SCOTUS 2023: Rice pilaf from Louisiana...is that like an ISIS video?

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > SCOTUS 2023: Rice pilaf from Louisiana...is that like an ISIS video?

«‹›2 »

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

Here comes gay marriage to the Supreme Court (bonus: SCOTUSBLOG calling out the inevitable decision numbers)

http://i.imgur.com/b5I1PqP.png

# ¿ Jul 9, 2014 20:02

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 9, 2024 15:33

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

Isn't their chance of stopping implantation on the same level of how certain over the counter medicines can also stop implantation?

# ¿ Aug 5, 2014 01:45

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

If we assume that the Supreme Court rules that gay marriage in one state must be recognized in other states (under the Full Faith and Credit Clause), how would a ruling like that affect items such as Concealed Carry laws?

Would it not be considered a similar set up where if one state recognizes it, other states must recognize it too?

# ¿ Jan 19, 2015 15:18

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

Trabisnikof posted:

Unlikely without another test case. SCOTUS rarely does suprise double wammy decisions.

I was not even thinking of a decision like that. I was wondering if their ruling would probably have direct ramifications on the CC debate.

But now, I want to see a "double whammy" decision like that. It would probably make me flip out (needless to say, I want it to be 5-4 agreeing with RBG, Sonya from the Block, and Hulk Kagan)

# ¿ Jan 19, 2015 17:24

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

I would be okay with the "1 person, 1 vote" case going against all citizens if we have a positive gay marriage ruling and a positive subsidies ruling.

I try to balance out the world.

# ¿ Jun 4, 2015 23:05

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

hobbesmaster posted:

If they somehow punt on standing...

My thoughts exactly. There is no harm being done.

# ¿ Jun 18, 2015 01:04

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

I have been seeing tons of "now we can get equal rights for guns in all states" on my Facebook feed. I was going to ask the thread if the SSM ruling could be used to get open carry recognized by all states.

While I am still wondering about that (and answer would be greatly appreciated), I have finished reading this thread. I have a new question. Could Kennedy and the rest of the concurring judges have specifically punted on the 14th amendment analysis due to the fact that issues like gun control pop up. Use non distinct and vague language that literally only applies to marriage so that any gun cases (or any tangentially related cases) would have to be brought up separately?

# ¿ Jun 28, 2015 16:28

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

I would normally say that there is not a good chance but this article got me thinking about whether there is more blow back against "more conservative" cases. Roberts could side with them easily but they push so hard that he does not want that as his legacy.
http://www.vox.com/2015/6/27/8856465/supreme-court-liberal

quote:

A few days before the Obamacare and same-sex marriage cases dropped, the New York Times published a fascinating data analysis showing that the Supreme Court was on track to have one of the most liberal terms in years.

But is the Court getting more liberal or are the cases getting more conservative?

The Times' analysis relies on the Supreme Court Database, which codes whether decisions are liberal or conservative (an explanation of their approach to doing this is here.) But while this kind of analysis can tell you whether the Court is finding more often for the pro-affirmative action side, or for the pro-choice side, or for unions, it can't tell you why � and that makes it hard to say whether the Court really has become more liberal or more conservative.

So imagine a finding that the court is ruling for affirmative action more often. One reason might be that the Court has become more liberal on affirmative action cases. Another reason might be that the Court has become more conservative, and so is hearing challenges to affirmative action laws that it wouldn't even have considered in past terms, even though it is ultimately siding with the status quo.

In that case, it might look like the Court is getting more liberal, as it is ruling for the pro-affirmative action side, but it would actually be getting more conservative.

In a post at the Upshot, Brendan Nyhan outlines some research that suggests more conservative Supreme Courts take more conservative cases, and so can end up leading to more liberal-looking rulings:

In a 2009 article, the political scientists Kevin T. McGuire, Georg Vanberg, Charles E. Smith Jr. and Gregory A. Caldeira proposed a theory that provides an alternate explanation to liberal drift. They predicted that conservatives would press their luck to take advantage when they had a majority on the court, appealing more cases they lost in lower courts. (Conversely, liberals would be less likely to appeal cases because they were more likely to prefer lower-court decisions and to fear creating damaging precedents.)

Mr. McGuire and his co-authors then showed empirically that this process increased the number of conservative reversals of lower-court rulings but also increased the number of cases in which a more liberal ruling was affirmed because litigants guessed wrong about how far the court was willing to go.

In other words, when conservatives have a majority on the Supreme Court, they send more conservative cases to the Supreme Court � and so, naturally, they end up losing more cases before the Supreme Court, which makes the Court look more liberal.

The Obamacare ruling is a good example. One way to read the outcome of that case is that the Court sided with liberals, and that's evidence of a more liberal term. But another way to read that case is that it only made it to the Supreme Court because the Court has become so conservative � any other Court wouldn't have bothered, and so the proper interpretation is that King v. Burwell is evidence of the Court's conservatism. Nyhan quotes Eric Citron, a former Supreme Court clerk, making exactly this point:

This [decision] is a good example of what�s problematic with the proposition that this is a "liberal" term. On the one hand, this is a huge victory for the left wing of the Court on a contentious issue; on the other hand, this issue does not get granted with a less conservative Court. It all depends on your baseline.

But there's another thing all these measurements miss: the importance of various rulings. The same-sex marriage ruling is a liberal ruling of enormous, even historic, magnitude. The scores will count it as one case, equal to any other case, but it isn't � and its presence alone will ensure that liberals long remember this Court.

Most Supreme Court decisions, after all, don't get this reaction from the other branches of government:

Correction: I misunderstood the methodology behind the Supreme Court Database when I first read it. I read it as relying on Segal-Cover and Martin-Quinn scores to come to its conclusions as to which rulings are liberal and which are conservative. In fact, it's the reverse: Segal-Cover and Martin-Quinn scores used the Supreme Court Database's coding to ground their conclusions. Thanks to the NYT's Jeremy Bowers for walking me through this. The text has been updated throughout.

I still think that the Arizona Commission is going to ruled unconstitutional but I now have a better feeling (because of this and the FHA/ACA rulings)about this and the death penalty cases.

# ¿ Jun 29, 2015 04:04

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

I asked in the USPol thread but no response.

In regards to the public union court case: I thought that unions already gave the ability to make sure that your fees were not being used for political contributions. Would that ruling cover this case already?

# ¿ Jul 1, 2015 04:55

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

Plus, Lincoln and all of these politicians are right. The Supreme Court is not the final decision, the Constitution is and any legislator that has an issue with a Supreme Court decision can create a constitutional amendment to fix it.

But I have always wondered; what happens if two parts of the Constitution contradict each other?

# ¿ Jul 24, 2015 05:19

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

Here in Illinois, churches have been ignoring the rules since the beginning. With no local law enforcement regarding the restrictions and no politician wanting to stand up to them, it has became just a game of �come on�.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELxLj6damX8

# ¿ Nov 26, 2020 15:56

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

#1 Get hosed Florida I suppose.

#2 Could Biden�s FCC just put the restrictions back in place

#3 How does unwanted text messages not fall under �robotext� category?

All unanimous which seems a little surprising. Barrett, Kavanaugh and Sotomayor all wrote the opinions.

# ¿ Apr 1, 2021 15:32

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

The hope in me is that Roberts uses this as a do over because he has to see the writing on the wall of what he did by gutting the VRA.

I will be prepared to be wrong and have my hope prove me foolish.

# ¿ Jun 17, 2021 21:20

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

Hypothetical question due to my sister believing that AZ is about to show massive fraud with their election and this is going to be the set up to Trump coming back into office.

Let�s say that the AZ audit falsely claims that there was tens of thousands of fraudulent votes. I am assuming that the DOJ will then get involved and this leads to a lawsuit that would eventually be sent to the SC.

How does this thread think that the SC? Would it even have four judges that would be willing to hear it? What sort of reasoning would the judges be looking for?

# ¿ Jun 27, 2021 04:55

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

Breyer can still retire after next term and the Democrats will be able to fill the seat (unless some D retires or dies which is a possibility). We saw how fast Barrett was nominated and approved, the end of the next term gives plenty of time.

Ds would probably screw it up still but hey, at least there is hope.

# ¿ Jul 3, 2021 14:41

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

FronzelNeekburm posted:

Biden won by 5.8 million votes, but 45,050 votes in the right places could have swung the election to Trump. We're just lucky that it was spread out across enough states that a few Republican officials choosing to do their jobs staved it off.

According to family, the Supreme Court has ruled in some old case that �fraud vitiates everything� so therefore Biden is no longer allowed to be President, Harris is no longer VP, and Trump just gets to take over the spot.

# ¿ Jul 17, 2021 00:35

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

Groovelord Neato posted:

https://twitter.com/fedjudges/status/1422970804329975810?s=20

Not surprising when you can compare him to Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Alito, Thomas and Barrett.

He looks like the perfect centrist judge compared to those.

# ¿ Aug 5, 2021 18:17

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

Sanguinia posted:

Lol at the Antifa Supersoldiers appearing to defend their precious security blankets like loving clockwork when someone suggests Gun Control as the thing to find-and-place into the dumb Abortion Batman law as a counter-troll.

I see the gun control:abortion happening reverse more. When discussing gun control and whether it can save lives, gun advocates always end up going down the �if you truly want to save lives, then why would you support abortion.�

Hell, after telling a person that my wife is still alive and my daughters were born because she was able to have an abortion without anyone outside of us and the doctor getting involved, he told me that we were the same as a mass shooter.

# ¿ Sep 4, 2021 20:26

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

Kalman posted:

You�d lose that money; the justices are all vaccinated. Wouldn�t surprise me if she�s vaxed also, it�d be fitting for the Republican Party.

Yeah, just like Fox News, they publicly rail against the vaccine in public but all their people in private are vaccinated.

The only people who buy the �vaccine is dangerous and no one should get it� are the local conservative talking heads (right wing radio hosts keep dying) and the local conservative population.

# ¿ Oct 3, 2021 15:20

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

I think you have 5 (maybe 6) that will side with the providers in state. I do not know if you have 5 that will side with the federal government.

They will probably neuter federal response and then use the Mississippi case to end nationwide abortion options.

Then the laws will go after people who leave the state to have an abortion and return to the state.

# ¿ Nov 1, 2021 17:43

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

The 5th circuit stayed the OHSA vaccination rules for companies with more than 100 employees.

They cited �grave constitutional and statutory issues� with the rule. Not surprisingly, they did not see those issues with the Texas abortion ban.

# ¿ Nov 7, 2021 14:11

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

But if the SC strikes it down immediately, unlike Texas� law, then whatever they use to justify it can be used against Texas� law.

If they still are dicks about it and say Texas is cool and California is bad, then California has all pretext in place to say go gently caress yourself.

Edit: I know that there has been a discussion the last few pages about how a civil war would play out now. This podcast actually runs through what it would probably look like. It was made in 2019 and it accurately called out the issues seen in the PNW over the last year and a half.

https://overcast.fm/+ROsao2E-Y

Bizarro Kanyon fucked around with this message at 07:25 on Dec 12, 2021

# ¿ Dec 12, 2021 05:50

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

Mr. Nice! posted:

Stevens? You mean Breyer?

No, he meant Stevens. When Stevens dies, Mitch (in control of the senate) will say that they need to replace him and for the first time ever, Mitch will nominate and have the senate consent to his judicial nominee.

The Democrats will twiddle their thumbs in angst.

# ¿ Dec 14, 2021 15:41

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

Mr. Nice! posted:

Justice Stevens hasn�t been on the bench in 11 years and hasn�t been alive for 2.

poo poo, Mitch is behind�

I honestly thought he was still alive.

# ¿ Dec 14, 2021 16:00

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

The thing is that the conservative justices even lead AG arguments that pushed the idea that states can do this even though the federal government cannot.

It means that any state wide vaccine mandate would be okay. States like NY, CA and maybe IL could do that but no one else would (and even those 3 may not).

However, they totally are going to gut OHSA the first chance they get.

# ¿ Jan 13, 2022 20:56

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

BALKANIZATION AHOY!!!!

Yeah, we need a constitutional convention to get poo poo cleaned up but like if that was ever going to happen.

Hell, I would be willing to set up term limits for congress members and federal judges and/or voter id (along with national registration and free national ids) if it meant that we could correct so much of this poo poo.

Too many states realize that the current system greatly benefits them more than others and that is enough to keep it below 75% ratification.

# ¿ Jan 14, 2022 16:56

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

cat botherer posted:

Good news! Soon Republicans will control enough state legislatures to call one unilaterally.

But those would entirely opened ended Conventions. Anything would be on the table and not just a single amendment.

I could see those turning into entire clusterfuck that gets nothing done.

# ¿ Jan 14, 2022 18:00

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

Bill Kristol made a tweet saying that Harris would be SC nominee so that Biden can appoint Romney and they would be a unity ticket.

loving galaxy brain right there.

I do not know if Manchin or Sinema step out against a nominee. Like someone said, they have already have a SC that reflects their own lovely ideology. But, this will be a very public moment so I could definitely see either of the two (Sinema especially) do it for show.

Chaos moment: One of them announces that they are switching parties because McConnell bribed them with a worry free primary and a sweet sweet chair seat.

# ¿ Jan 27, 2022 00:39

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

So close to Leonardo Leonardo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyNWXxhihY0

# ¿ Mar 9, 2022 01:22

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

I teach government in high school so we watched some of the morning hearing. I explained what�s as going on and then the students started working on an assignment with it on in the background.

They were getting angry about Lindsey Graham and could not figure out why he would be asking those questions instead of asking what she believes in.

When he said �On a scale of 1 to 10��, I finished his line with �how much faith do you have?� before he had finished. I meant it as a joke of what a dumb thing to say would be. When he finished his line exactly like that, I just could not take it.

My students saw me mentally have my brain broken. drat it Graham.

# ¿ Mar 22, 2022 18:12

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

Plus the Supreme Court is the most disconnected from the regular public (wealthy persons still have connections).

There is no direct remedy for displeasure with the Court�s decisions. The public cannot recall a Justice like they can a governor. They cannot vote them out of office like Presidents or members of Congress/state legislatures. Impeachment does not happen and has been shown to be a useless option.

The only options to directly voice concerns is through protesting. Since they have determined that a right to privacy does not exist for women to choose their medical procedures, then it can also be seen that there is no right to privacy at their own homes. As long as the protestors do not go onto private property (because property rights are the only laws to be always protected), then the Justices understand that they seeing the 1st amendment in action.

# ¿ May 9, 2022 14:27

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

It really seems like Gianni Thomas was probably the one who leaked it either to shore up weak votes or to just brag to her friends. Clarence Thomas gives it to her to show and she sends it out.

# ¿ May 31, 2022 12:03

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

Zophar posted:

https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1540852015693037568?s=20&t=LGjCITQeONLoey8Wn0FmhA

This is my Rep, who on January 6th said that �Hitler was right about one thing, you have to get the children� as a way to say Rs need to take over education.

Also, Trump endorsed our local dumbass who runs his own private Christian school which is not accredited while also running a farm that takes millions in government subsidies while he bitched about socialism. He ran for state rep and won. He then ran for state Senate two years later. He then got state fame when he signed onto a group that wants to kick Chicago out of Illinois. When the pandemic happened, he sued the governor over and over but the only judge that would rule in his favor was from his hometown. He said that it was this that made him run for Governor but everyone knew he was going to as soon as he became a senator.

He is now the likely R candidate against a decently popular governor but all I can get are Bruce Rauner/Donald Trump vibes (side note, current governor has been making trips to primary states�).

# ¿ Jun 26, 2022 02:02

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

Well this is not good.

http://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1542521353344913417

Edit: I do not know why the tweet is not embedded but the SC has taken up a North Carolina case over the �independent state legislature� theory where states can gently caress around with federal election rules no matter what.

Bizarro Kanyon fucked around with this message at 15:57 on Jun 30, 2022

# ¿ Jun 30, 2022 15:55

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

I teach high school government and I am going to have to change A LOT of what I go over. The last 6 years of government have already had me say �this is how it normally worked� a lot but it seems like how I teach government is going to be fully changing from now on.

# ¿ Jul 4, 2022 01:45

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

I guess all 50 state supreme courts have sent an amicus brief telling SCOTUS to not rule in favor of the NC Republicans.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2022 01:45

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

Barrett denied it without referring it to the whole court.

May just be a midterm decision that they pick up after. Maybe they realize that their ruling would mess with a poo poo ton of programs.

# ¿ Oct 20, 2022 22:36

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

As with all corruption, it will be ignored within a week. Powerful people have �win at anything� cards.

Also, with the SC refusing to allow the ban to take place, it is weird that the Biden administration on the same day gives a go ahead to ban trans athletes from competitions.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/04/06/trans-athletes-school-sports-title-ix/

# ¿ Apr 7, 2023 03:37

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

hobbesmaster posted:

Unless you�re governor of Illinois for some bizarre reason, then bribery laws work the way everyone thinks they should and not this way.

As someone from Illinois, I look back and I am surprised that the D party was willing to drop Blago that quickly.

A lot of times, it does seem like Ds are more willing to take that seriously.

# ¿ Apr 14, 2023 01:00

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 9, 2024 15:33

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

I just taught my economics class about the W-4 form and I told them that they can increase their paycheck amounts or they can send extra in and get it back as a refund.

I grew up with a parent who had so many random jobs that they always had to pay in and it caused my parents a lot of stress. Due to seeing that as a kid, I never wanted to deal with that so my wife and I pay extra in every year.

May be dumb but childhood memories affect adult actions.

# ¿ Apr 20, 2023 21:20

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > SCOTUS 2023: Rice pilaf from Louisiana...is that like an ISIS video?

«‹›2 »