president is elected.

But if Trump were reelected, and he nominated exactly the sort of person that Romney would have nominated if he had been president, I don't think it would make much sense to say that Romney should vote no on the appointment because he voted yes on impeachment.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 01:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by metsandfinsfan
Romney is a conservative who believes judges should rule by the constitution, not legislate. Romney is a pro-life conservative who supports conservative judges, yet you are saying he shoudlnt like ACB .. because she a nutcase.

makes sense
Trump's picks are stone cold locks to legislate from the bench, but you won't complain, because they'll legislate in ways you like.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 01:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
Trump's picks are stone cold locks to legislate from the bench, but you won't complain, because they'll legislate in ways you like.
false on all accounts
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 02:09 PM
in fact I have been extremely happy to see Kavanaugh dissent from the "right wing" majority numerous times already, regardless of whether i agreed or not; that let's me know that he reads the case and looks at the law and makes a decision, instead of just going with what the "conservative lawmakers would want" as you think i would want any judge to do; hint

i wouldn't
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 02:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rococo
Romney should be opposing the confirmation of ACB (or anyone else) as a matter of process until a new president is elected.

But if Trump were reelected, and he nominated exactly the sort of person that Romney would have nominated if he had been president, I don't think it would make much sense to say that Romney should vote no on the appointment because he voted yes on impeachment.
trolly and the left thinks this makes you dumb and him dumb

if you voted to impeach trump, you should obstruct everything he does, even the things you support!!
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 02:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by metsandfinsfan
false on all accounts
What are your thoughts on Antonin Scalia?
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 03:48 PM


Gotta love Trump being too dumb to avoid saying the quiet part out loud. "I need SCOTUS to give me the election, and having John Roberts as the fifth conservative vote is too risky"
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 04:12 PM
What do you think they should do that they will not?
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 04:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shuffle
The Compromise of 1877 averted a Constitutional Crisis in which Democrats, who claimed Tilden had been cheated, were prepared to form an army and march on Washington D.C., which Grant heavily reinforced with military units. Those were the two possible outcomes.
I’ll support Romney if he decides to throw down.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 04:46 PM
Ending Reconstruction turned out to be pretty bad for a lot of people. Good for racists who wanted to exercise total control over the South though. Not quite sure what Shuffle's post is actually suggesting in relation to the present day.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 04:58 PM
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 05:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by metsandfinsfan
very true

there is a reason joe biden won the nomination -- and it's definitely not because he is far left

It's because the DNC elites get lots of the monies to prop up the puppet who won't shoot the conductor. (of the Gravy Train)
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 05:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
Ending Reconstruction turned out to be pretty bad for a lot of people. Good for racists who wanted to exercise total control over the South though. Not quite sure what Shuffle's post is actually suggesting in relation to the present day.
We let the south off way too easy.

We are now reaping the bad harvest of our laziness.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 05:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RFlushDiamonds
We let the south off way too easy.

We are now reaping the bad harvest of our laziness.
What would you have proposed?
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 05:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RFlushDiamonds
It's because the DNC elites get lots of the monies to prop up the puppet who won't shoot the conductor. (of the Gravy Train)
it is still the humanoids that vote
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 05:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by campfirewest
What would you have proposed?
Interesting, huh?

Last edited by itshotinvegas; 09-23-2020 at 05:29 PM. Reason: especially from the side that's all about economic equality
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 06:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by campfirewest
What would you have proposed?
they should have been treated like the Nazis. minus all the gov positions and running the entire post war army.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote
09-23-2020 , 06:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by campfirewest
What would you have proposed?
It's hard to say but things like not allowing a southerner to become president before the slave issue was settled would be easy.
The Supreme Court discussion thread Quote

      
m