The US Supreme Court Thread

Does Stephen Miller have a law degree. Oh hell who cares Trump and Moscow Mitch will shove him in there.

 

There is NO requirement that a Supreme Court justice have a law degree.


By the way, Miller only has a BA from Duke.

 

Thanks. That was my next question answered.

 

Duke is the portal between Hell and the Earth. Sometimes, mistakes are made.

 

Who is the guy on the right?

 

... and what the ******** is that?

 

THIS, is well worth a read.
It's long but the portion I've selected is eye opening. It has another section attacking Kavanaugh's selection and his support from the NRA. Read it all.

An unusual brief
The senators supported that view. But their amicus brief presented little in the way of legal argument.

Instead it offered a broad and unprecedented indictment of the court’s conservative majority.

It accused the five justices who were appointed by Republican presidents – Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, John Roberts and Clarence Thomas – of pursuing a “political project” and being in league with the National Rifle Association and other pro-gun groups seeking to radically expand gun owners’ protections provided by the Second Amendment.

https://theconversation.com/democrats-turn-a-venerable-legal-tool-into-a-declaration-of-war-122175

An unusual brief

 

Duke? As in David Duke University?

 

The actual amicus brief is way, way more interesting than the article.

The problem with the amicus brief itself is not that:

The five Senators who signed on to it are exactly correct in their statements about the partisanship of the Supreme Court Justices.

They are exactly correct in their assertion that in 78 5-4 Decisions, the "Republican" justices voted in lock step and the big money, conservative positions prevailed in 73 of them.

From the brief:
"From October Term 2005 through October Term 2017, this Court issued 78 5-4 (or 5-3) opinions in which justices appointed by Republican presidents provided all five votes in the majority. In 73 of these 5-4 decisions, the cases concerned interests important to the big funders, corporate influencers, and political base of the Republican Party. And in each of these 73 cases, those partisan interests prevailed. See Sheldon Whitehouse, A Right-Wing Rout: What the “Roberts Five” Decisions Tell Us About the Integrity of Today’s Supreme Court, American Constitution Society (Apr. 24, 2019).

The problem is that sitting Senators should not be the ones filing this Amicus Brief.

It is dangerous for one branch to attack another branch. Yes, Trump does it all of the time. It is dangerous for him to do it, as well. But he basically only does this in the media and on twitter.

This takes the fight to a new, and scary, level. Yes, there have been other examples of Congress getting directly involved in Supreme Court fights (recently of note was Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG) taking up US v. Windsor)

Although I agree with they filed, they should not have been the group to file it.
This may set a bad precedent.


https://www.supremecourt.gov/Docket...259076_18-280bsacSenatorSheldonWhitehouse.pdf

 

OK...but how sure are you that it's a bigger problem than the purely partisan nature of the SC?

 

I am not, and it is not, but an amicus brief would not do anything about this other than make it known in a filing that almost noone reads.

 

The "Roberts Five." Seems a fitting title. We are the Gods, we don't need integrity
Perhaps by filing it, it will put them on notice that they're being watched. If they care.

Have you heard anymore about the challenge to remove Kavanaugh from the bench?

 

Fitting name and one of the worst bands ever.

Alito can't carry a tune for anything.

Thomas silently harmonized to whatever the rest are singing.

Kavanaugh is just there for the "sex and drugs," damn the "rock n roll"

 

After your post earlier I let my fingers wander though google. Seems after his appointment to the SP, there is no way to reverse his appointment. The only way to oust him is by impeachment.
That means having a majority vote from the house and congress.
Frankly I can't see that happening in this climate.

 

I started writing that, but thought making fun of the band would be less depressing.

There is impeachment, but that has only been once, I believe.

 

Yeah, the band was a far better post. I'll bet their crowd size numbers would have been higher.

 

Looks like a cross between GWB and Shuhsheffskee

 

"Yeah, but it was a future USSC penis!"

- Kav defenders

 

Collins confirmed the guy after Trump had a friendly chat with her.
Curious to know how much in cash or favors she was promised. Because she'll never get paid

 

Another reason why Democrats playing fair is so quaint. If this story's true, Republicans wouldn't let the FBI investigate BeerMan's background:

Two F.B.I. agents interviewed Ms. Ramirez, telling her that they found her “credible.” But the Republican-controlled Senate had imposed strict limits on the investigation. “‘We have to wait to get authorization to do anything else,’” Bill Pittard, one of Ms. Ramirez’s lawyers, recalled the agents saying. “It was almost a little apologetic.”

https://www.salon.com/2019/09/15/re...-against-brett-kavanaugh-during-confirmation/

So if there's a Dem takeover of the presidency & senate, they start impeachment of BeerMan who should be slimed daily with extreme prejudice as Hillary was with Benghazi. Until the Republicans are taught how to act civilly again there should be no compromise with them.

 

Impeachment still has to get through Trump's AG, DOJ, McConnell and Congress. Tough row to hoe.
Just as you say. Paid ads to slime him every day in press and TV. Make him take it to court. Or as the Idiot in chief says: Sue for liable!