Supreme Court Cases Thread

[BIG APPLE CAT]

I’m with SCOTUS on this. I am getting sick and tired of people who are guilty of spending time in prison being set free into the general public just because they “technically” didn’t “commit the crime they were convicted of”
In some ways those people are worse than the ones who were rightly convicted bc now they have a score to settle, and since they probably can’t find a job they’ll have plenty of time to plot out their crimes since they won’t be spending that time picking themselves up by their bootstraps.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I’m with SCOTUS on this. I am getting sick and tired of people who are guilty of spending time in prison being set free into the general public just because they “technically” didn’t “commit the crime they were convicted of”
In some ways those people are worse than the ones who were rightly convicted bc now they have a score to settle, and since they probably can’t find a job they’ll have plenty of time to plot out their crimes since they won’t be spending that time picking themselves up by their bootstraps.

Those sandbagging son-of-a-bitches.

[Spracne]

Listen, if you want to stand up for your rights, you should have done it immediately, when you didn't realize they were being violated!

[MakeItRain]

In 2012 the court ruled that when a state court "substantially" interferes with a defendant's constitutional right to be represented by counsel, the defendant, with a new lawyer, may appeal to federal court to show that he was denied his right to effective counsel. Back then, the majority was 7-to-2, with Justice Clarence Thomas in dissent. On Monday Thomas wrote the majority decision hollowing out that 2012 ruling on behalf of the court's new six-justice conservative super majority.

He said that federal courts may not hear "new evidence" obtained after conviction to show how deficient the trial or appellate lawyer in state court was. To allow such evidence to be presented in federal court, he said, "encourages prisoners to sandbag state courts," depriving the states of "the finality that is essential to both the retributive and deterrent function of criminal law."

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/23/1100852386/supreme-court-hobbles-challenges-by-inmates-based-on-bad-legal-representation

I'm really not sure if Thomas is actually this stupid or if there is some sort of benefit to him if innocent people have to stay in prison or get put to death.

Yeah this is unreal dumb!

Do the other justices not get to review these opinions before they are published? That's patently absurd, looks like some crap written by someone who knows they are stripping someone else's rights.

[Justwin]

I don't know a lot about the specifics of these cases, but in general, I come down on the side of making it more difficult for people to be in prison. The criminal justice system should err on the side of letting guilty people go free rather than on the side of innocent people being imprisoned. Anything that provides an avenue for an innocent person to go free should be weighted positively pretty heavily.

Also, the death penalty needs to be eliminated. These cases further illustrate the need for this.

[Rage Against the McKee]

If someone in prison has new or previously unseen evidence that is remotely exonerating, there should be a process for that evidence to see a court of law, and it shouldn't matter how many appeals they have already had.

[MakeItRain]

I don't know a lot about the specifics of these cases, but in general, I come down on the side of making it more difficult for people to be in prison. The criminal justice system should err on the side of letting guilty people go free rather than on the side of innocent people being imprisoned. Anything that provides an avenue for an innocent person to go free should be weighted positively pretty heavily.

Also, the death penalty needs to be eliminated. These cases further illustrate the need for this.

Justwin the progressive

[Spracne]

I don't know a lot about the specifics of these cases, but in general, I come down on the side of making it more difficult for people to be in prison. The criminal justice system should err on the side of letting guilty people go free rather than on the side of innocent people being imprisoned. Anything that provides an avenue for an innocent person to go free should be weighted positively pretty heavily.

Also, the death penalty needs to be eliminated. These cases further illustrate the need for this.

Justwin the progressive

  And to think, I had to go to law school to gain this perspective.

[chum1]

https://twitter.com/AndrewSolender/status/1537483974955749377

[sonofdaxjones]

#LOL

[sonofdaxjones]

Imagine actually believing yet another  #blueanon conspiracy theory  while IRL people are plotting to assassinate SC justices. 

#blueanon Deflecto Theater is sadly just getting ramped up. 

[chum1]

It seems natural to me that an increasingly (at least outwardly appearing) political court would be treated in an increasingly political way. We'll see what else happens for Thomas.

Also, this is one of those PAINFULLY obvious "if the shoe was on the other foot" situations for pubs. They'd be impeaching.

[sonofdaxjones]

#painfullyobvious

[catastrophe]

The court would be better without Thomas on it, but that’s a dangerous path to go down.

[sonofdaxjones]

 

[Dugout DickStone]

The court would be better without Thomas on it, but that’s a dangerous path to go down.

Can't throw a guy off the court for being into fat chicks.

[sonofdaxjones]

#blueanon body shaming is rolling at red line levels today

[Dugout DickStone]

#blueanon body shaming is rolling at red line levels today

guilty of calling ginni a tub on gE as charged.  I will also call her a proper weirdo and simple minded dinkconk

[Cire]

Just found out that she used to be in a cult. Only to get out and then join another


Cautionary tale


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mocat]

https://twitter.com/laurawags/status/1540023489377206273?t=H4BuiG-SfvY0EEesdoNKaQ&s=19

[catastrophe]

They’re clearly smart people. Thomas is probably the only member of the Court you might struggle to find super glowing things about.

There are very good arguments by very smart people for Roe being incorrectly decided.

There are less good arguments for overturning now given the potential damage to stare decisis and the Court’s reputation more generally. But academically it’s not a stretch to get there at all.

[Dugout DickStone]

They’re clearly smart people. Thomas is probably the only member of the Court you might struggle to find super glowing things about.

There are very good arguments by very smart people for Roe being incorrectly decided.

There are less good arguments for overturning now given the potential damage to stare decisis and the Court’s reputation more generally. But academically it’s not a stretch to get there at all.

AND they were asked in confirmation hearings, when they were under oath, if they thought it should be overturned.  Some of them lied

[Spracne]

They’re clearly smart people. Thomas is probably the only member of the Court you might struggle to find super glowing things about.

There are very good arguments by very smart people for Roe being incorrectly decided.

There are less good arguments for overturning now given the potential damage to stare decisis and the Court’s reputation more generally. But academically it’s not a stretch to get there at all.

I remember when stare decisis was a thing. Like when the Chief Justice determined a 9-0 decision was necessary in order to overturn the racist policy established in Plessy v. Ferguson. Now all you need is a divided court voting along ideological lines.

[Cire]

https://twitter.com/sethmoulton/status/1539997689148018693?s=21&t=UjcxHaVtEqUeQKv6-7juOg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dugout DickStone]

alito is such a little whiner in his writing too.  just a total cuck