The Supreme Court of the United States Thread

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

Well, she is stupid. She is still trying to figure out the difference between a man and a woman. I learned that as a child.

She's really an embarrassment to all humans everywhere.

 

[McDad]

It’s not every day you see a Supreme Court justice obliterate another, but that’s exactly what happened today with Barrett and Ketanji Brown.

Careful. LG is really sensitive to the word "obliterate" lately.

 

[OrangeTsar]

They need to define exactly who CAN put a national halt to *unconstitutional Presidential decrees/actions.

* I'm not saying trump has necessarily been unconstitutional, but this will apply to all presidents now.

I think the Supreme Court has that authority. But individual district judges should only be able to issue injunctions for their jurisdictions and for clients actually bring the case. The nation cannot have over 600 „Supreme Court justices“ with delusions of national power. Inferior courts aren’t directly established in the Constitution. They are creations of Congress meant to help reduce the load on the Supreme Court, not created to supersede it.

 

[jmacvols1]

 

[OrangeTsar]

She's really an embarrassment to all humans everywhere.

In any sane world, her statement before Congress that she couldn’t define what a woman is should have resulted in a 100 to 0 vote against confirmation

 

[Orange_Crush]

I think the Supreme Court has that authority. But individual district judges should only be able to issue injunctions for their jurisdictions and for clients actually bring the case. The nation cannot have over 600 „Supreme Court justices“ with delusions of national power. Inferior courts aren’t directly established in the Constitution. They are creations of Congress meant to help reduce the load on the Supreme Court, not created to supersede it.

Agreed. I'm just not sure how the Supreme Court takes jurisdiction. Who creates the case for them to rule on?

 

[Vol423]

I think the Supreme Court has that authority. But individual district judges should only be able to issue injunctions for their jurisdictions and for clients actually bring the case. The nation cannot have over 600 „Supreme Court justices“ with delusions of national power. Inferior courts aren’t directly established in the Constitution. They are creations of Congress meant to help reduce the load on the Supreme Court, not created to supersede it.

Also, why would a single federal district court judge wield more power than a Supreme Court Justice, who has to be part of a majority opinion of 9 total judges?

 

[OrangeTsar]

Also, why would a single federal district court judge wield more power than a Supreme Court Justice, who has to be part of a majority opinion of 9 total judges?

Excellent point!

 

[volbeast33]

Last week, my son was able to get tickets to the Supreme Court and listen to 4-5 decisions from the court. It was his dream come true. He wants to be a lawyer and a politician.

 

[n_huffhines]

Pack the courts, get just about whatever you want. They can wrest the law and their perception of the founding and original intent to find any way to justify anything. This is a terrible precedent. We are so ****ed as a nation.

A Bad Decision on Nationwide Injunctions

Today's 6-3 Supreme Court decision in Trump v. CASA, Inc. barring nationwide injunctions is a grave mistake. It risks…

reason.com

"The real heart of the matter here is not the technical debate about historical analogies, but a core principle of constitutional government: the state must not be allowed to engage in large-scale systematic violations of the Constitution, especially when it comes to basic constitutional rights, like the birthright citizenship rights at issue in this case. And courts must be able to impose the remedies necessary to prevent that. That principle is vastly more important than any historical details about the exact nature of remedies available British courts in 1789."

 

[just bob]

Pack the courts, get just about whatever you want. This is a terrible precedent. We are so ****ed as a nation.

A Bad Decision on Nationwide Injunctions

Today's 6-3 Supreme Court decision in Trump v. CASA, Inc. barring nationwide injunctions is a grave mistake. It risks…

reason.com

View attachment 751430

I love how you have this take. It's that Italian kiss thing. lmao

 

[C-south]

Pack the courts, get just about whatever you want. They can wrest the law and their perception of the founding and original intent to find any way to justify anything. This is a terrible precedent. We are so ****ed as a nation.

A Bad Decision on Nationwide Injunctions

Today's 6-3 Supreme Court decision in Trump v. CASA, Inc. barring nationwide injunctions is a grave mistake. It risks…

reason.com

"The real heart of the matter here is not the technical debate about historical analogies, but a core principle of constitutional government: the state must not be allowed to engage in large-scale systematic violations of the Constitution, especially when it comes to basic constitutional rights, like the birthright citizenship rights at issue in this case. And courts must be able to impose the remedies necessary to prevent that. That principle is vastly more important than any historical details about the exact nature of remedies available British courts in 1789."

Lol

 

[n_huffhines]

I love how you have this take. It's that Italian kiss thing. lmao

Huh?

Wait til the next socialist president labels thousands as right-wing terrorists and denies you all habeus corpus and district courts can't stop it.

You all are so short sighted

 

[just bob]

Huh?

Wait til the next socialist president labels thousands as right-wing terrorists and denies you all habeus corpus and district courts can't stop it.

You all are so short sighted

You're adorable.

 

[dalton_vol]

Comedy... auto pen and a quota nominee

 

[dalton_vol]

Huh?

Wait til the next socialist president labels thousands as right-wing terrorists and denies you all habeus corpus and district courts can't stop it.

You all are so short sighted

We expect that. That's what Biden's justice department already did. So you're comparing Americans to illegal aliens?

 

[dalton_vol]

In any sane world, her statement before Congress that she couldn’t define what a woman is should have resulted in a 100 to 0 vote against confirmation

Yep

 

[Orange_Crush]

He wants to be a lawyer and a politician.

My condolences.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

 

[C-south]

Huh?

Wait til the next socialist president labels thousands as right-wing terrorists and denies you all habeus corpus and district courts can't stop it.

You all are so short sighted

 

[CagleMtnVol]

Huh?

Wait til the next socialist president labels thousands as right-wing terrorists and denies you all habeus corpus and district courts can't stop it.

You all are so short sighted

At that point a lot of us we'll be singing....

 

[FortSanders]

Agreed. I'm just not sure how the Supreme Court takes jurisdiction. Who creates the case for them to rule on?

The Supreme Court gets civil and criminal cases through the appellate process, through aggrieved parties, who have actionable claims, called standing. A plaintiff can't file a claim unless he can show he was damaged in some way. A criminal defendant by definition has standing. The Supremes are most likely to take cases where there is a conflict in the Circuits, meaning an individual won a case in one Circuit and another has lost the same case in another Circuit. The Court likes cases that are fully briefed and argued at trial and on appeal. Nationwide injunctions prevent that, because a single ruling by a single judge creates a precedent other courts have to respect. Nationwide injunctions at the lowest federal courts inhibit the appeals process. That's why they are pernicious.

 

[FortSanders]

Huh?

Wait til the next socialist president labels thousands as right-wing terrorists and denies you all habeus corpus and district courts can't stop it.

You all are so short sighted

Lincoln was the last president who did this. He was wrong and the courts did allow challenges. Lincoln was the most criminal president in history.

 

[n_huffhines]

We expect that. That's what Biden's justice department already did. So you're comparing Americans to illegal aliens?

Biden suspended habeus corpus for thousands of right wingers?

They are Americans according to the constitution. Do you support the constitution?

 

[OHvol40]

Diversity is our strength. Just look no further than all the corrupt and incompetent dei mayors, judges, and representatives indicted and/or removed from their positions

Now if we could just get DEI out of VN, we could be rid of lesser-than PF posters.