|
She literally discovered their bullet-riddled bodies, which is why she became so rabidly anti-gun
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 19:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 17:28 |
|
|
galenanorth posted:Today I'm assuming that if SCOTUS is unwilling to strike church lockdown requirements on first amendment grounds there's no way in hell that they'd generally strike lockdown requirements on First and Fourteenth grounds? quote:The declaratory judgment says "(1) that the congregate gathering limits imposed by defendants' mitigation orders violate the right of assembly enshrined in the First Amendment; (2) that the stay-at-home and business closure components of defendants' orders violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment; and (3) that the business closure components of defendants' orders violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment." Also, yet another rear end in a top hat Stickman 
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 19:30
|
|
|
haveblue posted:She literally discovered their bullet-riddled bodies, which is why she became so rabidly anti-gun A left-wing group had also bombed her home and shot up a beach house her family owned, to the point that she carried a gun for awhile before swearing them off after the assassinations.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 20:08
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:blue slips make sense for district judges but not for circuit court judges, yeah - and given that republicans have abolished it twice now after democrats adhered to them, jesus christ don't do it again I fundamentally disagree. The constitution does not prescribe separate nominating or confirmation procedures based on how a state's Senate delegation is shaped. I do not agree with the notion, for example, that the oil industry should get a veto on district court appointments in Alaska regardless of who the president is. That's what giving Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan the blue slip means. Even more importantly, suppose Dan Sullivan loses to Al Gross this year (which seems like a huge long shot, but who knows, this state isn't polled well or often and incumbents aren't doing well this cycle). In spite of that huge (hypothetical) electoral repudiation of republican ideas, Lisa Murkowski, and by extension the oil industry, would *still* have a veto over Biden's nominees because either senator can torpedo a nominee with a blue slip. Senators are powerful enough they can use their influence to express displeasure with district court nominees through any number of channels. It's not like there is a shortage of ways for a malcontent senator to gum things up. There doesn't need to be a whole extra-constitutional veto* just to make governing that much harder. Senators are, almost to a person, neo-aristocratic gasbags lurching around trying to steal as much money as they possibly can before passing their seats on through their local-dynasty families. We should strip away every single bit of deference that allows them to brand themselves decorus potentates of The World's Greatest Deliberative Body. They're as loving scummy as your state house rep who just got his fourth DUI and should be treated accordingly. Of course, the best reason to dispense permanently with the blue slip is because you cannot meet bad faith with good, it's a suckers game. So, even if I thought it were good in principle I would support denying it to republicans, because they denied it to democrats. *offer valid only during democratic administrations
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 21:32
|
|
|
Kazak_Hstan posted:*offer valid only during democratic administrations You know that even under Trump, blue slips for district court nominees continue to be honored, right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 23:24
|
|
|
Kalman posted:You know that even under Trump, blue slips for district court nominees continue to be honored, right? I didn't know that, but it doesn't change my opinion. I think they're bad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 23:37
|
|
|
I feel like the logic of "It isn't in the constitution" or "The constitution doesn't say" is not a very compelling one for any argument really as to what should or should not be allowed, followed or enabled. Blue slips on paper harken to an ideal that the majority shouldn't act as a tyranny doing whatever they want and should ostensibly maybe reach for the approval of the representatives of those districts. In this case it's following the spirit of what the constitution envisions if not some specific wording.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 23:54
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Blue slips on paper harken to an ideal that the majority shouldn't act as a tyranny doing whatever they want and should ostensibly maybe reach for the approval of the representatives of those districts. What they literally harken to, like most things in the Senate, is segregation. The other things in the Senate, of course, harken to slavery.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 00:17
|
|
|
Kazak_Hstan posted:What they literally harken to, like most things in the Senate, is segregation. The other things in the Senate, of course, harken to slavery. Now I see blue slip parallels with "states' rights", which are championed the most in modern times when it comes to consideration of zoning and appropriations for infrastructure as local issues. Even though transportation infrastructure between blue cities like Nashville's Davidson County and the surrounding counties can only be handled at the state level, Tennessee's General Assembly instead has used its power to pre-empt local ordinances regarding extra bus lanes and prohibit any local raise in the minimum wage, sick leave, or other worker benefits above the local baseline. Authority given to localities is much more likely to be used to push their views of social and labor issues than it is to be used to push district-specific issues, like how it affects local industry, because that makes only a small proportion of all issues handled at that level of government. The "tyranny of the majority", in this case, acts as a proxy for federalism.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 00:39
|
|
|
Kazak_Hstan posted:What they literally harken to, like most things in the Senate, is segregation. The other things in the Senate, of course, harken to slavery. You appear to have linked an article that doesn't on its face support your assertion. The part relevant to segregation seems to be halfway through the article referring to its later usage from 1954 onwards, but I cannot see how on its face its usage beginning in 1913 harkens to that. I'm not sure but it feels like guilt by association, there are many good arguments to be made that governance and democracy should be a collaborative process and not a slim majority passing whatever it wants. Not that the tyranny of the minority preventing any and all progress is any better but there's two sides to every coin.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 00:50
|
|
|
The idea of blue slips being reasonable for district judgeships is that it makes perfect sense you ask people from new york about judges you will install that will sit in new york and, for the most part, judge only issues affecting new york - or Texas. It is a very reasonable compromise for both sides to give heightened deference to the senators from that state for the district level judgeships and there's little reason to blow that sort of respect for the state's wishes up. It doesn't need to exist, but it is an inoffensive process. It was always stupid to do it for circuit court judgeships and it was a massive mistake for Leahy to do it, which gave Trump a good number of extra judges.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 01:13
|
|
|
One point the article makes is that the changing politics around Brown stopped senators outside the old confederacy from voting down judges in the old south on overtly segregationist lines. So, while they could, and would, do that in order to gain favor with their southern colleagues before the civil rights movement, they could not keep doing that once it became too toxic. As a result, Eastland pushed the strict blue slip process as a way to prevent pro-Brown judges in the south from even reaching the point of a vote. As the article notes, there is not a document titled "The Blue Slip And Segregation, Friends Forever, A Book Report by Sen. James Eastland," for fairly obvious reasons. Yet, the article still presents a pretty compelling case linking the hard veto style blue slip process with segregationist interests in the old south. I would distinguish between the 1913 iteration and the 1956 version under Eastland. What we are really discussing here is the Eastland version. A purely advisory blueslip process isn't really what we are discussing. We're talking about a hard veto allowing a state's senators to dictate what the federal bench looks like in their state.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 01:17
|
|
|
galenanorth posted:Now I see blue slip parallels with "states' rights", which are championed the most in modern times when it comes to consideration of zoning and appropriations for infrastructure as local issues. Even though transportation infrastructure between blue cities like Nashville's Davidson County and the surrounding counties can only be handled at the state level, Tennessee's General Assembly instead has used its power to pre-empt local ordinances regarding extra bus lanes and prohibit any local raise in the minimum wage, sick leave, or other worker benefits above the local baseline. Authority given to localities is much more likely to be used to push their views of social and labor issues than it is to be used to push district-specific issues, like how it affects local industry, because that makes only a small proportion of all issues handled at that level of government. The "tyranny of the majority", in this case, acts as a proxy for federalism. 1. I have never heard “state’s rights” applied to the supremacy of state law over local ordinances before. 2. State supremacy is pretty much legally unassailable unless there’s a specific delegation of power to localities in your state constitution. It isn’t some wacky new conservative legal theory, it’s just how it works. 3. There are plenty of states where the state‘s power to override local law is being used to achieve left-wing goals, like forcing suburbs to allow denser development.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 08:27
|
|
|
The important thing is to respect the rights of minorities when selecting judges. And by minorities I mean, of course, respect the minority of states who want judges that will sign off on oppressing the rights of racial minorities in those states
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 17:49
|
|
|
Blue slips are just another motte-and-bailey of an institutional structure being held up because of its potential moral value without ever showing how the any moral values are inherent to the institution. A system that lets either good or bad actors block judge noms without providing a reason is inherently flawed. Say it with your chest or get out of the way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 18:07
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:33
|
|
|
Pretty much says it all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:34
|
|
|
Well, good job guys, we need a thread title change. https://www.thedailybeast.com/justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-the-outsiders-champion-has-died-at-87
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:35
|
|
|
Is this real https://www.npr.org/2020/09/18/1003...20Qk76Tu1uRj7kg
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:35
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ParkerMolloy/status/1307100365381394443?s=20
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:37
|
|
|
Trump is speaking right now - wonder what happens if someone tells him before he's done. Also, gently caress everything and Mitch will provoke war if he tries it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:38
|
|
|
McConnell will have someone confirmed inside 24 hours.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:38
|
|
|
can we find someone to call in a bomb threat to the senate everyday til jan 20 (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:38
|
|
|
oh boy oh boy oh boy oh boy
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:40
|
|
|
2020 is hell world, confirmed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:41
|
|
|
ulmont posted:Well, good job guys, we need a thread title change. still technically correct
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:41
|
|
|
remember when she refused to step down because she wanted her replacement to be picked by hillary
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:43
|
|
|
drat retiring in 2009 seeming kind of smart huh
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:43
|
|
|
lol
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:44
|
|
|
 McConnel just came so hard he rocketed out of his shell
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:46
|
|
|
Welp, we're gonna need a new thread title.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:52
|
|
|
Will they actually be able to force someone though before the election?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:53
|
|
|
Endorph posted:remember when she refused to step down because she wanted her replacement to be picked by hillary The first woman on the Supreme Court should only be replaced by the first woman president. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:54
|
|
|
RICKON WALNUTSBANE posted:Will they actually be able to force someone though before the election? there is, literally, no way to stop it
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:54
|
|
|
RICKON WALNUTSBANE posted:Will they actually be able to force someone though before the election? Probably. Hon. Ted Cruz incoming.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:55
|
|
|
RICKON WALNUTSBANE posted:Will they actually be able to force someone though before the election? Surely the Republicans will respect the decorum of their own precedent they established literally in the last election
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:55
|
|
|
Hope this works out
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:55
|
|
|
KodiakRS posted:Welp, we're gonna need a new thread title. -1 Days
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:56
|
|
|
So this is it, right? 2020 can't get any worse. Someone tell me it can't get any worse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 17:28 |
|
|
PIZZA.BAT posted:Surely the Republicans will respect the decorum of their own precedent they established literally in the last election
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 00:57
|
|