|
Glad Kennedy used his final term well in loving us as fast and hard as possible.  Can't wait for the Dems to roll over and let the GOP fast track Scalia 2.0 but now 40 years younger before the midterms!
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 06:09 |
|
|
evilweasel posted:There's no viable way forward besides court-packing in 2020. Feels like this is going to become a fairly mainstream opinion. Scary times ahead!
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:31
|
|
|
Watch the republicans go for full broke and nominate a 1L from liberty university.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:31
|
|
|
This is Trump’s opportunity to gently caress his base, though, now that he’s reached his confident “gently caress my advisors, WILDCARDS, BITCH!” stage.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:31
|
|
|
So Don Jr then?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:32
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:Reminder that Kennedy was only “the swing vote” after O’Connor stopped being “the swing vote” etc. It’ll just keep happening.  Trump's replacement for Kennedy is going to be as bad as Gorsuch, if not worse. If Roy Moore were 40 years old he would likely be Kennedy's replacement. Stutes posted:Kennedy was already part of the bad 5; the vote split won’t change until RBG dies, it’s just locked in for another 40 years. Kennedy is the only reason SSM is legal right now. If you don't think the challenges to overturn that decision haven't been plotted and held for Kennedy's retirement I have some bad news for you: ALEC is extremely good at what it does. Unless Roberts or some other conservative would actually stick to the "SSM is the law of the land" thing, and they won't, then SSM is going to be overturned within the next few years and there's going to be a hell of a lot of anti-LGBT poo poo passed by the GOP because conservatives will eat it up and most Democrats and 'independents' won't actually care. Reminder that if Hillary had won and Kennedy retired we'd either have a 6-3 non-fascist SCOTUS, or a 4-3 one. Evil Fluffy fucked around with this message at 19:34 on Jun 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:32
|
|
|
I analyzed his pre-November 2017 list and decided that Joan Larsen would be the most likely nominee...not sure on the post-November 2017 list, but my gut tells me he goes with a woman.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:33
|
|
|
I think I've expressed this elsewhere, but rolling back SSM and Roe V. Wade would be the quickest way to get the general public behind court packing. No guarantee they could do it, but still.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:33
|
|
|
Arkane posted:I analyzed his pre-November 2017 list and decided that Joan Larsen would be the most likely nominee...not sure on the post-November 2017 list, but my gut tells me he goes with a woman. Jeanine Pirro
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:34
|
|
|
Evil has won
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:36
|
|
|
I honestly think the GOP will gently caress this up and nominate a squish. With the election McConnell can’t slap down a Miers type incompetent or a potential Souter. If Bannon were still around, maybe, or if the let my boy Stephen Miller pick him.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:38
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Kennedy is the only reason SSM is legal right now. If you don't think the challenges to overturn that decision haven't been plotted and held for Kennedy's retirement I have some bad news for you: ALEC is extremely good at what it does. I don’t think the Republicans will go there because it will cost them corporate benefactors. Companies with public relations departments that are just wrapping up their Pride campaign were formerly just fine denying gay people rights that never existed, but will be pushed to action if they’re supporting taking people’s rights away.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:38
|
|
|
Finally Trump can get rid of Jeff sessions by making him a supreme Court Justice
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:40
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:I don’t think the Republicans will go there because it will cost them corporate benefactors. Companies with public relations departments that are just wrapping up their Pride campaign were formerly just fine denying gay people rights that never existed, but will be pushed to action if they’re supporting taking people’s rights away. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:41
|
|
|
Court packing was a bad idea when Roosevelt tried it and it's still a bad idea now. Republicans will win an election again, and once you ring that bell, you can't unring it. Actually, an amendment fixing the number of justices at 9 is a very good idea. Better idea: don't rely on the courts to win policy victories. If your complaint is that same sex marriage is only legal because of a court ruling that might be reversed, you could always just pass laws in state legislatures instead? (Reality: if that were overturned, it would still be legal in nearly every state at this point, and it would be a big vote winner for democrats too)
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:42
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Court packing was a bad idea when Roosevelt tried it and it's still a bad idea now. Republicans will win an election again, and once you ring that bell, you can't unring it. Actually, an amendment fixing the number of justices at 9 is a very good idea. No, because the Republicans on the court are all hosed up partisans and will find any non-conservative law to be unconstitutional on the flimsiest grounds. Without changing the makeup of the court to reduce the influence of these partisans, they're effectively a veto on any progressive legislation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:44
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Court packing was a bad idea when Roosevelt tried it and it's still a bad idea now. Republicans will win an election again, and once you ring that bell, you can't unring it. Actually, an amendment fixing the number of justices at 9 is a very good idea. Republicans control most of the state legislatures and usually congress and even where they don't they are way more effective than the Democrats so pretty much the only hope for a lot of people's policies is the supreme Court
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:44
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Court packing was a bad idea when Roosevelt tried it and it's still a bad idea now. Republicans will win an election again, and once you ring that bell, you can't unring it. Actually, an amendment fixing the number of justices at 9 is a very good idea. you're dumb the conservative majority is going to be rolling back policy victories based on the flimsiest of pretexts: democrats will not be able to pass policy wins of any sort without finding that somehow a $15 minimum wage violates the first amendment
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:45
|
|
|
Syzygy Stardust posted:I honestly think the GOP will gently caress this up and nominate a squish. With the election McConnell can’t slap down a Miers type incompetent or a potential Souter. Trump literally has a list approved by the most far right legal 'scholars' the RNC has and he literally just said he was using that again
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:45
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Court packing was a bad idea when Roosevelt tried it and it's still a bad idea now. Republicans will win an election again, and once you ring that bell, you can't unring it. Actually, an amendment fixing the number of justices at 9 is a very good idea. no they won't and even if they did you just added 6 liberal justices.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:46
|
|
|
Well that’s not going to help the Canadian real estate bubbles.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:46
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Court packing was a bad idea when Roosevelt tried it and it's still a bad idea now. Republicans will win an election again, and once you ring that bell, you can't unring it. Actually, an amendment fixing the number of justices at 9 is a very good idea. quote:Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof. The problem is state only recognition of same sex marriage doesn't help very much when everything involves interstate commerce.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:46
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Court packing was a bad idea when Roosevelt tried it and it's still a bad idea now. Republicans will win an election again, and once you ring that bell, you can't unring it. Actually, an amendment fixing the number of justices at 9 is a very good idea. The Republicans on the court have stopped caring about things like legal precedent. They have started making up pretexts for whatever result they want, regardless of the underlying law. See the decision in Masterpiece Bakery and the decision in Trump v. Hawaii-- they cannot be read as anything but polar opposites as it comes to the bias of government officials, and they were a week apart. The current SCOTUS does not care about the law anymore. It is controlled by wholesale partisans.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:48
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:Trump literally has a list approved by the most far right legal 'scholars' the RNC has and he literally just said he was using that again Outstanding. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:48
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:I don’t think the Republicans will go there because it will cost them corporate benefactors. Companies with public relations departments that are just wrapping up their Pride campaign were formerly just fine denying gay people rights that never existed, but will be pushed to action if they’re supporting taking people’s rights away. You think Trump and his insane nominees are constrained by "corporate benefactors"? That's cute but not true at all. These are true believers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:50
|
|
|
Among all this hysteria, it might be helpful to remember that Trump himself is very pro gay rights. On another note, two guys on his list are in their 40s. (USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:53
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Court packing was a bad idea when Roosevelt tried it and it's still a bad idea now. Republicans will win an election again, and once you ring that bell, you can't unring it. Actually, an amendment fixing the number of justices at 9 is a very good idea. Courts can overturn laws, you know.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:53
|
|
|
try 6-3 hellscape
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:53
|
|
|
Syzygy Stardust posted:Among all this hysteria, it might be helpful to remember that Trump himself is very pro gay rights. do a krauthammer. (USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:55
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Well that’s not going to help the Canadian real estate bubbles. I laughed... then I cried.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:56
|
|
|
Syzygy Stardust posted:Among all this hysteria, it might be helpful to remember that Trump himself is very pro gay rights. oh you sweet summer child
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:56
|
|
|
He's either trolling or an idiot and has been for a while. Best to ignore him.Mortabis posted:Court packing was a bad idea when Roosevelt tried it and it's still a bad idea now. Republicans will win an election again, and once you ring that bell, you can't unring it. Actually, an amendment fixing the number of justices at 9 is a very good idea. None of this matters when one side's entire attitude is 'gently caress the rules, gently caress tradition, and gently caress YOU'
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:57
|
|
|
I can't get over the fact that Kennedy saw - the election and the first 18 months of the Trump presidency, in general - travel bans 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 - children being held in cages and decided to cap it out with Trump v. Hawaii, legitimizing gerrymandering, gutting public sector unions, calling California a totalitarian state for banning lying about whether a facility is a medical clinic, and finally giving a massive electoral boost to the Republicans by retiring right before a midterm. Obergefell was an aberration. Kennedy should go down in history in the same footnote as the likes of Alito and Thomas. Also, crossposting from Trump thread: it's gonna be wild when the court rules 5-4 in favour of Trump in Trump v. United States over something like the special counsel deposing him or subpoenaing him, and three of this five are going to be Trump nominees themselves.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:57
|
|
|
Syzygy Stardust posted:Among all this hysteria, it might be helpful to remember that Trump himself is very pro gay rights. Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha I needed a laugh like that after all of this depressing poo poo today
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:57
|
|
|
Peter Thiel should come back into consideration.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:57
|
|
|
Sulphagnist posted:I can't get over the fact that Kennedy saw Well, what do you call it? *drum roll* The Libertarians!
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:58
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Court packing was a bad idea when Roosevelt tried it and it's still a bad idea now. Republicans will win an election again, and once you ring that bell, you can't unring it. Actually, an amendment fixing the number of justices at 9 is a very good idea. What the gently caress are you talking about, the Court threw out Lochner precisely because of the court packing plan.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:58
|
|
|
Sulphagnist posted:I can't get over the fact that Kennedy saw That’s unfair. Kennedy and Alito are poo poo to varying degrees, but Thomas is a top 5 Justice of all time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 19:59
|
|
|
Well, it’ll be fun to help dismantle the new Lochner era when I’m in my sixties I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 20:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 06:09 |
|
|
Lemming posted:No, because the Republicans on the court are all hosed up partisans and will find any non-conservative law to be unconstitutional on the flimsiest grounds. Without changing the makeup of the court to reduce the influence of these partisans, they're effectively a veto on any progressive legislation. The liberals on the court are any better? Literally every one of Sotomeyer's dissents or opinions is a rant on the underlying policy with little to nothing on legality or constitutionality. Ginsberg is not far behind, though she at least tries to make a (stretched) legal argument on matters. Kagan and Kennedy and Roberts are the only ones who seem capable of evaluating the legal merits of their cases, and not just the effects their decisions will have on legislative or executive policy. The real loss with Kennedy is that he added some legitimacy and premise of neutrality to the institution; now it will turn more into an un-elected version of congress. The problem with the Supreme Court is the same problem with the Presidency. Government is becoming more about absolute control of institutions and less about compromise. Most of what the goes before the Supreme Court are attempts to invalidate or create laws which should originate from the legislature. Most of what Trump and Obama previously did through executive action should have originated from the legislature. All that compromise is becoming too hard on everyone's ideals and unwillingness to negotiate with the enemy, so we try to attain absolute control over institutions that bypass the process.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 20:05
|
|
