SCOTUS Catch-all |

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 531
  • Views: 20K
  • Politics 
nycfan said:
Yeah, on the consideration of race as a factor for stops (so long as not the only factor) Kavanaugh indicated his expectation that ICE will succeed on the merits.
Click to expand...
Recognizing different cases may be handled differently, I think the odds of what SCOTUS will do, once it gets to the merits, are:

Most likely — Find some way to avoid ruling on the merits by either kicking it back to the lower courts or declaring cert to be improvidently granted or something, which will have the effect of keeping its pro-Trump shadow docket decisions intact indefinitely without creating law that could be useful for future Dem presidents.

Next most likely — Rule for Trump, ala Trump v. United States.

Least likely — Rule against Trump.
 
nycfan said:
Yeah, on the consideration of race as a factor for stops (so long as not the only factor) Kavanaugh indicated his expectation that ICE will succeed on the merits.
Click to expand...
FWIW nobody joined his concurrence. So he was speaking only for himself. Technically. The others might not give enough fucks to bother reading it. Who knows.

Meanwhile, Kav has decided that because the plaintiffs in the case could be stopped in the future on grounds other than race, the injunction against the use of race does them no good. Whatever.
 
nycfan said:
Click to expand...

Why would you carry your papers with you? The agents will just destroy them. You'd have to carry a copy, but then the agents will say it's a copy so it's fake, blah blah blah.

This is just straight blatant racism. Obviously the justices watch Fox News and have had their worldviews distorted.
 
BlooVooDoo said:
I actually expect that Trump will eventually lose almost all of these cases by 6-3 or 7-2 margins, but the cowards on the court who aren’t ready to come out of the fascist closet are more than happy to let Trump shit all over the constitution for as long as they can manage to delay stopping him and even then only because they don’t want a future liberal president to have such terrible power.
Click to expand...
This, sir, is the crux of the issue at hand.

It has become more and more apparent that the current regime NEVER expects the other side to get the chance and will keep doing all they can (legally but more decisively illegally) to keep it that way.

USSCT of old would of course reject 90% or more of Trump's actions based simply on Court precedent and Congress would accept that based on the expectation that they don't want the other side to ever have that power, as you noted.

But this Coward Court knows Trump and Congress will ignore it unless they play along.... and given enough gerrymandering and flat out fraud ("just find the 11k votes, or here in NC pull a Jeff Griffin and tossed out votes from areas that vote against you) the current regime may well have insulated itself successfully by 2026 to make every other previous notion of our governance moot.
 
nycfan said:
Yeah, on the consideration of race as a factor for stops (so long as not the only factor) Kavanaugh indicated his expectation that ICE will succeed on the merits.
Click to expand...
But not on the merits. Suddenly the Supreme Court regained its interest in jurisdiction and standing. I'm sure it's just a coincidence that they are evaluating claims against Trump and not Biden administration.

The idea that a person doesn't have standing to seek an injunction when a) the official policy is to target him/her based on race characteristics; b) they were already harassed or detained on that basis; and c) ICE came to their workplaces or homes (i.e. not random traffic stops). And note that the district court's factual findings were sound on all points.

Meanwhile, not a single state suing over student loans had any interest at all. Missouri claimed that it hypothetically received money from a loan servicer run by the state (which appeared on the record not to be true) and anyway drying up of that income stream would mean nothing because there are plenty of other debt instruments to service. Standing? Of course!
 
nycfan said:
Click to expand...

This is precisely why I’ve lost three colleagues this year, two nurses and a physician. One is brown and has an accent. Two are married to brown people with accents. Two now live in Canada and one in France. As a collective, they saw where this was headed and refused to contribute more of their expertise and time on this earth to a society that criminalizes their existence.
 
UNCMSinLS said:
IF the dems ever get back the Senate and the presidency, they should IMMEDIATELY expand the court and reverse every damn one of these decisions.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but I doubt the party's congressional leadership as it is now constituted has the guts to do it, even with a majority in both Houses. At some point, though, Democrats have got to start realizing that their survival as a political party is at stake, or at least their chances of ever regaining a majority in Congress.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top