Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, gernblansten said:

A divided Supreme Court ruled that individual judges lack the authority to grant nationwide injunctions

“Except when they do or it’s Kacsmaryk”

- John Roberts, probably 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, SubliminalHorn said:

So what does this mean? Will they start denaturalizing people in places like Texas and but not in states or districts it has been blocked?

It means Calvinball is the law of the land. 

  • Like 1
Posted

“Today, the threat is to birthright citizenship. Tomorrow, a different administration may try to seize firearms from law-abiding citizens or prevent people of certain faiths from gathering to worship,” Sotomayor wrote. “The majority holds that, absent cumbersome class-action litigation, courts cannot completely enjoin even such plainly unlawful policies unless doing so is necessary to afford the formal parties complete relief.”

The dissent gives me something to look forward to when Beto finally wins the presidency (I know).  "Hell yes, we're going to take your AR-15, your AK-47."

Posted

lol the radical anti-Americans were mad at ACB for some of her rulings over the last year

they complain and Fat Boy starts talking shit about her 

 

Now she’s hard right on things

  • Rage+1 4
Posted

My wife was born in the US to a Korean non-citizen who was in the US for school, then immediately adopted. We live in Texas. Can anyone tell me how concerned we should be?

Posted
Just now, hookem2010 said:

My wife was born in the US to a Korean non-citizen who was in the US for school, then immediately adopted. We live in Texas. Can anyone tell me how concerned we should be?

Adopted by who?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
22 minutes ago, SubliminalHorn said:

So what does this mean? Will they start denaturalizing people in places like Texas and but not in states or districts it has been blocked?

Well, this piece from two months ago outlines Stephen Miller’s position on it, so this is likely where things are headed. I hope I’m wrong.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/stephen-miller-unveils-bizarre-attack-194857907.html

  • Rage+1 2
Posted
13 minutes ago, hookem2010 said:

My wife was born in the US to a Korean non-citizen who was in the US for school, then immediately adopted. We live in Texas. Can anyone tell me how concerned we should be?

Pics? - Stephen Miller

Posted
19 minutes ago, hookem2010 said:

My wife was born in the US to a Korean non-citizen who was in the US for school, then immediately adopted. We live in Texas. Can anyone tell me how concerned we should be?

 

18 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Adopted by who?

Who was adpoted?  hookem2010's wife or mother?

6 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

Pics? - Stephen Miller

+1 asking for HenryJames.

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)

Wife. She was born in the US, so I don't know if she technically gained citizenship through birthright or through some other means at the time of adoption.

Edited by hookem2010
Posted
Just now, hookem2010 said:

Wife. She was born in thr US, so I don't know if she technically gained citizenship through birthright or through or some other means at the time of adoption.

As I recall, the language of the EO was only prospective in nature (at least at this point) (presumably to protect Barron, the cyber).

Posted
1 minute ago, DDD Dad said:

As I recall, the language of the EO was only prospective in nature (at least at this point) (presumably to protect Barron, the cyber).

OK, that was my understanding as well. Just never know what's coming down the pike with that fucking reptile Miller trying to create a white America.

Posted
1 hour ago, DDD Dad said:

@TwiceHorn Do you know if the plaintiff(s) in this case can easily amend to assert class action allegations?  If so I wonder whether and how quickly the district court could then certify the class or issue a TRO/TI based on class action claims.  Seems like the only way to address this nationwide.  

The ramifications of this decision on cases in which class action certification would not be available are huge and will likely lead to bizarre outcomes.  

Congress and now the courts have ceded their authority to the executive branch.  Welcome to the new fascist monarchy.

No idea.

Posted
14 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

As I recall, the language of the EO was only prospective in nature (at least at this point) (presumably to protect Barron, the cyber).

That's correct, but the question they're asking is one of interpretation of the 14th Amendment, and that is not going to be prospective in operation.

Posted

I mean don't you have to join a class action? even if free (considering there is no payout in the end I doubt it) aren't there time frames? so to get relief you have to hope you are not deported before you are able to join a class action?

We no longer have rights, those have been replaced as jump through hoops. I can't wait for the interpreations of right to life, you can only sue once you are dead.

Posted
12 minutes ago, linux said:

I mean don't you have to join a class action? even if free (considering there is no payout in the end I doubt it) aren't there time frames? so to get relief you have to hope you are not deported before you are able to join a class action?

We no longer have rights, those have been replaced as jump through hoops. I can't wait for the interpreations of right to life, you can only sue once you are dead.

Typically you are automatically in if you fall within the scope of the certified class and would then have to opt out if you didn't want the ruling to apply to you.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
9 minutes ago, linux said:

I mean don't you have to join a class action? even if free (considering there is no payout in the end I doubt it) aren't there time frames? so to get relief you have to hope you are not deported before you are able to join a class action?

We no longer have rights, those have been replaced as jump through hoops. I can't wait for the interpreations of right to life, you can only sue once you are dead.

Not exactly. You don't really individually join a class action at the outset. The attorney filing the case provides a class definition. At some point, the court will rule on whether the class can be certified. Assuming it grants certification, for the vast majority of class actions, anyone within that definition is part of the class. These are known as opt-out class actions. You have to actively decline to participate in order to be removed from the class. And that decision typically isn't made until there is a known outcome (e.g., a settlement). Opt-in class actions are rarer in modern times, but they do still exist. However, even there, the opt-in procedure is usually later in the process and until then the entire prospective class is treated the same. 

Posted
The court ruling says a president can classify anyone he/she desires to no longer be citizens. Stephen Miller, if elected, would ban any Black or Hispanic. It's that bad of a ruling. 

All non-white straight land owning males would no longer be citizens. They would be a new classification with limited rights (kiss voting good bye). Yall aren’t far enough on the dystopian ledge. These assholes can turn the US into a white Saudi Arabia. White men get everything - everyone else get bent and work for the rich white men.
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 hour ago, hookem2010 said:

My wife was born in the US to a Korean non-citizen who was in the US for school, then immediately adopted. We live in Texas. Can anyone tell me how concerned we should be?

Was the mom in the US legally when she had the baby? 

Posted
1 minute ago, Texas Fight said:

Was the mom in the US legally when she had the baby? 

It does not matter all non residents were part of the EO.

"(2) when that person’s mother’s presence in the United States was lawful but temporary, and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth."

Posted

FWIW, I listened to portions of the birthright citizenship case and when they were not discussing injunctions, at least 6, and possibly 7 judges were extremely skeptical of the government’s position. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
6 minutes ago, linux said:

It does not matter all non residents were part of the EO.

"(2) when that person’s mother’s presence in the United States was lawful but temporary, and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth."

How far back does that EO go for enforcing? Anyone ever born under those conditions? 

Posted
6 minutes ago, yoladu said:

Might as well have had a Coronation day with John Roberts placing a crown on Trumps head.

Just like napoleon, he would take it away and put it on himself

Posted

Do you think we'll at least get to see Arch lead the Horns to back to back undefeated seasons and national titles from the concentration camps?

  • Haha 1
Posted
45 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

FWIW, I listened to portions of the birthright citizenship case and when they were not discussing injunctions, at least 6, and possibly 7 judges were extremely skeptical of the government’s position. 

Would you say they had a furrowed brow?

23 minutes ago, Mo Horn said:

Just like napoleon, he would take it away and put it on himself

Trump's tiny little hands would have dropped the crown.

Posted
8 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Do you think we'll at least get to see Arch lead the Horns to back to back undefeated seasons and national titles from the concentration camps?

not a chance, you libruhl pusseh

Posted

Any case that could hold the dotard accountable for his bullshit takes years and years to make its way through the legal system.

A case that can strip away citizenship from millions?  Five fucking months.

Miss me with all the "That's just the way the system works." bullshit.

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
22 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Do you think we'll at least get to see Arch lead the Horns to back to back undefeated seasons and national titles from the concentration camps?

Probably not. I picture some scenarios like this but those guards aren't going to be nearly as nice as Nurse Ratched. 

 

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Can I get a cliffs notes on what happened here?

from what I understand SCOTUS just basically told the lower courts they can't keep blocking Trump's agenda. I could have that wrong, though

Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Do you think we'll at least get to see Arch lead the Horns to back to back undefeated seasons and national titles from the concentration camps?

you mean Trump University, Austin?   (The real TU!) 

Edited by Horn Dog
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

you mean Trump University, Austin?   (The real TU!) 

it's gonna be like all the fucking Moody venues. "I'm going to a show at the Moody!" Which fucking one??? Everything will be Trump branded and people will have no idea where to go. I'm embracing Idiocracy as a prophecy at this point

Posted
3 hours ago, SubliminalHorn said:

So what does this mean? Will they start denaturalizing people in places like Texas and but not in states or districts it has been blocked?

 

abbott will gladly applaud this move and help in any way necessary 

 

for the non whites here, do you proof of your parents / grandparents citizenship ?

no ? you could be waiting in an ice center for deportation as a newly labeled illegal 

laura loomer keeps talking about 65 million illegals for a reason. there's a thought / plan in motion 

Posted
15 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

from what I understand SCOTUS just basically told the lower courts they can't keep blocking Trump's agenda. I could have that wrong, though

Pretty good explainer on NPR a little while ago. Basically

these nationwide injunctions in general are a big problem for both sides (!!) 

this was the dumbest case to pick to rule on them because it most likely is a slam dunk to certify as a class action (and should happen soon)

all signs point to Trump losing when birthright citizenship ruling on merits comes (arguments begin in October)

very possible someone born with birthright citizenship gets deported if they are in a state not currently suing the administration and proceedings happen before SCOTUS issue ruling on the actual EO (but apparently something in this ruling put in by ACB makes that much less likely)

experts were Painter (ethics lawyer for W’s WH and some retired lady federal judge whose name I didn’t catch 

  • Hook 'Em 2


×
×
  • Create New...