|
The Warszawa posted:Haha, I read some of this in the Stephanopoulos memoir, do you have any recommendations on the topic? He pulled the Democrats out of the tailspin that they'd been in since LBJ and gave them a roadmap which has seen them eat the GOP's lunch since 2006. People love a winner.
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2013 20:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 13:32 |
|
|
The Warszawa posted:Fixed. I know that the Roberts Court is batshit, but a Hobby Lobby decision upholding the contraceptive mandate is a pretty sure thing, isn't it? We've barely touched on the can of worms that striking it down would open, and SCOTUS has to be aware of that, right? Right???
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2013 22:42
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:I can't see any of the NFIB Four voting to uphold this mandate and I feel like Roberts is going to swing with them this time, that infinite fucker - I don't see him siding against the nebulous soundbyte of "religious freedom." Then again, my analysis may be clouded by my complete and utter hatred of him. We're going to be cleaning up after this court for a very long time. Maybe all five of the conservatives will split an order of salmon mousse and give us a chance to create something decent.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2013 23:12
|
|
|
Hasters posted:I wonder if Mormons will be able to fire racial minorities since our inferiority is part of their sincerely held religious belief, and us gays are super hosed even in the few states that have passed anti-discrimination laws. IIRC the Mormons erased the codified racism back in the 70's. Gays are still hosed though.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2013 00:40
|
|
|
People wonder why I'm excited for President Hillary. Simply speaking, some of these fuckers have to die sometime.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2014 15:33
|
|
|
ayn rand hand job posted:Ginsburg is dissenting from the bench God bless and keep Our Lady of the Iron Doily.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2014 15:35
|
|
|
axeil posted:The Roberts court writing something worse than the Dred Scott "black people aren't people" decision would be pretty tough. "Racism is over" was a good first try.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
El Scotch posted:You could always move to Australia. No thanks. I've read the AusPol thread.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
She sees us! She likes us!  Ginsburg on Notorious R.B.G.: “It’s something that I enjoy”
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Just for novelty's sake, next time Democrats win Congress they should changes all references to God in the Pledge and in our public ceremonies to "Hail Satan". There's no right not to hear the Lord of Darkness' name, and since it's just a meaningless civic phrase and not any kind of government endorsement of this or that religion, I'm sure nobody will mind. I wouldn't mind.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2014 05:21
|
|
|
Kro-Bar posted:So does this mean gay marriage is now legal in all the states where bans were overturned but stayed pendig appeal? Yup.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2014 15:12
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Any state with a conservative-run government is going to be smart to simply not try and pass any laws prohibiting SSM for now, as they can simply try to wait and hope for shifts on the courts to favor them rather than getting a ban struck down and having no way to prohibit it. There's an easy way to force that though, you just have a gay couple walk into the courthouse and ask for a marriage license. If they're denied, you sue.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
euphronius posted:I can't imagine Congress not rectifying any damage SC may do here. Look at this guy who still thinks that Congress will act to stop dumb poo poo from happening.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2014 21:45
|
|
|
I expect nothing less than a 5-4 champagne blowjob for the hard right. But then again I expected that from the last ACA case, so maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised again.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
Of course, applying that same logic to other public servants is (for Roberts) absurd.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
Forever_Peace posted:Wouldn't be quite as dumb if we actually allowed felons to vote. On the plus side, it would give states a good reason to push for felons to be given their full civil rights backs.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
computer parts posted:At this point it's probably cheaper to just accept whatever licensing scheme Oracle wants. True, but Google is big enough that it can make very expensive decisions if they decide that it's the right strategy for their future.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2015 16:06
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:You think that its going to be politically possible to take away millions of people insurance legislatively? Like, I've always rather assumed that the reason Boehner and Mitch have let this whole thing go on as long as it has is that they knew Obama more or less would stop it before it got far enough to become politically damaging. They've promised their paymasters and the gribbly pack of slobs that make up their base that they'll rip up the New Deal just as soon as they get control of the White House again. They're going to have to at least try their best to hurt some people and do some damage in order to satisfy that constituency.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2015 23:20
|
|
|
There's not a feasible fix because the GOP has spent a lot of time and effort making Obamacare as radioactive as possible. Any republican who is perceived to be working on fixing it instead of breaking it will be risking a primary.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Scalia's dissents contain the best tantrums. I am so very looking forward to his Obergefell v. Hodges dissent.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2015 15:48
|
|
|
KilroyWasHere posted:Kagan's Kimble v. Marvel opinion has references to the Spider-Man theme song. Odds are that she was humming it while writing the opinion. 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2015 15:35
|
|
|
Slate Action posted:I'm not sure I understand the outcome where we get a pro-Obamacare ruling. The Conservative wing of the court thought they had the votes to strike it down (i.e. Roberts changed his mind again), but it turns out they didn't (Kennedy changed his mind / Roberts changed his mind AGAIN)? If they didn't have five anti votes at some point, they probably wouldn't have taken the case, right? They probably just decided that it was their last, best chance to swat at Obamacare and took the chance that they could pull a majority.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2015 15:17
|
|
|
blackmongoose posted:Unlike most people it seems, I'm thinking they'll go for the softer version of saying states have to recognize any marriage performed in another state, but not saying that there's a constitutional right to gay marriage. It ultimately amounts to almost as much of a victory, but seems more in line with Kennedy's views - I think he'd be uncomfortable with forcing states to grant their approval to gay marriages, but forcing recognition is something he would view as less intrusive while still protecting the rights of couples married in states that approve it. He also tends to dislike bright lines, which is another reason I think he'll shy away from stating the constitution mandates gay marriage. I don't think that they'll go that route because SCOTUS knows that we'd just be back here in a year or two as more and more federal judges strike down state bans.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
Drone posted:From Scalia's dissent: "We should start calling this law SCOTUScare." Let the butthurt flow like sweet wine, you bitter country club bigot.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2015 15:31
|
|
|
Scrub-Niggurath posted:So is Roberts cool again Roberts is still a punk bitch, nothing has changed.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
Short of a nuclear bomb, anything that makes Ramirez mad is good for America.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
It's nice to be a part of the civilized world.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2015 15:04
|
|
|
gently caress the dissents. I want to read RBG's concurrence.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
Because of course that's what Biden's up to. 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
Zoran posted:Fake, sadly. I want to believe.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
patentmagus posted:I wouldn't be surprised if the liberal judges granted cert in order to put reproductive choice on a more solid footing. Liberal judges aren't going to chance that unless they know for certain that they'll win.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
Goatman Sacks posted:I mean, that won't keep 4 justices from voting against it. Piles of poo poo that they are, I couldn't see Roberts or Scalia going for that. Alito votes for whatever the nice guys at the club think is right, and Thomas' jurisprudence is so sideways that it's hard to say where he'll fall.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2015 15:26
|
|
|
Goatman Sacks posted:Why? Roberts is a old fashioned Texas racist, and Scalia gets his opinion from talk radio and then has his staffers spend the next month figuring out a tortured logic to justify it. Scalia I'm less certain about, but he's usually a reliable vote when there's a clear-cut constitutional issue on the table. And Roberts has a lingering respect for the rule of law that even being a retrograde reganite shithead hasn't completely tamped down like it has in that useless hack Alito.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2015 16:22
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Can it really be any worse than what we got the Yes. No Washington around to threaten a bunch of worthless pols into making a working government this time.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
I'm so relieved by this that I could almost cry.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:Can't wait to see who President Bloomberg nominates. Judge Whitey from Futurama. 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:What landmark cases wouldn't have happened if everyone on the Court shared Scalia's originalism and textualism. All of the bad ones.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 01:18
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:I know this really isn't the thread for it but what's trending with the economy that is any worse than the barely above water bullshit we've been going through since 2008? China's slowing down and Europe is lagging, eventually that will drag us down too. For the moment we're holding out because we're not a petrostate and we're the only game in town.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 08:47
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:I sort of wonder if they can reverse themselves on striking down the VRA and have it pop back into existence without need for congress. I doubt they'd do it but has something like that ever occurred? I know Scalia had one law he loved get struck down and he insisted on applying it in his dissents as if it still was on the books because he thought the original decision was wrong. I don't think so. Roberts has spent his entire career trying to rip up the VRA, and I very much doubt that that rat gently caress would be at all interested in seeing it resurrected by SCOTUS decision.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 13:32 |
|
|
Radish posted:Scalia is making it real hard not to ghoulishly be happy at his death. I ate a dinner with friends at the best restaurant in town and ran up a huge liquor bill. The entire time I was effervescent with delight over the fact that that evil gently caress finally dropped dead.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2016 18:03
|
|