Author Topic: Supreme Court Cases Thread  (Read 70603 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Trim

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 42609
  • Pfizer PLUS Moderna and now Pfizer Bivalent
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1200 on: May 21, 2025, 02:38:40 PM »
:lol:

Offline CNS

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38046
  • I'm Athletes
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1201 on: May 21, 2025, 02:45:24 PM »
Dang, 7/7 recap from ol' starseed  :adored:

Thank you for your service

Offline DaBigTrain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 12695
  • stuxnet, meltdown, spectre, Bitcoin, ffChamp
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1202 on: May 21, 2025, 02:46:58 PM »
 :lol:
"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"

https://blockstream.info/block/000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c172b3f1b60a8ce26f

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 59352
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1203 on: May 21, 2025, 02:48:49 PM »
DerpConOne: Thy name is #blueanongE  :thumbsup:

Offline Stupid Fitz

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 6761
  • Go Cats
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1204 on: May 22, 2025, 10:24:33 AM »
Well, small win that at least 4 justices know what the constitution says about church and state. MAGA is going to be big mad at ACB for abstaining.

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 22857
  • Gentleman | Polymath | Renowned Lover
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1205 on: May 22, 2025, 10:42:56 AM »
Well, small win that at least 4 justices know what the constitution says about church and state. MAGA is going to be big mad at ACB for abstaining.

I'll take the small victories where we can get them. The party of Constitution and Tradition seems to have forgotten that the Founders were in the mold of Enlightenment Deists. They actively avoided entangling sectarian religious institutions with public life.
My winning smile and can-do attitude.

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 59352
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1206 on: June 27, 2025, 10:50:12 AM »
Is ACB on the cusp of redeeming herself?  Shots fired . . .

We will not dwell on Justice Jackson's argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries' worth of precedent, not to mention the constitution itself. We observe only this: Justice Jackson decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary.

Viewers of this #blog will note that across the whole of #blueanon - they warmly embrace an imperial Presidency . . . as long as its their own, now they embrace an imperial court, because they're low self esteem losers.



« Last Edit: June 27, 2025, 10:55:22 AM by sonofdaxjones »

Offline 'taterblast

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16951
  • Hi, I'm James McGill.
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1207 on: June 27, 2025, 10:58:02 AM »
Viewers of this #blog will note that across the whole of #blueanon - they warmly embrace an imperial Presidency . . . as long as its their own

very unique to #blueanon and certainly no one else

Offline BIG APPLE CAT

  • smelly poor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7721
  • slide rule enthusiast
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1208 on: June 27, 2025, 11:06:52 AM »
SCOTUS just handing out Ws to the dems these days. its disgusting.

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 59352
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1209 on: June 27, 2025, 11:28:18 AM »
Viewers of this #blog will note that across the whole of #blueanon - they warmly embrace an imperial Presidency . . . as long as its their own

very unique to #blueanon and certainly no one else

Viewers of this blog will note that #blueanon invited two of the biggest all time advocates for an imperial presidency to their side simply because they were anti-Trump.

#blueanon: We'll sell out every ideal cus Don Trump


Offline 'taterblast

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16951
  • Hi, I'm James McGill.
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1210 on: June 27, 2025, 11:42:39 AM »
to which two people are you referring?

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 59352
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1211 on: June 27, 2025, 11:52:06 AM »
Dick Cheney and W Bush

 . . . oh, and Liz

Offline mocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 40486
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1212 on: June 27, 2025, 12:05:34 PM »
Dick Cheney and W Bush

 . . . oh, and Liz


amazing

Offline 'taterblast

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16951
  • Hi, I'm James McGill.
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1213 on: June 27, 2025, 12:12:16 PM »
 :love:

Offline CNS

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38046
  • I'm Athletes
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1214 on: June 27, 2025, 12:22:31 PM »
Everyone needs to calm down about Trump because Liz Cheney.

Offline Stupid Fitz

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 6761
  • Go Cats
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1215 on: June 27, 2025, 02:57:10 PM »
Big wins for straight, white, christian folks in today's rulings. Bout time that group caught a break.

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 59352
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1216 on: June 27, 2025, 05:18:15 PM »
The fact that mocat and some of the usual #blueanongE'rs are trying to distance themselves from the warm embrace their movement gave Dick, Liz and Dubya has me a bit rattled.

I fear that The Kansas State University's accreditation may be in jeopardy . . . again.

Viewers of this blog should note that 6 justices signed on to ACB

StupidFtiz would vote for Stalin-Hitler-PolPot-Mao because he is so enraged at Don Trump. It's  :lol: :lol:



« Last Edit: June 27, 2025, 05:24:55 PM by sonofdaxjones »

Offline wetwillie

  • goEMAW Poster of the WEEK
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 32485
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1217 on: June 27, 2025, 08:12:17 PM »
I'm going to need @Spracne to give me a simple breakdown of what this ruling really means.  Seems like a bit of a nothing burger to me.
When the bullets are flying, that's when I'm at my best

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 59352
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1218 on: June 27, 2025, 08:22:23 PM »
Big wins for straight, white, christian folks in today's rulings. Bout time that group caught a break.

The equal hand of justice applied to all races, colors and creeds etc. etc.

Unless StupidFitz gets Big Mad about it . . . which is all the time.


Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 22857
  • Gentleman | Polymath | Renowned Lover
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1219 on: June 27, 2025, 09:21:15 PM »
I'm going to need @Spracne to give me a simple breakdown of what this ruling really means.  Seems like a bit of a nothing burger to me.

It's easy to let the imagination run wild and envision a near future in which Trump gets more Putin-y with neither Congress nor SCOTUS blocking him, and a rogue Judge in Oregon or Maryland or something turns his docket into a class-certifying machine, slinging out nationwide preliminary/permanent injunction left, right, and center. Think he could get impeached?

The Court did not rule on the merits of the birthright citizenship question. They punted, in other words. They did take away a powerful tool of the Judiciary but left some pretty obvious workarounds.

What this means in practice is that in 30 days, when lower courts have to rework their rulings, parts of the Executive Order could start taking effect in some states, creating a patchwork where some kids might not get citizenship depending on where they’re born. Sotomayor and the other liberals in their dissent were justifiably concerned with basic fairness and the risks of a fractured system where your rights depend on your zip code.
My winning smile and can-do attitude.

Offline CNS

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38046
  • I'm Athletes
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1220 on: June 28, 2025, 09:13:47 AM »
Does this mean that if any certain state doesn’t file a lawsuit within 30days of any EO, the. That EO is effectively law in those states?  Wouldn’t this essentially make Don the law in most of the states?

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 22857
  • Gentleman | Polymath | Renowned Lover
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1221 on: June 28, 2025, 09:57:55 AM »
Does this mean that if any certain state doesn’t file a lawsuit within 30days of any EO, the. That EO is effectively law in those states?  Wouldn’t this essentially make Don the law in most of the states?

No? What I'm saying is what's to stop a putative (would-be) plaintiff with standing from seeking certification of a class of persons similarly situated, i.e., persons affected by the particular policy or law at issue? The effect of that would be a nationwide injunction that bars government action against a person only if that person is a (named or unnamed) member of the class (and the class is comprised of only persons affected by the policy/law, to begin with). Does that make sense?
My winning smile and can-do attitude.

Offline Stupid Fitz

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 6761
  • Go Cats
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1222 on: June 28, 2025, 10:08:25 AM »
Appreciate your comments here Spracs. What about the ruling for parents afraid of gay people? If they can pull their kids from classes that mention gay people, can people pull their kids from class rooms that teach or mention religion?

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 22857
  • Gentleman | Polymath | Renowned Lover
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1223 on: June 28, 2025, 10:31:14 AM »
Appreciate your comments here Spracs. What about the ruling for parents afraid of gay people? If they can pull their kids from classes that mention gay people, can people pull their kids from class rooms that teach or mention religion?

If this is another decision that came down yesterday, I haven't read it. What's the case name?
My winning smile and can-do attitude.

Offline CNS

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38046
  • I'm Athletes
    • View Profile
Re: Supreme Court Cases Thread
« Reply #1224 on: June 28, 2025, 10:52:44 AM »
Appreciate your comments here Spracs. What about the ruling for parents afraid of gay people? If they can pull their kids from classes that mention gay people, can people pull their kids from class rooms that teach or mention religion?

If this is another decision that came down yesterday, I haven't read it. What's the case name?


https://www.npr.org/2025/06/27/nx-s1-5430355/scotus-opt-out-schools