Amy Coney Barrett

[JayMysteri0]

Something that needs to be hammered home as well in all of this...
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1320901441272373250/

TFG

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

I don't think she will flip, but if 45 administration can't make some clear cut iron clad case for involving the Supreme Court, I don't seem them weighing in the way 45 imagines. I see the individuals this administration has nominated are more likely to go "I got MY LIFETIME job SUCKER, we DON'T need you anymore to F shit up! We got this now! BYE!"

Yea, the GOP sure did use Trump and his supporters, while behind his back saying "He's not one of us".

 

[JayMysteri0]

Eyup!
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1321013191057592322/
Pull your head out of the sand

When you want to insure the rest of your career is spent with an 'asterisk' next to all of your decisions
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1320924685769428993/

No, really...
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1320931707512639488/

 

[lizkat]

I'm posting a snap of this tweet from the House JC rather than the tweet itself, just in case someone besides its ranking member (Jim Jordan) decides the tweet is just too revelatory of the level of gotcha politics to which the Republican Party has descended. And yes, October 26th really was Hillary Clinton's birthday. But of course that had nothing to do with the rush to confirm Amy Coney Barrett yesterday and have Justice Clarence Thomas swear in an extreme right wing replacement for Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

I'm posting a snap of this tweet from the House JC rather than the tweet itself, just in case someone besides its ranking member (Jim Jordan) decides the tweet is just too revelatory of the level of gotcha politics to which the Republican Party has descended. And yes, October 26th really was Hillary Clinton's birthday. But of course that had nothing to do with the rush to confirm Amy Coney Barrett yesterday and have Justice Clarence Thomas swear in an extreme right wing replacement for Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

View attachment 966

View attachment 967

Yes.

To my disbelief, I saw that last night on Twitter, and could hardly credit the sheer.......vindictive pettiness, spitefulness and pure, vile, vicious nastiness that animates and informs decision making in that party.

 

[iMi]

This was ordained when The Mango Turd won in 2016. Dems need to stop being timid. No more talk about possible court packing. They should have plans set to implement the strategy as soon as they're in control again. And possible counter strategies when the GOP attacks their plans and/or they (Republicans) regain control. It has been a war with one side fighting as if in war. The Dems worry too damn much about appearances and not enough about results.

Should Biden win (with the Senate taken back by Dems) it will be a hard, uphill battle to undo the damage of the present occupier and Republican thuggery since the 1980s. They don't need to get in each others way and they should totally ignore Republicans. No matter what Dems do, there will her howling hypocrites on the other side. The ACA fight should be studied for what not to do.

I could not agree more. What’s even more amazing is that Republicans are attacking Dems right now on the issue of court packing — forcing Biden to commit one way or another — while they are themselves packing the court as we speak. They are blasting Biden knowing court packing is not popular with voters while they are doing exactly that right now. It’s fucking ridiculous. Are people really this stupid and blind? I have to literally check to make sure I am still in the real world and not some crazy alternative universe.

 

[iMi]

Something that needs to be hammered home as well in all of this...
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1320901441272373250/

TFG

This is expected. When they had complete control of the government, they spent two years passing a tax cut for the rich. They could have done anything. That’s what they focused on instead. Now, same thing. They should be working on covid measures, but instead they play politics with a court seat. They sure had the time and energy to get that done.

 

[Huntn]

This was ordained when The Mango Turd won in 2016. Dems need to stop being timid. No more talk about possible court packing. They should have plans set to implement the strategy as soon as they're in control again. And possible counter strategies when the GOP attacks their plans and/or they (Republicans) regain control. It has been a war with one side fighting as if in war. The Dems worry too damn much about appearances and not enough about results.

Should Biden win (with the Senate taken back by Dems) it will be a hard, uphill battle to undo the damage of the present occupier and Republican thuggery since the 1980s. They don't need to get in each others way and they should totally ignore Republicans. No matter what Dems do, there will her howling hypocrites on the other side. The ACA fight should be studied for what not to do.

Just how hard would it be to expand SCOTUS, simple majority vote or super majority?

 

[ronntaylor]

Just how hard would it be to expand SCOTUS, simple majority vote or super majority?

The Constitution gives the power to Congress. If the Dems take over the Senate in January 2021, they would just need a backbone and unity. I say make it 13 justices. We currently have 12 Regional District courts. Expand the Supreme Court to have it assign an associate justice for each Regional Court; the Chief Justice oversees administrative affairs, calendars, and such. IDGAF what the Rethugicans do once they're back in power. If the Dems regain total control of the Congress and White House declare all-out war and run roughshod over the GOP as retaliation and send a signal that no more pussyfooting around to the likes of MoscowMitch and The Mango Turd.

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

If Biden wins. His administration better not be soft or try to play too much in being nonpartisan, like Obama did. Cause the GOP showed themselves as completely biased and ruthless for the past 12 years. Don't want to hear no cry baby criticism when the Dems play for keeps.

 

[ronntaylor]

If Biden wins. His administration better not be soft or try to play too much in being nonpartisan, like Obama did. Cause the GOP showed themselves as completely biased and ruthless for the past 12 years. Don't want to hear no cry baby criticism when the Dems play for keeps.

If Biden wins, he'll need to pressured to make sure his administration is as progressive as possible. Too often Dem voters vote on the 1st Tuesday in November every four years and go home, thinking their work is done. Republican voters vote and go to work on their goals and agenda items. I want us to ignore Rethugican crying and work on what we need. Fuck the GOP and corporate interests.

Local elections also matter and we need to get people elected that will make progress after the disaster of The Mango Turd.

New York City has a mayoral election in 2021. I plan to work for the most progressive candidate. I want us to get a true progressive that will hit the ground running from Day #1. NYC needs so much to be done no matter who wins in the upcoming presidential election. In addition, there will be a lot of vacancies due to term limits in the City Council. My current asshole... er, councilman can't leave soon enough. I prefer a woman to fill the seat, but again, I'll work for the most progressive candidate.

On the national level: start the work now for 2022 Senate seats of the GOP assholes that are most vulnerable. Progressives need to coalesce around candidates now. Not the weeks and months just before primaries when it'll be too late to dislodge long-term pols and corporate puppets. I want to see someone similar to AOC in the Senate. Fuck it, I want to see several AOCs in the Senate.

We just better be prepared to fight if The Mango Turd and his minions try to steal this election if it's closer than expected.

 

[SuperMatt]

Welcome to the Supreme Court, Amy Coney Barrett!

Splitting 5 to 4, Supreme Court Backs Religious Challenge to Cuomo’s Virus Shutdown Order (Published 2020)

Justice Amy Coney Barrett played a decisive role in the decision, which took the opposite approach of earlier court rulings related to coronavirus restrictions in California and Nevada.

www.nytimes.com

We can officially say it’s time to pack the court when they go full ideologue at the cost of what’s good for the health of Americans.

 

[User.45]

Welcome to the Supreme Court, Amy Coney Barrett!

Splitting 5 to 4, Supreme Court Backs Religious Challenge to Cuomo’s Virus Shutdown Order (Published 2020)

Justice Amy Coney Barrett played a decisive role in the decision, which took the opposite approach of earlier court rulings related to coronavirus restrictions in California and Nevada.

www.nytimes.com

We can officially say it’s time to pack the court when they go full ideologue at the cost of what’s good for the health of Americans.

“So, at least according to the Governor, it may be unsafe to go to church, but it is always fine to pick up another bottle of wine" or "shop for a new bike," Gorsuch wrote.

You need nothing more than this quote To understand the depth of ignorance of people who are making these rulings.

 

[SuperMatt]

“So, at least according to the Governor, it may be unsafe to go to church, but it is always fine to pick up another bottle of wine" or "shop for a new bike," Gorsuch wrote.

You need nothing more than this quote To understand the depth of ignorance of people who are making these rulings.

Ugh, may as well stock it with 9 fish and call it the sardine court. What a joke... aren’t lawyers supposed to be smart?

 

[lizkat]

Ugh, may as well stock it with 9 fish and call it the sardine court. What a joke... aren’t lawyers supposed to be smart?

I would have expected even this incarnation of our Supreme Court to resist more strongly the politicization of a public health crisis on the scale of this coronavirus pandemic. Very, very disappointing. They could have made a ruling quite narrow enough to preclude it being taken for anything like approval of an actual attack on First Amendment rights.

 

[User.45]

I good analysis from CNN (i.e. reflects my opinion on the medical front):

In fact, the great risks for transmission are indoor places like religious services, restaurants, concert halls and theaters where large groups are together for a considerable period of time, typically an hour or more. As Justices Sotomayor and Kagan point out, "New York treats houses of worship far more favorably than their secular comparators," by "requiring movie theaters, concert venues, and sporting arenas subject to New York's regulation to close entirely, but allowing houses of worship to open subject to capacity restrictions."

A recent study by Stanford University researchers published in Nature Magazine made the same point regarding the highest risks of viral transmission: "on average across metro areas, full-service restaurants, gyms, hotels, cafes, religious organizations, and limited-service restaurants produced the largest predicted increases in infections when reopened."

What is especially disappointing in the Supreme Court decision is that the lower court had made the correct points very clearly in a decision that was brazenly overlooked by the majority decision. The Federal District Court had noted that: "Among the other problematic features of religious gatherings, congregants arrive and leave at the same time, physically greet one another, sit or stand close together, share or pass objects, and sing or chant in a way that allows for airborne transmission of the virus."

Opinion: Supreme Court's scientifically illiterate decision will cost lives

The Supreme Court ruling against New York state's decision to limit religious gatherings in a few high-incidence parts of New York City during the Covid-19 pandemic will cause grave danger in the rest of the country, where public health authorities will feel hamstrung to restrict religious...

www.cnn.com

 

[Alli]

I posted something about ACB on Facebook, commenting “pro-life, my ass.” @TiffanySmiffany responded “more like pro-grammed.”

 

[SuperMatt]

I saw Jay posted this in PRSI:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1332132539134320640/

The Catholic Church in America keeps going against this Pope time and again. I wonder if they will split from Rome?

Kind of sad that the actual religious leaders are telling people to care for the health of others, but the SCOTUS, under the (false) pretense of protecting religious freedom, is saying to do the opposite.

The Justices voting this way claim to be Christian, but funny enough they don’t recall the Biblical story of the first great judge: Solomon. Being a judge or justice is not about slavish adherence to the letter of the law. This court, I believe, literally would split a baby.

 

[User.45]

I saw Jay posted this in PRSI:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1332132539134320640/

The Catholic Church in America keeps going against this Pope time and again. I wonder if they will split from Rome?

Kind of sad that the actual religious leaders are telling people to care for the health of others, but the SCOTUS, under the (false) pretense of protecting religious freedom, is saying to do the opposite.

The Justices voting this way claim to be Christian, but funny enough they don’t recall the Biblical story of the first great judge: Solomon. Being a judge or justice is not about slavish adherence to the letter of the law. This court, I believe, literally would split a baby.

Kavanaugh was actually suggesting something he may have not wanted to suggest:
"The State argues that it has not impermissibly discriminated against religion because some secular businesses such as movie theaters must remain closed and are thus treated less favorably than houses of worship. But under this Court's precedents, it does not suffice for a State to point out that, as compared to houses of worship, some secular businesses are subject to similarly severe or even more severe restrictions ... Rather, once a State creates a favored class of businesses, as New York has done in this case, the State must justify why houses of worship are excluded from that favored class."

You guys see the can of worms here? Him using "secular business" as the opposite of "house of worship" inadvertently insinuates that houses of worship are religious businesses, which they fucking are, and that's why they don't want to shut down: perverse financial incentives.

 

[SuperMatt]

Kavanaugh was actually suggesting something he may have not wanted to suggest:
"The State argues that it has not impermissibly discriminated against religion because some secular businesses such as movie theaters must remain closed and are thus treated less favorably than houses of worship. But under this Court's precedents, it does not suffice for a State to point out that, as compared to houses of worship, some secular businesses are subject to similarly severe or even more severe restrictions ... Rather, once a State creates a favored class of businesses, as New York has done in this case, the State must justify why houses of worship are excluded from that favored class."

You guys see the can of worms here? Him using "secular business" as the opposite of "house of worship" inadvertently insinuates that houses of worship are religious businesses, which they fucking are, and that's why they don't want to shut down: perverse financial incentives.

It also COMPLETELY ignores the reason there is a favored class. Businesses such as grocery stores involve people entering for a short period of time to obtain the necessities of life, with a fairly low risk of spreading the disease if people follow the mask mandates and maximum occupancy rules.

A church involves sitting in one spot for up to 2 hours with communal speaking and singing that is a super-spreader event! It fits into the same category as a bar - people in close quarters speaking loudly.

It seems to me that there are some wildly unqualified members on the “supreme” court now. What a travesty.