Supreme Court of the United States

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

30 minutes ago, Foxx said:

On Kimmel last night, Brandon predicted a revolution in August if they go through with their announcement. How convenient, in August, when all the swamp creatures are OOF. It seems to be a trend of the recent past few years where August is the prime time period for psyops.

 

Only a Democratic administration could think an insurrection would be staged in favor of the current government.  

 

These people are such...disingenuous ass-rats. 

[Billsandhorns]

He also said Republicans should be put in jail 

[Fansince88]

12 hours ago, Ann said:

Flashback...
 

 

Seems worse than Trumps speech on J6.

[Fansince88]

5 hours ago, Ann said:

They don't need no stinkin' security, according to Drunk Nancy 

 

 

He hand gestures are drunker than she is. They dont line up at all!

[Cinga]

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-shoots-down-ny-rule-set-high-bar-concealed-handgun-licenses

 

Supreme Court shoots down NY rule that set high bar for concealed handgun licenses

The court ruled in its first major gun case in more than a decade

 

 

[Cinga]

https://conservativebrief.com/supreme-10-64037/?utm_source=CB&utm_medium=DJD

 

Quote

 

The US. Supreme Court has ruled 8-1 that leaders of North Carolina’s Republican legislature can step in to advocate for a voter ID law in court that they believe the state’s Democratic attorney general isn’t fighting hard enough to defend.

Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor was the only one to dissent in the case, which has been closely watched given November’s crucial midterm elections are just months away.

“At the heart of this lawsuit lies a challenge to the constitutionality of a North Carolina election law. But the merits of that dispute are not before us, only an antecedent question of civil procedure: Are two leaders of North Carolina’s state legislature entitled to participate in the case under the terms of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure,” Gorsuch wrote in the opinion.

 

 

[Dubs]

What a loser

 

 

[IDBillzFan]

It'd be kind of funny if SCOTUS handed down the overturn of Roe today.

 

Who knows what kind of meltdown the left could have watching a pro-life and pro-2nd amendment ruling in the same day.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Deranged Rhino]

If you're not already on a war footing in your personal life, you're behind (by that I mean, prepared for shortages, interruptions in services and power and social unrest). It's looking like months now before things pop off, not years. And there are players on both sides who are actively trying to push for that exact outcome. 

 

 

 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

So a mayor ignoring a SCOTUS ruling is fine... but people parading through a federal building is "the end of democracy" and worthy of being denied basic due process and a speedy trial? 

 

 

 

Got it.

[Taro T]

7 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

So a mayor ignoring a SCOTUS ruling is fine... but people parading through a federal building is "the end of democracy" and worthy of being denied basic due process and a speedy trial? 

 

 

 

Got it.

 

Um, yeah, Mr. Mayor, pretty sure that 1 thing has changed - that law has lost the presumption of constitutionality and is effectively voided.  So, if your administration illegally refused to issue permits, there will be means of redress available.

 

It'd be a really bad precedent for a government official to ignore a ruling by the SCOTUS.  It pretty much leads down the path to anarchy.  If you can ignore this ruling and continue to enforce an unconstitutional law, why can't any other citizen simply ignore whatever law they don't feel like abiding.  The social compact only works when the vast majority agree to it.  And really don't see how the compact remains when the government won't abide by it.

 

Hoping & expecting this was rhetorical flourish as preamble to say he'll now look for methods upholding the constitution to try to enact his goals.  But if not, Houston St., we have a problem.

[Dubs]

2 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

Um, yeah, Mr. Mayor, pretty sure that 1 thing has changed - that law has lost the presumption of constitutionality and is effectively voided.  So, if your administration illegally refused to issue permits, there will be means of redress available.

 

It'd be a really bad precedent for a government official to ignore a ruling by the SCOTUS.  It pretty much leads down the path to anarchy.  If you can ignore this ruling and continue to enforce an unconstitutional law, why can't any other citizen simply ignore whatever law they don't feel like abiding.  The social compact only works when the vast majority agree to it.  And really don't see how the compact remains when the government won't abide by it.

 

Hoping & expecting this was rhetorical flourish as preamble to say he'll now look for methods upholding the constitution to try to enact his goals.  But if not, Houston St., we have a problem.

the left (hate that ill defined term) should work to amend the constitution as they see fit and see how it goes. That’s the process for changing these things. 

[Billsandhorns]

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

 

Um, yeah, Mr. Mayor, pretty sure that 1 thing has changed - that law has lost the presumption of constitutionality and is effectively voided.  So, if your administration illegally refused to issue permits, there will be means of redress available.

 

It'd be a really bad precedent for a government official to ignore a ruling by the SCOTUS.  It pretty much leads down the path to anarchy.  If you can ignore this ruling and continue to enforce an unconstitutional law, why can't any other citizen simply ignore whatever law they don't feel like abiding.  The social compact only works when the vast majority agree to it.  And really don't see how the compact remains when the government won't abide by it.

 

Hoping & expecting this was rhetorical flourish as preamble to say he'll now look for methods upholding the constitution to try to enact his goals.  But if not, Houston St., we have a problem.

The Biden admin. actively ignores laws already 

[Taro T]

36 minutes ago, Billsandhorns said:

The Biden admin. actively ignores laws already 

 

Started putting together a long-winded response but instead will simply say: well, yeah, there's that.

[IDBillzFan]

I write this as pure speculation, but assuming the court follows up this massive 2A decision with the overturning of Roe this week, there is a simple lesson to be learned from all of this: if you're a Supreme Court justice considering retirement, do not hesitate one moment to retire when the president of your preferred party is in office.

 

I'll forever be convinced that RBG was SO certain Hillary would win, that she decided to not retire under Obama so the first female president could retire "notorious RBG" and replace her with another woman. The optics on that would be hard to beat.

 

Unless, y'know, Hillary loses and RBG drops dead while Trump is president.

 

And look, I know you'd still likely be looking at 5-4 instead of 6-3, but Roberts is a pussy and he could have easily been pushed to the other side if the opportunity was there. See Obamacare.

 

 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

46 minutes ago, IDBillzFan said:

I write this as pure speculation, but assuming the court follows up this massive 2A decision with the overturning of Roe this week, there is a simple lesson to be learned from all of this: if you're a Supreme Court justice considering retirement, do not hesitate one moment to retire when the president of your preferred party is in office.

 

I'll forever be convinced that RBG was SO certain Hillary would win, that she decided to not retire under Obama so the first female president could retire "notorious RBG" and replace her with another woman. The optics on that would be hard to beat.

 

Unless, y'know, Hillary loses and RBG drops dead while Trump is president.

 

And look, I know you'd still likely be looking at 5-4 instead of 6-3, but Roberts is a pussy and he could have easily been pushed to the other side if the opportunity was there. See Obamacare.

 

 

 

It's not just that Hillary would win, but they were so certain that their cloning industry would continue, so that even if RBG kicked, her clone could still see a few more years.

 

No one could have predicted that Trump's anti-child trafficking efforts would create such an adrenochrome shortage that their cloning efforts would be severely disrupted, leading to their inability to replace RBG 2.0 with RBG 3.0.

 

Amirite, @Deranged Rhino?

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Crap Throwing Monkey said:

 

It's not just that Hillary would win, but they were so certain that their cloning industry would continue, so that even if RBG kicked, her clone could still see a few more years.

 

No one could have predicted that Trump's anti-child trafficking efforts would create such an adrenochrome shortage that their cloning efforts would be severely disrupted, leading to their inability to replace RBG 2.0 with RBG 3.0.

 

Amirite, @Deranged Rhino?

[B-Man]

 

[IDBillzFan]

Supreme Court released Dobbs this morning.

 

I'd stay home if I were you.