The US Supreme Court Thread

Yes, but with how quickly the news cycle spools up now adays, waiting until the next day was too long. He should have apologized for his wording yesterday.

 

His failure to respond...and then his piss poor apology/non apology...is going to put Dems in the position of either having to censure him or be perceived as defending one of their own for threatening judges.

And no - saying that he should not have used the words he used, or saying he’s from Brooklyn and used harsh language...is not an apology. And not anywhere near good enough. Particularly after both he a SPOX whatabouted out of the gate. And are basically still doing it.

 

According to some strains of quantum theory, there are an infinite number of universes. In absolutely NONE of them would a Republican apologize for saying what Schumer said.

 

That is one of the good things of being a Repug.

2 different set of standards.

 

What Q said.

******** 'em. When they go low, we go high? Tell that to Justice Garland. He shouldn't apologize one damn bit, he should double down and bring out the receipts.

 

I mean if Brett was in tears like he was at his hearing, maybe Chuck can send him a nice fruit basket

 

maybe, maybe not

but IN THIS universe, Schumer DID NOT 'apologize' just offer some half-assed version of i misspoke, they misunderstood, Republicans bad

 

Yes, correct: when it comes to respecting traditions and institutions, they are. Quite bad, actually.

The idea that Republicans should be allowed to destroy long established means in order to gain power, while Democrats should be held responsible for upholding those means, just enables Republicans to consolidate power far beyond their actual numbers in society.

This sort of thing has happened before. I doubt if it's a conscious choice, but Roberts has strong similarities to Carl Schmitt.

 

No, but the Republican should.

 

it’s not that hard to both apologize and call out the hypocrisy with receipts.

here:
I should not have used those words. They were inappropriate and beneath my office. For that I unequivocally apologize to my constituents, the American people, and more importantly to the Supreme Court justices.

With that said, I eagerly await both Justice Robert’s admonition of, and President Trumps apology for, (insert judicial attack receipts). I am sure we can all agree both are long overdue.

 

Nah, playing fair was so Obama-esque. And I get why he had to dial it back with Whitelandian Repubs & their rabid constituents. But we're far beyond those days.

 

In fairness to Roberts, he has called out Trump's attack on judges.

 

Strike that part then. But I think he didn’t say shit last week when Trump called for RBG and sotomayer to recuse in any Trump related case.

 

So far as I can tell, yes. He's pretty inconsistent on this sort of thing.

 

He's not addressing every instance, but he has made it clear that Trump's attack on Judge's based on who appointed them is inappropriate. Obviously, that didn't slow Trump down any, but there really isn't much point in repeatedly pointing at his comments from 2018.

https://apnews.com/c4b34f9639e141069c08cf1e3deb6b84

 

............and the judges hit back at Roberts. From FOX.

Disorder in the courts: Federal judge blasts Chief Justice John Roberts

A federal judge leveled harsh accusations against Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and the rest of the conservative majority, claiming that they are “actively participating in undermining American democracy.”

Judge Lynn Adelman of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin blasted the Roberts-led court in an article titled “The Roberts Court’s Assault on Democracy,” set to be published in the Harvard Law & Policy Review.

“[T]he Roberts Court has been anything but passive,” wrote Adelman, who was appointed to the bench by President Bill Clinton. “Rather, the Court’s hard-right majority is actively participating in undermining American democracy. Indeed, the Roberts Court has contributed to ensuring that the political system in the United States pays little attention to ordinary Americans and responds only to the wishes of a relatively small number of powerful corporations and individuals.”

Adelman pointed to two particular types of cases. First were those dealing with what he called “direct assaults on democracy such as cases that affect voting rights.” He said some cases have hurt minorities by weakening the Voting Rights Act. In a recent case, the court refused to intervene in partisan gerrymandering.

The second type of case Adelman described was where he said the court “increased the economic and political power of corporations and wealthy individuals and reduced that of ordinary Americans and entities which represent them.” These included Citizens United, which said that corporations enjoy free speech protections that allow them to spend large sums in connection with elections. Adelman said that this decision “weaponized the First Amendment.”

Adelman was even unhappy with Roberts’ own opinion and key vote that upheld ObamaCare because it knocked down its expansion of Medicaid. He said this “thwarted Congress’ efforts to address one of the most serious problems that the poor face, the lack of health insurance[.]”

The judge did not reserve his ire for the Supreme Court alone. He took shots at Senate Republicans for their handling of President Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court, which GOP senators ignored in order to allow Obama’s successor to appoint someone else – this resulted in President Trump successfully nominating Justice Neil Gorsuch.

Adelman went so far as to compare the Republican senators to pro-slavery Southerners.

“The zealous partisanship the Republicans displayed in connection with the Garland nomination, as well as judicial appointments generally reminds one of nothing so much as the ‘fire-eaters,’ those fervent defenders of slavery who pushed the South into the Civil War,” he wrote.

Ultimately, though, Adelman’s focus was on Roberts, insisting that he has exhibited a harmful bias and that his description of a Supreme Court justice was of an umpire who “calls the balls and strikes” was “a masterpiece of disingenuousness.”

He concluded with a dire warning that the current state of the judiciary has contributed to “a new and arguably dangerous phase in American history” that requires fixing and necessitates “every bit of democratic resourcefulness that we can muster to undo the damage that the Court has already caused.”

 

That sound you all heard was the end of the legitimacy of the judicial system in America.

 

Hold my beer....







Said Brat Kavanaughty...

 

Susan Collins remains highly concerned

 

Counter-intuitively, it will be Democrats who stop adhering to the norm of judicial supremacy. The Roberts Court's decision last night means that it will almost certainly issue another similar verdict in the coming months, and Democrats will likely ignore it.

 

Informative tweet explaining the upcoming arguments re trump tax returns that SCOTUS will hear shortly.

for those that still think Roberts has a reputation that is salvageable....these decisions will be remembered forever. I fear these decisions will be nothing about balls and strikes

1250763891157630976 is not a valid tweet id

 

Interesting!!!
I feel they’ll go Trump, their saviors, way.

 

Frau Merkel, if youre listening. If you could find the Deutsche Bank records concerning Mr. Trump Im sure our media would reward you greatly.

 

The Supreme Court on Tuesday said that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg underwent non-surgical treatment for a benign gallbladder condition.

Bader was treated at Johns Hopkins hospital in Baltimore and is resting comfortably and plans to take part in Wednesday’s teleconference arguments, the court said.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/05/sup...der-ginsburg-hospitalized-with-infection.html

get well