SCOTUS is on a Roll

[Huntn]

Just saw that ruling. WTF is going on with SCOTUS?

The cloaked facades are off, littering the floor, while suck on this evil chuckles are heard in the halls of the Supreme Court.

 

[Yoused]

 

[Runs For Fun]

 

[Runs For Fun]

This is going to be interesting. We'll see if SCOTUS is going to continue on its destructive path

Supreme Court to hear 2 cases with major implications for 2024 — POLITICO

The Court's new term starts in October and includes significant voting cases.

apple.news

 

[lizkat]

This is going to be interesting. We'll see if SCOTUS is going to continue on its destructive path

Supreme Court to hear 2 cases with major implications for 2024 — POLITICO

The Court's new term starts in October and includes significant voting cases.

apple.news

Well Kavanaugh went to Georgetown Prep which aside from its party rep does have a Jesuit social justice aspect in its overall academic ambience... but I guess the Federalist Society chapter at Yale managed to beat anything like that lean out of Kavanaugh, even if one might think he could come around to the left a little as he matures on the high court. Haven't lost all hope yet, but the thing that bothers me about him on the high court so far is that he seems to pen these fairly moderate riffs now and then but then votes with the conservatives anyway.

 

[Cmaier]

Well Kavanaugh went to Georgetown Prep which aside from its party rep does have a Jesuit social justice aspect in its overall academic ambience... but I guess the Federalist Society chapter at Yale managed to beat anything like that lean out of Kavanaugh, even if one might think he could come around to the left a little as he matures on the high court. Haven't lost all hope yet, but the thing that bothers me about him on the high court so far is that he seems to pen these fairly moderate riffs now and then but then votes with the conservatives anyway.

I went to a Jesuit law school, and i can assure you than not a single jesuit principle infiltrated by evil little jewish mind.

 

[lizkat]

I went to a Jesuit law school, and i can assure you than not a single jesuit principle infiltrated by evil little jewish mind.

Well not every Jesuit prof exudes all that much social justice lean when not being called on the carpet by his diocesan superior, either, I suspect.

 

[Citysnaps]

I went to a Jesuit law school, and i can assure you than not a single jesuit principle infiltrated by evil little jewish mind.

I went to the same school (engineering, not law) and never detected a whiff of it.

 

[mac_in_tosh]

In a single term as president, Trump has successfully changed the direction of the country to radical Conservatism for a generation.

And the irony is that Trump just used a conservative stance as an expediency to gain office but historically played both sides of the aisle, including giving contributions to Hillary Clinton. From Wikipedia:

In a 2004 interview, Trump told CNN's Wolf Blitzer: "In many cases, I probably identify more as Democrat", explaining: "It just seems that the economy does better under the Democrats than the Republicans. Now, it shouldn't be that way. But if you go back, I mean it just seems that the economy does better under the Democrats...But certainly we had some very good economies under Democrats, as well as Republicans. But we've had some pretty bad disaster under the Republicans." In a July 2015 interview, Trump said that he has a broad range of political positions and that "I identify with some things as a Democrat."

 

[Cmaier]

I went to the same school (engineering, not law) and never detected a whiff of it.

Actually, the only time I ran across a Jesuit there was when my wife, who was the Sobrato residence director, introduced me to them.

 

[lizkat]

And the irony is that Trump just used a conservative stance as an expediency to gain office but historically played both sides of the aisle, including giving contributions to Hillary Clinton

He's just a grifter --not really even a businessman-- and so it's all just about money and public presence so he can keep his marks in tow. If there is money in the picture, he figures it's somehow bound to be his for the taking. He was certainly not about party politics in any traditional sense.

Bannon originally had to school him on what a primary election was. Turns out Trump had never voted in one. When Bannon commented on that, Trump said something to effect of wtf I always vote. Bannon said oh no you don't, not in primaries. Trump said how do you know, voting is private anyway. Bannon said your VOTE is private but whether you voted may not be (depending on state, and all states make some voter information public). Trump was astounded. This from a guy who later claimed to know that millions of "illegals" had voted...​

You have to wonder how the GOP ever figured they could use this guy and escape the fallout from his ignorance, impulsivity and complete disdain for advancing any interests but his own.Too bad that all the rest of us are also paying a price for the ascension to power of such a hazard to democracy.

 

[Citysnaps]

Actually, the only time I ran across a Jesuit there was when my wife, who was the Sobrato residence director, introduced me to them.

I did take a contracts class as an elective. Can't remember the law professor's name, though. He was on the old side and seemed like a higher up in the department. And a business ethics class (IIRC, that was a requirement).

Those were two of the more interesting/useful classes.

 

[GermanSuplex]

Did anyone else get the impression that the info the January 6 committee got from GinnI is that she’s legit nuts? She’s likely not guilty of anything, but it’s a little troubling that the wife of a Supreme Court Justice thinks our elections are a fraud because her chosen cult leader didn’t win.

And it looks like Ginny has a history with cults and groupthink, so yeah..

And when you see old Clarence as the lone dissenter in cases involving Trump, it makes you wonder. Which is why he should do the right thing and recuse himself from such cases. But he has no reason to do so, and the facade of justices giving a crap about optics is gone now too.

Trump’s poison has crept into all these cracks of our system.

 

[Alli]

I still want to know who paid off all Kavanaugh’s debts.

 

[lizkat]

The case about voting rights in Alabama will be heard on October 4. The question is whether the court's ruling will further weaken the Voting Rights Act.

How the Supreme Court’s New Gerrymandering Case Threatens the Voting Rights Act

A redistricting case challenging Alabama’s congressional map could make it harder to ensure fair representation for communities of color.

www.brennancenter.org

Alabama lawmakers drew a map that continues a policy of dividing the Black Belt among four congressional districts, ignoring the request of Black constituents to be kept together in two districts for better representation as well as significant demographic changes in the region over the last couple of decades.

Because of the division of the Black Belt, the region’s Black voters have an ability to elect their preferred candidates only in the 7th District, a sprawling district with a tenacle stretching to Birmingham that the plaintiffs say is packed with far more Black voters than needed to elect a Black-preferred candidate.

I'm so sick of all the dancing around the fact that racial discrimination does exist AS SUCH, i.e., with intention.... and it should not be permitted to contribute to gerrymandered congressional maps that attempt to reduce actual representation of the interests of people of color in Congress. One of the examples likely to be presented by plaintiff is the Alabama delegation votes against capping the price of insulin at $35, where there is prevalence of diabetes among Blacks but the districts there are carved up to distribute Black votes so to reduce likelihood of their having major influence in more than one district.

 

[Alli]

I keep looking at district maps in states accused of gerrymandering, and I think it’s time every state redistricts fairly. Cut the state in half one way, then the other way. Continue doing that until districts contain similar size populations, but enough of these crazy snakey lines.

 

[rdrr]

I keep looking at district maps in states accused of gerrymandering, and I think it’s time every state redistricts fairly. Cut the state in half one way, then the other way. Continue doing that until districts contain similar size populations, but enough of these crazy snakey lines.

Or just do something as simple as by county.

 

[Alli]

Or just do something as simple as by county.

Sometimes counties are too large to be a single district.

 

[lizkat]

If SCOTUS is on a roll as per thread title, this case ought to have them rolling in the aisles... and it's not a joke, it's real. A guy got busted for running a facebook site that parodied a police department. The Onion took exception to the result of lower court proceedings. A lot of work went into their brief, but The Onion didn't even bother taking off its snark hat while constructing it. In the cited piece there's a link to download a pdf of the brief... it is both serious, hilarious and a reminder that OF COURSE we have the right to criticize the authorities and OF COURSE parody is ruined up front if the reader is encouraged to think it's a fake from the get-go.

'The Onion' filed a real brief with the Supreme Court supporting man jailed for making fun of cops

Anthony Novak was arrested for running a Facebook page that parodied the police department of Parma, Ohio.

www.engadget.com

EDIT: Heh, this story was making rounds of social media enough to draw traditional media outlets to want to interview staff of The Onion. NPR has run a piece based on a phone interview with the head writer of The Onion, who wrote the brief and then had The Onion's lawyers finish doctoring on it.

We didn't imagine The Onion would have a whole raft of lawyers? In our litigious society?!

The man who wrote the Onion's Supreme Court brief takes parody very seriously

The satirical site submitted a 23-page brief to the Supreme Court in support of a First Amendment case. Mike Gillis, The Onion writer who authored the brief, tells NPR why parody is worth defending.

www.npr.org

Mike Gillis, head writer for The Onion and author of the brief, told NPR in a phone interview that he hopes the filing won't just help convince the Supreme Court to take on the case, but also show the public why parody matters so much.

"To just get this many people thinking about parody, and the fact that it adds a lot to their lives and that it's something worth defending, was very, very satisfying for me," he says.

There are certain misconceptions Gillis wanted to clear up for the Supreme Court — including why it's so important for parody to be realistic and why labeling it as such upfront wouldn't only be unnecessary, but unhelpful.

But he also sees the brief as an opportunity to defend the role of parody at large. So, NPR asked, why does it matter?

The short answer is that it's an "extremely powerful rhetorical form that can't really be mimicked by a serious, dry statement of criticism." The longer answer goes back thousands of years, to the etymological root of the word, and has to do with how even slightly tweaking a form can open readers' eyes to how "this thing that had this extremely elevated sense of itself is actually not infallible and can be criticized easily."

Right... and one may hope the Supreme Court takes that to heart regarding its own functions.

 

[Herdfan]

I keep looking at district maps in states accused of gerrymandering, and I think it’s time every state redistricts fairly. Cut the state in half one way, then the other way. Continue doing that until districts contain similar size populations, but enough of these crazy snakey lines.

Today technology could do this for us. Easily. A computer could simply create districts using zip codes and solely based on population and being contiguous.

But it would come with risks for both sides. Take Alabama for example, which is the subject of the current case. Right now Alabama has one majority black district, which yields them 1 Black Rep. Based on population, it should be 2. But what if a "dumb" computer spits out a map that has no majority Black districts because it isn't taking this into account?