Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Wed Aug 12 13:51:58 2020

Utopia Talk / Politics / The leftist Supreme Court
Rugian
Member
Thu Jun 18 09:27:18
Quite the busy week for SCOTUS.

-Rewrote Title VII to extend protections to fags and shemales
-Refused to take up multiple cases of 2nd Amendment infringements
-Refused to take up ruling on the legality of sanctuary cities (so much for federal immigration law being the law of the land - RIP SB 1070)
-Struck down repeal of DACA (apparently EOs are permanent and cant be canceled now)

Looks like the leftist pressure campaign against Roberts is working splendidly. Bush is a fucktard for putting that idiot on the court.
Renzo Marquez
Member
Thu Jun 18 09:39:50
John Roberts has probably been to Epstein's island.
patom
Member
Thu Jun 18 09:40:21
It's not so much that cities are declaring themselves 'sanctuary' cities. The Feds want them to do the job of the Feds.
If a city starts to arrest illegals, then they are obligated to house them in their local jails at their expense. Can you imagine what that would do to the budgets of a small town or big city.

Must really piss Trump off, Obama appointing Gorsuch.
Paramount
Member
Thu Jun 18 09:48:26
There is a risk (or chance?) that tens of thousands of gay men and shemales will come to the USA and apply for jobs now that they know their rights will be protected. If the US doesn’t already have the highest concentration of gays and shemales, they will have it in 1-2 years.
Dukhat
Member
Thu Jun 18 09:48:42
Daddy got double scorched tonight Ruggy.
Habebe
Member
Thu Jun 18 09:57:07
Patom, From what I understand tbis recent ruling was about if an illegal is arrested for a non capital crime immigration wants the jail to notify them and they will take them into ICE custody.

The locals from what I gather dont eant someone deported for something minor.
Habebe
Member
Thu Jun 18 09:58:10
Rugian, I did notice this rapid reversal recently.
Wrath of Orion
Member
Thu Jun 18 10:19:30
Aww, the racists and homophobes are having a bad day, I see.
jergul
large member
Thu Jun 18 10:23:01
See Ruggy, that is how far to the right you are. A conservative dominated Supreme Court is not willing to support you.
Rugian
Member
Thu Jun 18 10:31:10
Jergul

SCOTUS isnt dominated by conservatives. Democrats have spent three years threatening the court if it doesn't move to the left. Apparently, those threats have started to work.

http://www...of-the-court-brief-11565911608
Rugian
Member
Thu Jun 18 10:37:35
"When liberals worry about losing a major Supreme Court case, they usually make appeals to the Court’s legitimacy. This is intended to attract Chief Justice John Roberts by suggesting that a conservative outcome would damage the institution’s reputation. The ritual is disingenuous but usually subtle.

Five Democratic Senators have had it with subtle. In a remarkable and threatening amicus brief, Sheldon Whitehouse, Mazie Hirono, Richard Blumenthal, Richard Durbin and Kirsten Gillibrand all but tell the Justices that they’ll retaliate politically if the Court doesn’t do what they say in a Second Amendment case.

“The Supreme Court is not well,” they tell the Justices in what is really an enemy-of-the-Court brief. “Perhaps the Court can heal itself before the public demands it be ‘restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics.’” By “restructured,” they mean packed with new Justices by a Democratic President and Senate after they kill the filibuster.

The case involves a challenge to a New York City law that banned licensed gun owners from bringing handguns outside the city even if a gun is unloaded and locked in a container separate from its ammunition. The Court accepted the case in January. Fearing a Supreme Court defeat, New York softened the restrictions and in July asked the Court to dismiss the case as moot. The Justices are scheduled to consider that question Oct. 1. The plaintiffs say the regulations are still unconstitutional.

The five progressive Senators are furious the Justices may rule on the case though the most constitutionally dubious provisions have been repealed. Their amicus brief claims the Court would be deciding a “hypothetical” issue. Their real fear is that the Court will clarify its Second Amendment jurisprudence and broaden protections for gun ownership.

As the left-wing website ThinkProgress notes with approval, the brief amounts to a “declaration of war” against the conservative Justices that essentially describes the Supreme Court as “dominated by political hacks selected by the Federalist Society.”

The not-so-amicus brief attacks the Federalist Society by name five times, as if the network of bookish conservative-leaning students and lawyers is responsible for swinging elections. It posits darkly that “massive political spending and secrecy are rarely a salubrious combination.” This echoes Sen. Whitehouse’s previous effort to force anyone filing amicus briefs to disclose who funded them.

The Federalist Society doesn’t file amicus briefs. Its efforts are devoted to educational events and debates on public policy and law, and they aren’t secret. Liberals are welcome. If Mr. Whitehouse were interested in learning about opposing views, he might be too. Unlike at other campus groups, no one is shouted down at Federalist Society events.

The Senators also paint the conservative Justices as monolithic, though the recent term saw significant diversity on the Court’s right. New Justice Brett Kavanaugh has formed an alliance of sorts with Chief Justice Roberts while Justice Neil Gorsuch sometimes joined the four liberals. There were more decisions with a majority of four liberals and one conservative—10—than there were with five conservatives. The four liberals formed a far more monolithic block.

The Senators darkly cite “a multimillion-dollar advertising campaign to shape this Court’s composition,” as if liberals don’t and won’t run advertisements when Democratic Presidents nominate judges. They say that 73 decisions with a conservative majority “concerned interests important to the big funders, corporate influencers and political base of the Republican Party” and add that it “if it turns out that these anonymous donor interests” benefit from those decisions then “it bodes very poorly for the Court.” This is rank demagoguery.

This is a dramatic escalation in the Supreme Court wars, and it doesn’t come from the right. Prominent liberals have gone in the blink of an eye from agonizing over the Court’s legitimacy in the hope of swaying John Roberts to openly assailing the Justices themselves as corrupt."

----

Lo and behold, ten months later...
hood
Member
Thu Jun 18 10:47:01
"Waaaah, the left is playing politics with the Supreme Court! We would never do such a thing *cough*pleasedontbringupthestolenseatorthemanytrumpthreatstocourts*cough*!"
Rugian
Member
Thu Jun 18 10:48:39
Hood

What evidence do you have to suggest that Trump's "threats" have actually influenced judicial opinions?
Habebe
Member
Thu Jun 18 10:52:48
Meh, Its an election cycle, good.time to meet in the middle. None of these are gamechangers.

As far as im concerned if you want to go bang dudes, go bang dudes, why should I care?

The 2md amendment issues, Well I dont know the details, but we have had a pretty good run at reversing restrictions lately.

Sanctuary cities? Simple fix, bus all of the illegals you can to.those cities, problem solved.

My daily life is not really effected by any of these rulings.
hood
Member
Thu Jun 18 10:53:02
What evidence do you have to suggest that the amicus brief actually influenced judicial opinions?
Rugian
Member
Thu Jun 18 11:01:47
See the OP
hood
Member
Thu Jun 18 11:04:19
So no evidence. Got it.
Rugian
Member
Thu Jun 18 11:07:22
Wrong.
Wrath of Orion
Member
Thu Jun 18 12:26:58
Rugian's hackery is reaching Retard Rod levels these days.
Dakyron
Member
Thu Jun 18 15:31:53
"It's not so much that cities are declaring themselves 'sanctuary' cities. The Feds want them to do the job of the Feds.
If a city starts to arrest illegals, then they are obligated to house them in their local jails at their expense. Can you imagine what that would do to the budgets of a small town or big city. "

This is 100% bullshit. Federal government under Obama and man-hater Napolitano went out of their way to prevent states and cities from enforcing immigration law. See SB1070, as Rugian pointed out.
Paramount
Member
Fri Jun 19 02:08:21
Here is another Leftist supreme court that is attacking Mr Trump now.


Facebook removes Trump ads with symbol once used by Nazis to designate political prisoners

Facebook on Thursday deactivated dozens of ads placed by President Trump’s reelection campaign that included a symbol once used by the Nazis to designate political prisoners in concentration camps.

The marking appeared as part of the campaign’s online salvo against antifa and “far-left groups."

A red inverted triangle was used in the 1930s to identify Communists, and was applied as well to Social Democrats, liberals, Freemasons and other members of opposition parties incarcerated by the Nazis. The badge forced on Jewish political prisoners, by contrast, featured a yellow triangle overlaid by a red triangle so as to resemble a Star of David.

The red triangle appeared in paid posts sponsored by Trump and Vice President Pence, as well as by the “Team Trump” campaign page. It was featured alongside text warning of “Dangerous MOBS” and asking users to sign a petition about antifa, a loose collection of anti-fascist activists whom the Trump administration has sought to link to recent violence, despite arrest records that show their involvement is trivial.

http://www...designate-political-prisoners/
Rugian
Member
Mon Jun 29 09:29:11
Fucking Roberts.
Wrath of Orion
Member
Mon Jun 29 21:48:00
It's like they're actually trying to make Rugian's life more miserable than it already is, lol.
jergul
large member
Tue Jun 30 02:45:58
And now he messed up abortion. Ruggy must be so sad.
Paramount
Member
Tue Jun 30 03:32:42
Trump is getting banned everywhere now:


Trump suspended from Twitch, as Reddit bans the ‘The_Donald’ and additional subreddits

https://techcrunch.com/2020/06/29/trump-suspended-from-twitch-as-reddit-bans-the-the_donald-and-additional-subreddits/


He should create an account on TikTok.
Dukhat
Member
Tue Jun 30 05:38:06
Rugian is so fucking helpless he opposes real things that would benefit his life like paid leave and only wants things that hurts other people like discrimination against Transgenders.

A true cuck.

Rugian
Member
Tue Jun 30 05:43:25
I have paid leave.

Although I'm not sure what both that and Paramount's post have to do with the Supreme Court.
Habebe
Member
Thu Jul 02 03:38:31
http://sla...-montana-religious-schools.amp

I figured this could go jere instead of its owm thread.

So the website is out of pocket but its the lefts.take from this conservative win over funding for private schools.

So the gist is this.

If a state decides to fund private school tuitions they can not pick and choose which private schools on the basis of religion.
earthpig
GTFO HOer
Fri Jul 03 00:18:39
I have not read the full opinion, but I agree with it as presented at that link (which is opposed to it). I don't think the sum total of all of this is evidence of the judiciary being manipulated. I take it, which is inclusive of a Trump appointee or two doing something that Trump wouldn't like, etc, as evidence of an independent judiciary.

If you want there to be a Muslim charter school in Montana, great! Move a sufficient population into Montana to support such a school, and open up shop. But you can't punish Montana's de facto "Christian only" just because that happens to be the demographic makeup at the moment, unless Montana is actively preventing non-Christian immigration and non-Christian charter school formation. Roberts is right to side with the conservatives on this one.
jergul
large member
Fri Jul 03 05:36:26
EP
Montana is directly preventing non-christian charter schools by denying them funding.

Its fine if the funding is per student if that allays your concerns. That gives the proportionality you were looking for.

But funding Chistian schools exclusively is in fact unconstitutional as it fucks up the separation of church and state.

The only counterargument is that the State should probably not be funding any kind of religious school.

Which would be a literal understanding of your constitution.
jergul
large member
Fri Jul 03 05:45:34
hmm, I may have wanted to read the article before posting.

Still, I nailed it on the counterargument! :D.
Habebe
Member
Fri Jul 03 05:53:17
Jergul. This ruling will allow all schools, religious or not tombe eligible for public funds. How is that denying different religions? I'm sure we have Muslim and Jewish schools somewhere.

They are just saying that a state can not discriminate against a school Marley because it is religious.
jergul
large member
Fri Jul 03 05:55:43
I know. I read the article after that first post.
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share