Jump to content
Motor City Sonics

The Supreme Court

Recommended Posts

I might add the MSU Extension also does quite a bit of early childhood related education in both urban and rural areas of the state. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BetMGM Michigan $600 Risk-Free bet

BetMGM Michigan Sports Betting
Michigan online sports betting is now available! Start betting at BetMGM Michigan now and get a $600 risk-free bet bonus at their online sportsbook & casino.

Claim $600 risk-free bet at BetMGM Michigan Now

This really is THE litmus test case for this version of the Court: if they rule in favor of Trump, they are ruling against the Constitution, full stop.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

supreme court rejects pennsylvania law suit to throw out electors.

i tell ya, barrett, kavanaugh, and gorsuch are really doing a bad job of doing trump's bidding.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Buddha said:

supreme court rejects pennsylvania law suit to throw out electors.

i tell ya, barrett, kavanaugh, and gorsuch are really doing a bad job of doing trump's bidding.

All that's missing is the Curb Your Enthusiasm theme music...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mtutiger said:

All that's missing is the Curb Your Enthusiasm theme music...

great.  now i have that song stuck in my head!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Buddha said:

great.  now i have that song stuck in my head!

It’s a good one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Buddha said:

supreme court rejects pennsylvania law suit to throw out electors.

i tell ya, barrett, kavanaugh, and gorsuch are really doing a bad job of doing trump's bidding.

It was Alito!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

supreme court denies trump again.

sheesh, barrett, gorsuch, and kavanagh are really not earning their paychecks.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ruling was no standing, and I think that is right.  The saner Texas GOP weren't in support of this lawsuit seeing it as anti federalist, among other issues.   Probably to distract from the legal problems he is having.   Possibly to earn a pardon from Trump?  He has also been having issues with some of his biggest donors, so perhaps pandering to them.  Who knows. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Buddha said:

supreme court denies trump again.

sheesh, barrett, gorsuch, and kavanagh are really not earning their paychecks.

there is a possible dynamic that without a personality like Scalia to hold the right side together, Alito and Thomas' deep idiosyncrasies will prevent a unifying conservative block from emerging as a doctrinal force, esp if Kavanaugh, a born pilot fish, falls into close orbit around the ever moderating John Roberts.

I can hope anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Gehringer_2 said:

there is a possible dynamic that without a personality like Scalia to hold the right side together, Alito and Thomas' deep idiosyncrasies will prevent a unifying conservative block from emerging as a doctrinal force, esp if Kavanaugh, a born pilot fish, falls into close orbit around the ever moderating John Roberts.

I can hope anyway.

or kavanaugh was always a moderate like roberts and the idea that any of them were beholden to trump was a liberal pipe dream and never had any grounding in reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, RatkoVarda said:

both of them?

John Cornyn and Kay Granger. And Chip Roy. Those are the ones I saw come out vocally against it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Melody said:

The ruling was no standing, and I think that is right.  The saner Texas GOP weren't in support of this lawsuit seeing it as anti federalist, among other issues.   Probably to distract from the legal problems he is having.   Possibly to earn a pardon from Trump?  He has also been having issues with some of his biggest donors, so perhaps pandering to them.  Who knows. 

It strikes me as a Ken Paxton ploy to suck up to/virtue signal to Trump and the base, not clear whether it relates to his legal issues or not...

But the ploy got really out of hand when such a significant amount of electeds decided to attach their names to it. Almost like a test of loyalty to Trump

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Buddha said:

or kavanaugh was always a moderate like roberts and the idea that any of them were beholden to trump was a liberal pipe dream and never had any grounding in reality.

Oh - I never thought the idea they had loyalty to Trump had currency - from a legal perspective there is no Trump legal theory - other than get-out-of-jail-for-me! But you saw two justices ready to give a forum to the most ridiculous arguments even if they were ready to rule against in the end. What if *their* views had had enough sway to put the case on the docket and tie put the election on ice and the country into political chaos while the crazies were given the fricken SCOTUS as a platform to legitimize their arguments? Even two justices where they were - which is to day unprepared to immediately swat down the right side crazies,  is 40% of the way to somewhere I don't want to be.

But to the other point. Scalia was intellectually magnetic in a way Alito and Thomas just are not. Personality matters. Cogency of argument matters (even if Scalia did by the end double back to contradict himself often enough). I *think* 6 conservatives with a Scalia type leader still on the bench would be potentially much more impactful than this current rather disparate conservative group. In that sense, the fact that Trump just threw names up there without any philosophy of his own that might have driven toward an intellectually cohesive court made a difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And of course no president really knows for sure what they are getting when they nominate a judge. I doubt GHWB expected Clarence Thomas to be  as......eccentric... as he is. A 'moderate' Republican like GWB probably did not nominate Alito expecting him to turn out to be the right of Attila the Hun. Whether it's truer to chalk that up to random luck or the hazard of relatively intellectually lightweight presidents like GWB and Trump trying to vet people whose work is fundamentally outside their full comprehension becomes discussion fodder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will he attempt some sort of Martial Law now?      People like Convicted Felon Flynn have suggested it and he'll do anything to avoid facing his debts and coming charges in the state of New York, where he can not pardon himself.  

If Martial Law is declared, even if not followed, what the **** will happen in this country?   Biden and Harris arrested?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Gehringer_2 said:

Oh - I never thought the idea they had loyalty to Trump had currency - from a legal perspective there is no Trump legal theory - other than get-out-of-jail-for-me! But you saw two justices ready to give a forum to the most ridiculous arguments even if they were ready to rule against in the end. What if *their* views had had enough sway to put the case on the docket and tie put the election on ice and the country into political chaos while the crazies were given the fricken SCOTUS as a platform to legitimize their arguments? Even two justices where they were - which is to day unprepared to immediately swat down the right side crazies,  is 40% of the way to somewhere I don't want to be.

But to the other point. Scalia was intellectually magnetic in a way Alito and Thomas just are not. Personality matters. Cogency of argument matters (even if Scalia did by the end double back to contradict himself often enough). I *think* 6 conservatives with a Scalia type leader still on the bench would be potentially much more impactful than this current rather disparate conservative group. In that sense, the fact that Trump just threw names up there without any philosophy of his own that might have driven toward an intellectually cohesive court made a difference.

thomas and alito would have denied the petition on its face too, so im not sure what your first paragraph is other than thinking "what if the judges on the supreme court thought something different than all of them actually think, then things would really be bad."  well....sure.  but they dont.

gorsuch is the new scalia, not alito or thomas.  he is a very good writer and you saw a combative streak in the religious institution/covid rules case that you hadnt seen before.  it was very scalia-esque.  and im not sure what scalia was really good at other than being a figure head for people who font know the law to latch onto.  his myth with the public is larger than his influence at court, imo.  kind of like rbg for the liberals.

speaking if the liberals, dick durbin and the rest of the democrat amen chorus put forth the "barrett is a trump plant waiting to hand him the election" lie continually.  you want to undermine legitimacy of our institutions?  thats a good way to help ol mitch in that regard.

btw, how many of trump's judges have denied thrown out these trump election lawsuits?  all of them?  so much for that theory too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Buddha said:

speaking if the liberals, dick durbin and the rest of the democrat amen chorus put forth the "barrett is a trump plant waiting to hand him the election" lie continually.  you want to undermine legitimacy of our institutions?  thats a good way to help ol mitch in that regard.

I agree with you generally, he had the right to confirm her and the courts (bound by lifetime appointments) haven't performed as many liberals expected during this time period. 

Having said that,, the appearance of the party in the Rose Garden (which subsequently became a Superspreader event), the subsequent after party post-confirmation, and Trump's own words on his expectations of what she would do in the event of an elections case didn't help.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Buddha said:

gorsuch is the new scalia, not alito or thomas. 

He may be a good writer,  but does/will his more property centered outlook  - while certainly a conservative value, have the kind of mythic draw to other conservative minds that Scalia could marshall with his constant invocations of the founders and 'original intent' et al? And again, you can't separate personality from persuasiveness.   Philosophically Thomas should have taken up Scalia's mantle. but he is too prickly and Quixotic - he  goes too easily to places that too obviously expose the weakness of his arguments. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Michigan Sports Betting Offer

Michigan launched online sports betting and casino apps on Friday, January 22, 2021. We have selected the top Michigan sportsbooks and casinos that offer excellent bonus offers. Terms and conditions apply.

BetRivers Michigan - Get a 100% up to $250 deposit bonus at their online sportsbook & casino.

Click Here to claim $250 deposit bonus at BetRivers Michigan For Signing Up Now

FanDuel Michigan - Get a $1,000 risk-free bet at FanDuel Michigan on your first bet.

Click Here to claim $1,000 Risk-Free Bet at FanDuel Michigan

BetMGM Michigan - Get a $600 risk-free bet at the BetMGM online casino & sportsbook

Click Here to claim $600 risk-free bet at BetMGM Michigan

   


×
×
  • Create New...