It's interesting that originalism and textualism are only really important to the liberal crowd when applied to the 1st and 2nd Amendments. Then again, both the MAGA and liberal crowd would throw out the 1st Amendment, for different reasons. Also, the Bruen opinion applied was authored by Justice Thomas, who dissented. I disagree with Thomas, as temporarily separating someone from their guns is not "stripping" 2nd Amendment rights without due process, as he contended. It's the balance between public safety and resolving the truth of the matter. The Court ruled correctly.
Not to pick fly shit, but if there is one outcome that screams of bias it is the South Carolina gerrymandering case. The idea of legislatures being able to create "safe districts" (for either party) is BS. Sorry no excuse for it; none. It is one of the reasons we are where we are.
This cut from NPR regarding the right's position says it all: "Republicans denied exiling Black voters, maintaining that they were simply seeking to transform a marginal Republican district into a safe district for the GOP."
Are you freaking kidding me?
That aside legal scholars far and wide have decried the presidents claim of "absolute immunity." It was a crap argument that gave the Supreme Court the ability to play politics and drag this out to avoid the case going to trial before the election. Hell, if they cared about the legality of the argument they could have accepted Jack Smith's request to hear the case the beginning of the year.
I don't care one whit about Alito and Thomas's wives woes. They are shameful and highly irregular, but that's not my concern. Thomas getting a boatload of "gifts" and forgetting to report them should be illegal, but obviously not. They simply refuse to police themselves. That's on them.
It would be interesting, once the SC bounces the case they should never had taken to see it hurried along to trial; precedent be damned. I've got to believe both you (David) and Steve want to see justice be done swiftly so voters have all of the information necessary to make an "informed" vote.
I'm not surprised or upset by the Court's delay on immunity. It's important to get this one right, both for the current era and for future generations. I think that it's a difficult case and I'd rather have it done correctly than quickly.
The flip side to judicial impartiality is that Tump's status as a presidential candidate should not get him speedier service at the Supreme Court.
It's interesting that originalism and textualism are only really important to the liberal crowd when applied to the 1st and 2nd Amendments. Then again, both the MAGA and liberal crowd would throw out the 1st Amendment, for different reasons. Also, the Bruen opinion applied was authored by Justice Thomas, who dissented. I disagree with Thomas, as temporarily separating someone from their guns is not "stripping" 2nd Amendment rights without due process, as he contended. It's the balance between public safety and resolving the truth of the matter. The Court ruled correctly.
When I say "important" I mean as a boogeyman, Christofascist, kind of important.
Not to pick fly shit, but if there is one outcome that screams of bias it is the South Carolina gerrymandering case. The idea of legislatures being able to create "safe districts" (for either party) is BS. Sorry no excuse for it; none. It is one of the reasons we are where we are.
This cut from NPR regarding the right's position says it all: "Republicans denied exiling Black voters, maintaining that they were simply seeking to transform a marginal Republican district into a safe district for the GOP."
Are you freaking kidding me?
That aside legal scholars far and wide have decried the presidents claim of "absolute immunity." It was a crap argument that gave the Supreme Court the ability to play politics and drag this out to avoid the case going to trial before the election. Hell, if they cared about the legality of the argument they could have accepted Jack Smith's request to hear the case the beginning of the year.
I don't care one whit about Alito and Thomas's wives woes. They are shameful and highly irregular, but that's not my concern. Thomas getting a boatload of "gifts" and forgetting to report them should be illegal, but obviously not. They simply refuse to police themselves. That's on them.
It would be interesting, once the SC bounces the case they should never had taken to see it hurried along to trial; precedent be damned. I've got to believe both you (David) and Steve want to see justice be done swiftly so voters have all of the information necessary to make an "informed" vote.
I'm not surprised or upset by the Court's delay on immunity. It's important to get this one right, both for the current era and for future generations. I think that it's a difficult case and I'd rather have it done correctly than quickly.
The flip side to judicial impartiality is that Tump's status as a presidential candidate should not get him speedier service at the Supreme Court.