Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
44 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

Yep. It is unclear how our Constitutional system can still function with what they have ruled. I don't even know if there is a reset button. 

I think it’ll take a complete constitutional rewrite at this point. If that’s even possible. It probably isn’t without a major war, and even then, there’s a good chance the rewrite will be in fascism 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
46 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

Yep. It is unclear how our Constitutional system can still function with what they have ruled. I don't even know if there is a reset button. 

I mean, President Newsom could come in and order that, in the name of national security, all 6 of them need to be publicly hanged on the WH lawn and a mildly competent lawyer could argue - USING SOLELY SCOTUS OPINIONS - that he is within his right to do so.  It's just fucking insanity.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Drool 1
Posted
50 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

Yep. It is unclear how our Constitutional system can still function with what they have ruled. I don't even know if there is a reset button. 

 

denying the mid term election results / denying the election will be the the final blow to this nation 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

denying the mid term election results / denying the election will be the the final blow to this nation 

This is the plan. I really thought they were going to wait til 2028, but the midterms are the goal. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

We’re going to need a truth and reconciliation commission that gives the six republicans on the court the option to to go prison or resign and spend the rest of their days doing yard work with day laborers to atone for their crimes.

  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
15 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

We’re going to need a truth and reconciliation commission that gives the six republicans on the court the option to to go prison or resign and spend the rest of their days doing yard work with day laborers to atone for their crimes.

aggy has a better shot at winning a national championship in one of the three major sports.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
51 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

I mean, President Newsom could come in and order that, in the name of national security, all 6 of them need to be publicly hanged on the WH lawn and a mildly competent lawyer could argue - USING SOLELY SCOTUS OPINIONS - that he is within his right to do so.  It's just fucking insanity.

No he won't because...

48 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

denying the mid term election results / denying the election will be the the final blow to this nation 

....this is the end-game.  It's the only end-game that make sense.  They cannot simultaneously (1) give complete and total power, with no restraints or restrictions, to the executive, and (2) believe for a millisecond that an opposition executive will ever occupy the office again.

Brown people have no rights in this country.  "Being brown" is reasonable suspicion that allows you to be detained by the police.  Implicit in that is that....being white gives you a free pass.  

This rule will also apply to black people, because "it is known that there is a higher prevalence of criminals among the black population, and therefore it is a reasonable basis to suspect they are engaged in criminal activity."  The doctrine on Terry stops is dead.  White people have special status in this country: they have constitutional protections, like the 4th amendment.  Everyone else....has no such rights or protections.

It's just the core principle of conservatism, now said out loud by the fascist court: "Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."

And it follows that such groups must likewise be deprived of their voice, vote, and representation.  There will be no further free and fair elections.  The SCOTUS will make sure of it.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
55 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

denying the mid term election results / denying the election will be the the final blow to this nation 

And then we'll all go to work like nothing happened because football season and Christmas.

Ahhhh, America.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
5 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

SCOTUS sides with fascists in Los Angeles ICE case

All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

This is the plan. I really thought they were going to wait til 2028, but the midterms are the goal. 

They're absolutely the goal. If the GOP comes out of the 26 mid-terms with any kind of majority in the House and Senate, Trump is in the White House until he dies. And elections are probably over, legitimate ones anyways. They'll be like Russian elections.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

Pardon the thread-jack, as this story is British, but it does deal with courts.

Quote

A new mural by elusive street artist Banksy showing a judge beating an unarmed protester with a gavel will be removed from a wall outside one of London’s most iconic courts, authorities said Monday.

The mural appeared Monday and depicts a protester lying on the ground holding a blood-splattered placard while a judge in a traditional wig and black gown beats him with a gavel. Banksy posted a photo of the work on Instagram, his usual method of claiming a work as authentic. It was captioned “Royal Courts Of Justice. London.”

image.png.015891bd2cac3b2ad11d5fa3a78f6f66.png
 

https://apnews.com/article/banksy-mural-london-royal-courts-justice-c08b2cef093ea6a0520302eacfbd871f

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Drool 1
Posted
17 hours ago, Nivek said:

The snowflake who cried during a job interview about calendars and sneered as people asked questions about his past, is now telling everyone it is not an issue to answer questions.

Calvinball Kavanaugh's concurrence from yesterday's ICE detention decision:  ethnicity is a factor that can by used in deportation investigations.   

Calvinball Kavanaugh wen it comes to college admissions:  admissions process must be "colorblind."

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
16 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

lol at twice horn

For a bit of perspective on this, we've always known there is a lower threshold than probable cause for immigration-related stops as the lawdogs spent hours telling VAPA, years ago.  This low?  Maybe not.

And, the reason ethnicity is prohibited for criminal stops is that ethnicity is an invidious (extremely unfair) indicator of criminality or criminal activity in most cases, the exception being when the suspect has been identified as someone of a particular ethnicity.

But, ethnicity is kind of an unavoidable criterion when it comes to immigration.

Also, legally, immigration/removal/deportation is not criminal so the protections against unreasonable search and seizure are lower because the prosecution apparatus is not triggered.  I think that should be rethought, though, and it's not whether the criminal apparatus is invoked, but whether the government seeks to detain whether civilly, or criminally, or otherwise.  THAT is the deprivation of liberty we're concerned with. not whether a criminal proceeding is invoked, because the net result is the same.

That's not to say that I agree with any of this shit, but there are a lot of historical SCOTUS, including liberal ones, that would have come to a similar "conclusion."

 

Posted
40 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Also, legally, immigration/removal/deportation is not criminal so the protections against unreasonable search and seizure are lower because the prosecution apparatus is not triggered.  I think that should be rethought, though, and it's not whether the criminal apparatus is invoked, but whether the government seeks to detain whether civilly, or criminally, or otherwise.  THAT is the deprivation of liberty we're concerned with. not whether a criminal proceeding is invoked, because the net result is the same.

1) this is correct.

2) this will never happen.  Because we no longer have the Rule of Law, we just have the rule of Supreme Executive Power, as decreed by the POTUS and SCOTUS.

I will now list the limits on executive power (as wielded by the actual POTUS, so long as that POTUS is a Republican) this SCOTUS will ultimately find and uphold:

 

 

 

....

 

 

....

 

 

....

 

Yep, I think that covers it.

Posted (edited)

Surly Law Dogs:

Where the hell are the inexorable Wheels of Justice?

Where the hell is the collective wisdom of the Justices, Courts, legal scholars that will stop this madness?

Face it: Y'all were fucking clueless about what is ultimately going down in this country.

Y'all were little more than gaslighters for the mystified "conservatives" and others in Surly who just could not believe that was going down in Ronnie Reagan's and W's super-patriotic Team USA. 

Cheerleaders of the Drug War, the GQP has always loved throwing people of color in jails. Now they get to add artists, writers, intellectuals, professors and any others they claim is a threat to their pre-shrunk worldview.

What is happening now is the Reagan-Falwell-GQP wet dream!

-- A Medieval Anti-Science Fascist America ruled by White Christian fanatics and billionaires.

 

 

Edited by BevoAbyss
Posted
38 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

1) this is correct.

2) this will never happen.  Because we no longer have the Rule of Law, we just have the rule of Supreme Executive Power, as decreed by the POTUS and SCOTUS.

I will now list the limits on executive power (as wielded by the actual POTUS, so long as that POTUS is a Republican) this SCOTUS will ultimately find and uphold:

 

 

 

....

 

 

....

 

 

....

 

Yep, I think that covers it.

You're right, never said it would.  But that's what SHOULD happen with this.

Posted
Just now, TwiceHorn said:

You're right, never said it would.  But that's what SHOULD happen with this.

Dude...."should" was escorted from the building, taken out in the back alley, and double-tapped to the back of the head a long fucking time ago when it comes to the Rule of Law.

It's over, man.  It's been over for a while, now's just when it all manifests, with no impediments or inhibitions.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
42 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

This is next-level "well akshuly..." shit.

It's ackhuly called legal analysis.  Something SCOTUS, as well as surly, is notoriously short on.

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Dude...."should" was escorted from the building, taken out in the back alley, and double-tapped to the back of the head a long fucking time ago when it comes to the Rule of Law.

It's over, man.  It's been over for a while, now's just when it all manifests, with no impediments or inhibitions.

Maybe we should start to design a new country.

Posted
1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Fine.  I have my design program queued up.....

tumblr_lrmxdsoJfz1qauwcn.gif

Give her the kneeshooters?

Possibly more seriously, roughly half of this country would seem to go along with a new country with a similar Constitution with a lot of the vagary and experimental shit taken out.

The only problem might be wresting the territory from the existing US.

Posted
Just now, TwiceHorn said:

Give her the kneeshooters?

Possibly more seriously, roughly half of this country would seem to go along with a new country with a similar Constitution with a lot of the vagary and experimental shit taken out.

The only problem might be wresting the territory from the existing US.

The West Coast may just take care of that on its own.  We are running at breakneck speed towards dissolution, because when one side says "we don't want you or your approach here at all, and we'll enforce our will by authoritarian force," union is impossible.  When that split is over something as profound as slavery, that split is understandable.  When it's over....all of the stupid and performatively cruel shit of this regime...well, it's fucking baffling.  We're going to scrap the Republic because a trans kid played volleyball and because we didn't think multi-billionaires had enough of an advantage?  WTF?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

For a bit of perspective on this, we've always known there is a lower threshold than probable cause for immigration-related stops as the lawdogs spent hours telling VAPA, years ago.  This low?  Maybe not.

And, the reason ethnicity is prohibited for criminal stops is that ethnicity is an invidious (extremely unfair) indicator of criminality or criminal activity in most cases, the exception being when the suspect has been identified as someone of a particular ethnicity.

But, ethnicity is kind of an unavoidable criterion when it comes to immigration.

Also, legally, immigration/removal/deportation is not criminal so the protections against unreasonable search and seizure are lower because the prosecution apparatus is not triggered.  I think that should be rethought, though, and it's not whether the criminal apparatus is invoked, but whether the government seeks to detain whether civilly, or criminally, or otherwise.  THAT is the deprivation of liberty we're concerned with. not whether a criminal proceeding is invoked, because the net result is the same.

That's not to say that I agree with any of this shit, but there are a lot of historical SCOTUS, including liberal ones, that would have come to a similar "conclusion."

 

The problem with ethnicity being an unavoidable criterion arises when one understands ethnicity in the context of a shared cultural background or descent. Such cannot be easily discerned by skin, social location or even accent. I’m a black man of light complexion with two black parents with nappy hair. Fiesta employees speak to me in Spanish every time I shop in the store without fail, because, they make incorrect assumptions about my ethnicity. Because it’s so easy to do, the protections should be stronger.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
Just now, Satchel said:

The problem with ethnicity being an unavoidable criterion arises when one understands ethnicity in the context of a shared cultural background or descent. Such cannot be easily discerned by skin, social location or even accent. I’m a black man of light complexion with two black parents with nappy hair. Fiesta employees speak to me in Spanish every time I shop in the store without fail, because, they make incorrect assumptions about my ethnicity. Because it’s so easy to do, the protections should be stronger.

All of that is no doubt true.  But barring immigration inquiries, arrests, and detention based on ethnicity is really unmanageable because of the nature of immigration.

Maybe you could take detention off the table so the inquiries have no "penalty," but that doesn't seem realistic either.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Satchel said:

The problem with ethnicity being an unavoidable criterion arises when one understands ethnicity in the context of a shared cultural background or descent. Such cannot be easily discerned by skin, social location or even accent. I’m a black man of light complexion with two black parents with nappy hair. Fiesta employees speak to me in Spanish every time I shop in the store without fail, because, they make incorrect assumptions about my ethnicity. Because it’s so easy to do, the protections should be stronger.

You went into Fiesta.  Learn spanish, bitch.

Posted
1 hour ago, BevoAbyss said:

Surly Law Dogs:

Where the hell are the inexorable Wheels of Justice?

Where the hell is the collective wisdom of the Justices, Courts, legal scholars that will stop this madness?

Face it: Y'all were fucking clueless about what is ultimately going down in this country.

Y'all were little more than gaslighters for the mystified "conservatives" and others in Surly who just could not believe that was going down in Ronnie Reagan's and W's super-patriotic Team USA. 

Cheerleaders of the Drug War, the GQP has always loved throwing people of color in jails. Now they get to add artists, writers, intellectuals, professors and any others they claim is a threat to their pre-shrunk worldview.

What is happening now is the Reagan-Falwell-GQP wet dream!

-- A Medieval Anti-Science Fascist America ruled by White Christian fanatics and billionaires.

 

 

Who, specifically, are you talking about?

Posted
46 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

You went into Fiesta.  Learn spanish, bitch.

Si, correcto.. Dos librae. Gracias, Senora. Don’t tell me a bitch don’t know Spanish.

  • Haha 1


×
×
  • Create New...