Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Re: SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

    Originally posted by MissThundercat View Post
    And you all tell me not to worry, that Roberts will help us with the deciding vote, blah, blah, blah.
    You'll never hear that from me.
    **NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.

    Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
    Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by MissThundercat View Post
      And you all tell me not to worry, that Roberts will help us with the deciding vote, blah, blah, blah.
      No, I'm saying the first few cases will tell us whether his partisanship trumps his view towards his legacy on the court.

      It takes more balls to be the 5th vote to overrule precedent than it does to cast a 4th vote in dissent. We'll see which wins out.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

        Typical partisan split today, and one thinks it will cause "massive social upheaval" and "these changes should go through Congress."

        I don't feel positive about this, being in the minority at stake here.
        Facebook: bcowles920 Instagram: missthundercat01
        "One word frees us from the weight and pain of this life. That word is love."- Socrates
        Patreon for exclusive writing content
        Adventures With Amber Marie

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

          Originally posted by unofan View Post
          No, I'm saying the first few cases will tell us whether his partisanship trumps his view towards his legacy on the court.

          It takes more balls to be the 5th vote to overrule precedent than it does to cast a 4th vote in dissent. We'll see which wins out.
          None of the current right wing justices is a profile in courage.
          Cornell University
          National Champion 1967, 1970
          ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
          Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

            Originally posted by Kepler View Post
            None of the current right wing justices is a profile in courage.
            Like I said, I don't feel positive, and I'm quite sure Pubbies and certain liberals are going to cis-splain this to me to make me feel worse.
            Facebook: bcowles920 Instagram: missthundercat01
            "One word frees us from the weight and pain of this life. That word is love."- Socrates
            Patreon for exclusive writing content
            Adventures With Amber Marie

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

              The Onion has the GOP's number.
              Cornell University
              National Champion 1967, 1970
              ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
              Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

                Oddly enough, I read something early today where Kavanaugh was leading the charge in questioning Louisiana for their non-unanimous jury conviction law. He seemed unimpressed, and made comments regarding racist outcomes for those convicted. It makes me wonder if there is some slight glimmer of humanity hiding in there somewhere.
                "The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." George Orwell, 1984

                "One does not simply walk into Mordor. Its Black Gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust, the very air you breathe is a poisonous fume." Boromir

                "Good news! We have a delivery." Professor Farnsworth

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

                  Non-unanimous jury conviction? What in the actual ****?
                  Code:
                  As of 9/21/10:         As of 9/13/10:
                  College Hockey 6       College Football 0
                  BTHC 4                 WCHA FC:  1
                  Originally posted by SanTropez
                  May your paint thinner run dry and the fleas of a thousand camels infest your dead deer.
                  Originally posted by bigblue_dl
                  I don't even know how to classify magic vagina smoke babies..
                  Originally posted by Kepler
                  When the giraffes start building radio telescopes they can join too.
                  He's probably going to be a superstar but that man has more baggage than North West

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

                    Originally posted by dxmnkd316 View Post
                    Non-unanimous jury conviction? What in the actual ****?
                    Maybe it's a five-sixths verdict, like states have for civil.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Kepler View Post
                      None of the current right wing justices is a profile in courage.
                      winners write the history
                      a legend and an out of work bum look a lot alike, daddy.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

                        Originally posted by MissThundercat View Post
                        Yeah, that is not going well. I see the bs arguments that I expected the right to make prominent in the discussions. And if Gorsuch is the swing as indicated in the article we know which way this is likely to go.
                        **NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.

                        Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
                        Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

                          Originally posted by mookie1995 View Post
                          winners write the history
                          Or, in this case, cheaters.
                          Cornell University
                          National Champion 1967, 1970
                          ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
                          Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

                            Originally posted by MissThundercat View Post
                            I haven't read too much on this case, but isn't it a case about whether discrimination based upon sexual orientation is included in the broad "sex discrimination" statutes passed by Congress 50 years ago?

                            Personally I think the law should ban such discrimination. Not only is it wrong to engage in such discrimination, it's stupid. Thus, it won't bother me if the Supreme Court says it's included.

                            But that said, it also seems to me that in light of the fact that what, maybe half the states, and hundreds of cities nationwide have taken the step to specifically identify sexual orientation discrimination as prohibited conduct in addition to "sex discrimination" suggests that both judicially and legislatively in this country pretty much everyone concluded sexual orientation discrimination is not included in Title VII?

                            I know I'm in the minority here, but I don't think a decision by Gorsuch, Kavanaugh or anyone else on that court concluding that sex orientation is not covered in the old definition is a sign of partisanship. People on this board, including you, have talked about how this state or that doesn't identify sex orientation as a protected category in the human rights statutes in the state where they reside. Yet I'm going to guess most of those states have a "sex discrimination" statute. It seems like it is a legislative solution. Just my two cents.
                            That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

                              Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
                              I haven't read too much on this case, but isn't it a case about whether discrimination based upon sexual orientation is included in the broad "sex discrimination" statutes passed by Congress 50 years ago?

                              Personally I think the law should ban such discrimination. Not only is it wrong to engage in such discrimination, it's stupid. Thus, it won't bother me if the Supreme Court says it's included.

                              But that said, it also seems to me that in light of the fact that what, maybe half the states, and hundreds of cities nationwide have taken the step to specifically identify sexual orientation discrimination as prohibited conduct in addition to "sex discrimination" suggests that both judicially and legislatively in this country pretty much everyone concluded sexual orientation discrimination is not included in Title VII?

                              I know I'm in the minority here, but I don't think a decision by Gorsuch, Kavanaugh or anyone else on that court concluding that sex orientation is not covered in the old definition is a sign of partisanship. People on this board, including you, have talked about how this state or that doesn't identify sex orientation as a protected category in the human rights statutes in the state where they reside. Yet I'm going to guess most of those states have a "sex discrimination" statute. It seems like it is a legislative solution. Just my two cents.
                              So, Majority Rules then? Cause that legislation will never pass Congress. Hell, Abortion was decided by the Supreme Court in 1973 and in many places in this country a woman still does not have the right to choose.

                              Try again.
                              **NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.

                              Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
                              Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

                                Originally posted by ScoobyDoo View Post
                                So, Majority Rules then?
                                We can do it one of three ways. We can let our elected representatives in Congress and the state legislatures pass the laws. Or we can let nine lifetime appointments on the Supreme Court tell us what the law should be. Or, we just let Trump do it, or whoever happens to hold the office of President. Your choice sunshine.
                                That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X