The US Supreme Court Thread - Post Roe v. Wade reversal edition

Last thing I remember there were fancy red carpeted steps but they were moving down like an escalator. Dreyfuss is like "C'mon! let's run up them!" And we tried but couldn't get to the top. Maybe similar to a surprise-math-test-to-graduate dream. Not sure.

 

Unless you were naked or at least only wearing underpants it doesn’t count

…is what my friend told me

 

Likely that yesterday in Minneapolis was so disturbing that the brain was working OT into the AM

 

Bill Archer used to do this over-the-top fake exaggerated German thing:

"If vee don't bend zee knee to zee Fuher, vee vill find OUT! Ja? Vee vill comply!"

 

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/...s-minority-too-small-to-challenge-sports-bans

According to this the Supremes are going to uphold state bans in trans athletes because there are so few of them.

So you can’t discriminate against twins, or lesbians, or Canadians, or folk singers, but you can legally discriminate against Tegan & Sara because they’re the only twin lesbian Canadian folk singers in the world. Got it.

 

So looks like mail-in ballots received after election day can be challenged

The Supreme Court on Wednesday revived an Illinois Congress member’s lawsuit over a state mail-in ballot law, paving the way for political candidates nationwide to challenge election laws more easily in their states.

The justices ruled 7-2 that Rep. Mike Bost (R-Ill.) has the legal right to sue Illinois over its ability to count mail-in ballots received after Election Day, a practice targeted by President Trump and his allies.

https://www.google.com/url?q=https:...ttles/5688500-mail-in-ballot-lawsuit-revived/

 

Why stop there? Challenge everything, the date, the signature, the stamp, the boxes, the machines…

And if everything fails, create enough ruckus and send the count to the Supreme Court, where they will be counted the Right Way…

 

Would you say it gives candidates more leeway in challenging election results and how they're tabulated?

 

Sounds like a bad day in front of SCOTUS today for Trump Co.

Nearly all the justices sounded incredibly skeptical on their arguments about being able to fire Cook.

 

Panel of federal judges appoints a prosecutor. Todd Blanche says nuh-uh, you're fired.

Judges don’t pick U.S. Attorneys, @POTUS does. See Article II of our Constitution. You are fired, Donald Kinsella. https://t.co/XUYRgaqG2T

— Todd Blanche (@DAGToddBlanche) February 12, 2026

 

I’m still amazed that they haven’t ruled on the tariffs yet.

https://bsky.app/profile/marcelias.bsky.social/post/3meqwidtjpc2l
NEW: Supreme Court adds three new days for releasing opinions: Feb. 20, 24, and 25.

 

Probably completely unrelated that an importer sued customs against section 232 tariff overreach just a few days ago...

 

SC says Donnie can't rely on national emergency law to impose tariffs. Wonder what happens to $ collected.

WASHINGTON — Delivering a major blow to President Donald Trump, the Supreme Court on Friday ruled that he exceeded his authority when imposing sweeping tariffs using a law reserved for a national emergency.

The justices, divided 6-3 held that Trump's aggressive approach to tariffs on products entering the United States from across the world was not permitted under a 1977 law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/su...rumps-tariffs-major-blow-president-rcna244827

 

Haha. This is gonna be fun.
Step 1 - file for refunds
Step 2 - demand compensation from suppliers that passed through increases
Step3 -ignore the customer requests for all of your tariff pass throughs.
4)ultimately ******** the retail customers

 

Honest question. Stupid question.

I mean, yeah, to me or me it's more than obvious that the United States is not being invaded by a foreign power but just over half of the Supreme Court has now recognized that those emergency powers were invoked unconstitutionally. Is it completely insane to think that the non-tariff executive actions that also rest on the foundation of emergency powers necessary to repel a foreign invasion are also unconstitutional? I'm thinking specifically of the president sending the army to occupy Democratic cities.

 

Because this is all about me, do I now not have to pay that $6.35 tariff bill to FEDEX for a CD I bought from a supplier in France?

 

From previous articles on the topic, the government will have to pay back the various companies.

This is probably one reason the stock market is performing as well as it is (I.e., well, but not as well as our peer nations.). Corporate profits are going to go way up over the next couple of quarters as the companies get reimbursed. That means there will be pressure to use that money for dividends.