Author Topic: Supreme Court Cases Thread  (Read 35193 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline CNS

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 36785
  • I'm Athletes
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #250 on: June 24, 2022, 11:20:00 AM »
Douglas county prosecutor just stated she would not prosecute.  This will be pretty common across the country.  And it should except it also deals a pretty significant blow to the judicial branch of our federal government.

Now we just need doctors to build clinics and stake their career on not being prosecuted by the DoCO prosecutor, as well as the next prosecutor, and the next, etc.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37161
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #251 on: June 24, 2022, 11:26:34 AM »
If abortion is murder why would anyone be happy with a states right to choose murder?  If they were killing toddlers in CO, I wouldn't care that I lived in Texas, I'd want that crap made illegal and I would do a lot more than just wait fifty years for the Supreme Court to rule on it.  The fact is, abortion doesn't equate to murder and everyone knows it.

I can assure you that these people are not happy with states having any rights that they disagree with, and will introduce federal legislation to ban abortion everywhere as soon as they have control of the house, senate, and president again.

Offline Stupid Fitz

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4846
  • Go Cats
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #252 on: June 24, 2022, 11:30:08 AM »
I’m definitely morbidly curious how the Court would approach an interracial marriage ban.

It really could get interesting. Like who is the most racist governor? Could some small timey mayor ban it and get it to the SC? Could maybe a Dem state "outlaw" it and then basically say they aren't going to prosecute just to get it to the SC just to prove a point? That's prob a terrible idea, but it would be a hoot to see Thomas' opinion.

It doesn't have to be a state for them to take the case. It just needs to be some racist challenge it on "constitutional" grounds, it will certainly make it's way through the courts. This current make-up of the court wouldn't hesitate to take up a "constitutional" issue.

Thomas can easily justify it the same way he justified abolishing Roe and everything else coming. It shouldn't be a federal mandate.

yeah, but would he? That is what would be interesting to see. He and his wife seem like real shitbags so I could totally see him changing his opinion because it affects him.

Let me let you into the mind of a coon. He doesn't see he and Ginny the same way he sees other interracial couples. They always have some sort of twisted rationalization to justify how they're different than the people they look down their noses at. This current thing with Hershel Walker is a perfect example. I have no doubt that he believed all the crap he said about absentee fathers, never mind the fact that he has multiple kids that he ignored. He didn't forget, he just cared more about the applause of the people who wrongly crap on black men as bad fathers, than he did his kids. In his head, it was "those bitches tricked me, so those kids aren't mine."

Coons always have a reason to justify why they aren't like the rest of us. Keep that in mind when you see something from Whitlock and why his views changed so much the last 15 years.

 :horrorsurprise:

Offline DQ12

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 22292
  • #TeamChestHair
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #253 on: June 24, 2022, 11:47:16 AM »
If abortion is murder why would anyone be happy with a states right to choose murder?  If they were killing toddlers in CO, I wouldn't care that I lived in Texas, I'd want that crap made illegal and I would do a lot more than just wait fifty years for the Supreme Court to rule on it.  The fact is, abortion doesn't equate to murder and everyone knows it.
what would you do?


"You want to stand next to someone and not be able to hear them, walk your ass into Manhattan, Kansas." - [REDACTED]

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 53649
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #254 on: June 24, 2022, 11:48:27 AM »
Relative to the gun case, #blueanonGe should be enraged at their most favored justices for offering a dissent that was complete crap, using case examples and virtue signaling bullshit that had little to nothing to do with the case at hand.

I say this as a full proponent of strengthening gun laws and banning certain types of guns.

Offline kstater

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2242
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #255 on: June 24, 2022, 11:51:58 AM »
Anyone surprised Parsons was the first to sprint to his desk and ban it?

Sent from my SM-S906U1 using Tapatalk


Offline chum1

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 21947
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #256 on: June 24, 2022, 11:56:45 AM »
I have no idea what this sort of lying could be other than purely political in nature.

https://twitter.com/IsaacDovere/status/1540360023217430528

Offline BIG APPLE CAT

  • smelly poor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 6713
  • slide rule enthusiast
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #257 on: June 24, 2022, 12:12:48 PM »
2 of them are old and fat shits so they may not make it to outlaw inter-racial marriages.  Although reading Thomas's concurring opinion which makes marrying outside of your race illegal would be interesting

They will go for the gays well before brown people. They will eventually get there, but it will take a bit of time.

yeah it kind of feels like SCOTUS is sending the signal "pass laws banning whatever you want, we're willing to hear the case and support it" and if that sounds hyperbolic i mean...???

Then pass laws banning machine guns for 18 year olds....

dems won't do it but i promise you the MTGs and Boeberts and Cruz's of this country will be tripping over their collective dicks/vags to introduce the most batshit legislation they can cook up

Offline dal9

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1782
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #258 on: June 24, 2022, 12:19:06 PM »
Relative to the gun case, #blueanonGe should be enraged at their most favored justices for offering a dissent that was complete crap, using case examples and virtue signaling bullshit that had little to nothing to do with the case at hand.


we are really defining "virtue signaling" down when "pointing out that massacres of children are bad" counts as "virtue signaling"


(i know i just violated the thing i agreed with about not responding to these shitposts)

Online Institutional Control

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 14990
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #259 on: June 24, 2022, 12:22:49 PM »
If abortion is murder why would anyone be happy with a states right to choose murder?  If they were killing toddlers in CO, I wouldn't care that I lived in Texas, I'd want that crap made illegal and I would do a lot more than just wait fifty years for the Supreme Court to rule on it.  The fact is, abortion doesn't equate to murder and everyone knows it.
what would you do?

That's a good question and hard to say in my hypothetical that would never happen but I'd like to think I'd go John Brown style and organize and/or participate in actual attacks on places where toddlers were being murdered.   

Offline bucket

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9596
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #260 on: June 24, 2022, 12:26:49 PM »
If abortion is murder why would anyone be happy with a states right to choose murder?  If they were killing toddlers in CO, I wouldn't care that I lived in Texas, I'd want that crap made illegal and I would do a lot more than just wait fifty years for the Supreme Court to rule on it.  The fact is, abortion doesn't equate to murder and everyone knows it.
what would you do?

That's a good question and hard to say in my hypothetical that would never happen but I'd like to think I'd go John Brown style and organize and/or participate in actual attacks on places where toddlers were being murdered.


Offline mocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 39254
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #261 on: June 24, 2022, 12:29:37 PM »
I have no idea what this sort of lying could be other than purely political in nature.

https://twitter.com/IsaacDovere/status/1540360023217430528

amaze

Offline cfbandyman

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9506
  • To da 'ville.
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #262 on: June 24, 2022, 12:31:20 PM »
Relative to the gun case, #blueanonGe should be enraged at their most favored justices for offering a dissent that was complete crap, using case examples and virtue signaling bullshit that had little to nothing to do with the case at hand.


we are really defining "virtue signaling" down when "pointing out that massacres of children are bad" counts as "virtue signaling"


(i know i just violated the thing i agreed with about not responding to these shitposts)

Hey you know that thing that was bad and the people who voted for the bad thing? Yeah, those that didn't are bad too because they didn't write words well enough
A&M Style: 1/19/13 Co-Champion of THE ED's College Basketball Challenge

The art of the deal with it poors

OG Elon hater with a tesla


Offline Dugout DickStone

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 51710
  • BSPAC
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #263 on: June 24, 2022, 12:38:53 PM »
I have no idea what this sort of lying could be other than purely political in nature.

https://twitter.com/IsaacDovere/status/1540360023217430528

This is a stain on the SC.  And a pretty bad one

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 53649
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #264 on: June 24, 2022, 12:39:06 PM »
Relative to the gun case, #blueanonGe should be enraged at their most favored justices for offering a dissent that was complete crap, using case examples and virtue signaling bullshit that had little to nothing to do with the case at hand.


we are really defining "virtue signaling" down when "pointing out that massacres of children are bad" counts as "virtue signaling"


(i know i just violated the thing i agreed with about not responding to these shitposts)

Those events had nothing to do with the case at hand, thus they are irrelevant.  The dissent was trying to play on emotion.




Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37161
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #265 on: June 24, 2022, 01:30:13 PM »
I’m definitely morbidly curious how the Court would approach an interracial marriage ban.

It really could get interesting. Like who is the most racist governor? Could some small timey mayor ban it and get it to the SC? Could maybe a Dem state "outlaw" it and then basically say they aren't going to prosecute just to get it to the SC just to prove a point? That's prob a terrible idea, but it would be a hoot to see Thomas' opinion.

It doesn't have to be a state for them to take the case. It just needs to be some racist challenge it on "constitutional" grounds, it will certainly make it's way through the courts. This current make-up of the court wouldn't hesitate to take up a "constitutional" issue.

Thomas can easily justify it the same way he justified abolishing Roe and everything else coming. It shouldn't be a federal mandate.

yeah, but would he? That is what would be interesting to see. He and his wife seem like real shitbags so I could totally see him changing his opinion because it affects him.

Let me let you into the mind of a coon. He doesn't see he and Ginny the same way he sees other interracial couples. They always have some sort of twisted rationalization to justify how they're different than the people they look down their noses at. This current thing with Hershel Walker is a perfect example. I have no doubt that he believed all the crap he said about absentee fathers, never mind the fact that he has multiple kids that he ignored. He didn't forget, he just cared more about the applause of the people who wrongly crap on black men as bad fathers, than he did his kids. In his head, it was "those bitches tricked me, so those kids aren't mine."

Coons always have a reason to justify why they aren't like the rest of us. Keep that in mind when you see something from Whitlock and why his views changed so much the last 15 years.

I've seen Clarence's wife. He's clearly playing the long game to end his marriage without having to go through a sinful divorce.

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 21752
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #266 on: June 24, 2022, 01:42:03 PM »
I have no idea what this sort of lying could be other than purely political in nature.

https://twitter.com/IsaacDovere/status/1540360023217430528

This is a stain on the SC.  And a pretty bad one

Not just the Court. This will reverberate throughout the country and cause immense damage. But yeah. My faith in the institution is shot.

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 20529
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #267 on: June 24, 2022, 01:50:37 PM »
I think a lot of people imagine that this is going to spark some sort of conflict where there is some resolution that is forced to the never ending anaconda that seems to be squeezing the life out of civic life and political institutions but I don't think we get there. Nothing is resolved, everything just a little worse and absolute gridlock as far as the eye can see.

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #268 on: June 24, 2022, 06:18:00 PM »
Really shitty day for dipshits who don’t know how to have sex without getting pregnant. RIP


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline wiley

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2186
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #269 on: June 24, 2022, 07:40:15 PM »
I have no idea what this sort of lying could be other than purely political in nature.

https://twitter.com/IsaacDovere/status/1540360023217430528

This is a stain on the SC.  And a pretty bad one

Not just the Court. This will reverberate throughout the country and cause immense damage. But yeah. My faith in the institution is shot.
Ive seen common alternatives suggested that they may try to open clinics on tribal land.  Is that even a feasible option?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
it's easy to be emaw when EMAW is at your doorstep - FFF

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #270 on: June 24, 2022, 07:44:36 PM »

Offline BIG APPLE CAT

  • smelly poor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 6713
  • slide rule enthusiast
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #271 on: June 24, 2022, 07:54:35 PM »
Pretty crazy to think there was a time when the SC was actually populated with enough good people and it hadn’t become political theater and the president could afford to not make it a priority. But that’s not what the SC is anymore.

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #272 on: June 24, 2022, 08:03:24 PM »
Babies lives matter, BAC. Wear a condom.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline kstater

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2242
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #273 on: June 24, 2022, 08:06:12 PM »
Really shitty day for dipshits who don’t know how to have sex without getting pregnant. RIP


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Exactly.   We should find a way to fund organizations that help get people the things they need to do that.


Wait.  We don't want to do that either. 

Sent from my SM-S906U1 using Tapatalk


Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 21752
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #274 on: June 24, 2022, 08:07:33 PM »
I see Wacky's time off really caused some self-reflection.