SCOTUS Catch-all |

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 482
  • Views: 18K
  • Politics 
TOO.....MUCH.....WINNING!

Seriously, I can see the merit, in limited extreme cases of nationwide injunctions. The problem (as usual) is the libs went way overboard on this with every liberal interest group running to Rhode Island or San Francisco for an injunction. Justice Kagan even raised this in oral argument.
 
So far --

Great day for the executive, litigators, freedom of religion (but not freedom from religion), and RFK Jr.

Horrible day for Congress, public schools, district court judges, and the constitution.

Let's see how we bring this home.
 
I have no love whatsoever for porn on the internet. I'd love it if we could ban it. But we can't. Because of this asshole thing we call the First Amendment. Unless you're in Texas. In which case the First Amendment doesn't apply.
 
nycfan said:

Supreme Court Limits Nationwide Injunctions in Birthright Citizenship Case​

In a major victory for President Trump, the court limited the ability of federal judges to pause his executive orders. The decision may reshape the way U.S. citizenship is granted, even temporarily.


IMG_7683.jpeg
Click to expand...
As always, Trump is up to his ears in bullshit. I literally can't imagine supporting a person who lies as much as he does.
 
Done for today, and I have to check out for a while. The VRA decision will apparently come next week. So, congrats Ram. Congrats, calla. You guys got what you wanted from this term. The human cost is unimaginable, but you guys should feel really good about what your team has been able to do over the last few years.
 
Pub hypocrisy related to nation-wide injunctions is maximal. They should be ashamed but that would require a moral compass and sense of integrity.
 
Trump will make an exception for Norwegian citizens who have a kid in USA. For those babies, immediate citizenship!
 
JCTarheel82 said:
Pub hypocrisy related to nation-wide injunctions is maximal. They should be ashamed but that would require a moral compass and sense of integrity.
Click to expand...
If you explained the process to individuals from other countries, most would likely land where the court did.
President is elected by public.
Issues order.
Party unhappy shops suit into District Court favorable to their position.
One single judge overrides president.
Supreme Court decides

Vs

Everything the same until no injunction allowed and ultimately decides by supreme court

The decision chooses to allow presidents orders to stay in place until SC rules vs District Court judge having power to stop it until Supreme Court

It was who has the right to get benefit of the doubt: President or district court judge

The SC said the president.
 
nycfan said:

Justices Let Parents Opt Children Out of Classes With L.G.B.T.Q. Storybooks​

Maryland parents have a religious right to withdraw their children from classes on days that stories with gay and transgender themes are discussed, the court ruled.


Decision: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-297_4f14.pdf
Click to expand...
It’s like anything - the extreme ruins it for all. The book that started it all was teaching elementary school kids that a doctor was just randomly assigning sex at birth and had no insight into what the baby’s sex was.
 
Alright, I hate to ask this, but could someone (or someones) explain to me like the dullard I am what the injunction ruling means and its significance. Feel free to talk to me like I’m 10.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top