SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States)

gimmesometruth27 · October 16

mickeyrat said:

In Louisiana voting case, US Supreme Court ponders a 'colorblind' Constitution - https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/louisiana-voting-case-us-supreme-court-ponders-colorblind-constitution-2025-10-16/

yes, because we are so colorblind as a society.

fucking kavenaugh is going to overturn the voting rights act because apparently there is no racial jerrymandering.

josevolution · October 16

gimmesometruth27 said:

mickeyrat said:

In Louisiana voting case, US Supreme Court ponders a 'colorblind' Constitution - https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/louisiana-voting-case-us-supreme-court-ponders-colorblind-constitution-2025-10-16/

yes, because we are so colorblind as a society.

fucking kavenaugh is going to overturn the voting rights act because apparently there is no racial jerrymandering.

McConnell Ginsberg & Biden to blame all three had some sort of hand in the current state we are in with the SC! McConnell for not allowing the nod for Obama appointee Ginsberg for not retiring sooner & Biden for not having the balls to expand the courts

Lerxst1992 · October 16

Alex, I’ll take figure out how to win senate majority within the next 12 years for $2000 please

josevolution · October 16

Lerxst1992 said:

Alex, I’ll take figure out how to win senate majority within the next 12 years for $2000 please

I’d say longer than that what will you say when they declare elections are null & void by this administration?

mickeyrat · November 2

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/5021252/uploads/editor/7a/5y5sfiqs03xf.jpg

OnWis97 · November 3

In fairness the hypothetical president was not the Greatest Person in the History of this Country.

Lerxst1992 · November 3

mickeyrat said:

As terrible a decision as US v Trump is, US presidents deciding who to murder outside of a declared war, is nothing new. What’s new is expanding that power to cig boats.

Gern Blansten · November 5

This SC hearing does not sound good for trump...

Gern Blansten · November 5

Sotomayor grilling Blanch about using tariffs to raise revenue....plenty of evidence of trump bragging about how much revenue he's bringing in

Tariffs are toast

gimmesometruth27 · November 5

Gern Blansten said:

Sotomayor grilling Blanch about using tariffs to raise revenue....plenty of evidence of trump bragging about how much revenue he's bringing in

Tariffs are toast

dude it is the supreme court you are talking about. 4 of them are basically trump's own personal legal team.

tbergs · November 5

Yeah, but what are Trump's allies on the bench saying? The liberal leaning justices are obviously against and maybe Barrett, but the rest, doubtful.

gimmesometruth27 · November 5

the supreme court reminds me of that old flintstone's episode where fred gets promoted to head of the company. all he has to do is sit in meetings all day and ask 2 questions and give one response:

1. who's baby is that? (meaning idea)
2. what's your angle?
3. I'll buy that.

Gern Blansten · November 5

Both Thomas and Alito were asking some questions that seem to suggest they don't buy it. I didn't hear Roberts but saw on X that he seemed to indicate opposition as well.

Of course we never know until they make a decision but it really doesn't sound good. Exec branch can't impose taxes and these are taxes...and they have a revenue raising intent with trump constantly harping about how much money he's bringing in.

Blanch is trying to argue that it isn't revenue raising...ridiculous

Gern Blansten · November 5

Gorsuch railing him now for a perceived change in position

gimmesometruth27 · November 5

i will believe it when they strike them down.

mickeyrat · November 8

Did you know? Every year, the Supreme Court’s nine justices fill out a form that discloses their financial connections to companies and people.

Our database allows you to search for organizations and people that have paid them, reimbursed them for travel and given them gifts: https://propub.li/4hVJNZq

mickeyrat · November 10

The Supreme Court will not revisit its landmark decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide after rejecting a case brought by a former county clerk who was jailed for contempt after refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples: https://www.10tv.com/article/syndication/associatedpress/supreme-court-rejects-call-to-overturn-its-decision-legalizing-same-sex-marriage-nationwide/616-6cf11f8c-b8a0-4dd5-ba06-19f97ca1f2bb?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook_10TV_-_WBNS

(AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta, File)

josevolution · November 11

Good now the witch can crawl back into her Kentucky cave

Lerxst1992 · November 11

Gern Blansten said:

Sotomayor grilling Blanch about using tariffs to raise revenue....plenty of evidence of trump bragging about how much revenue he's bringing in

Tariffs are toast

He’ll keep coming up with new emergencies to employ new tariffs and they’ll keep dragging him back to court, which could take years.

josevolution · November 11

Lerxst1992 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Sotomayor grilling Blanch about using tariffs to raise revenue....plenty of evidence of trump bragging about how much revenue he's bringing in

Tariffs are toast

He’ll keep coming up with new emergencies to employ new tariffs and they’ll keep dragging him back to court, which could take years.

So why bother?

SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States)

Comments

Categories