knapplc Posted June 15, 2020 Share Posted June 15, 2020 1 hour ago, QMany said: Kavanaugh dissented. Remember, Senator Collins claimed he was a defender of gay rights to support her vote to confirm. I would imagine she finds this decision troubling, then. 1 1 Link to comment
QMany Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 14 hours ago, BigRedBuster said: The Judiciary is supposed to be apolitical, but it is not often (i.e. Thomas and Kavanaugh). But the *chef's kiss* of this is Conservatives openly admitting they are for activist judges, not neutral arbiters of the law, as long it is their own Court-packing. The gig is up. 1 Link to comment
QMany Posted June 18, 2020 Share Posted June 18, 2020 With these two recent decisions, please remember Trump's Admin argued before SCOTUS: (1) we should be able to discriminate against LGBTQ, and (2) we should be able to deport hundreds of thousands of immigrants brought to the US as children. Cruelty is the point with Trump and trumpkins. Imagine how illegal and cruel your actions have to be for this uber-conservative packed Court to rule against you in both. 2 Link to comment
TGHusker Posted June 18, 2020 Author Share Posted June 18, 2020 On 6/15/2020 at 6:45 PM, BigRedBuster said: That is a very good tweet. Conservatives and evangelicals should both want an independent judiciary. An activist court is blatantly anti traditional conservative values. A court that favors one group over another by reinforcing injustice is blatantly anti Christian (evangelical or not). 1 Link to comment
knapplc Posted June 18, 2020 Share Posted June 18, 2020 29 minutes ago, QMany said: With these two recent decisions, please remember Trump's Admin argued before SCOTUS: (1) we should be able to discriminate against LGBTQ, and (2) we should be able to deport hundreds of thousands of immigrants brought to the US as children. Cruelty is the point with Trump and trumpkins. Imagine how illegal and cruel your actions have to be for this uber-conservative packed Court to rule against you in both. This is astounding. I am astounded. Link to comment
RedDenver Posted June 18, 2020 Share Posted June 18, 2020 3 minutes ago, knapplc said: This is astounding. I am astounded. I'm not that surprised. Even conservative SC justices have usually upheld civil liberties and the Civil Rights Act. It's when corporations come along that they make those terrible rulings that screw the rest of us. Link to comment
QMany Posted June 18, 2020 Share Posted June 18, 2020 16 minutes ago, knapplc said: This is astounding. The result here is great, but I'll be the Debbie Downer cynic here. The majority opinion basically held: Trump may have said he wanted to do this exact illegal and discriminatory thing, but Plaintiff's cant say his cabinet officials were listening to Trump when they did the exact thing he told them to do. Much like the Muslim Ban opinion, it basically says, "you can do that, just don't do it that blatantly; give yourself some BS pretext." Also, neither decision this week dealt with the Constitution. Abortion, free exercise, Trump taxes, etc. still to come. But for today, this result is just: Link to comment
QMany Posted June 18, 2020 Share Posted June 18, 2020 2 minutes ago, RedDenver said: I don't know if I'm ready to go that far, it was Roberts' Court that just gutted the Voting Rights Act essentially claiming racism and discrimination is gone. 1 Link to comment
RedDenver Posted June 18, 2020 Share Posted June 18, 2020 1 minute ago, QMany said: I don't know if I'm ready to go that far, it was Roberts' Court that just gutted the Voting Rights Act essentially claiming racism and discrimination is gone. Good point. Link to comment
TGHusker Posted June 18, 2020 Author Share Posted June 18, 2020 1 hour ago, QMany said: Imagine how illegal and cruel your actions have to be for this uber-conservative packed Court to rule against you in both. That is one powerful and insightful statement. Link to comment
QMany Posted June 18, 2020 Share Posted June 18, 2020 3 hours ago, QMany said: The result here is great, but I'll be the Debbie Downer cynic here. The majority opinion basically held: Trump may have said he wanted to do this exact illegal and discriminatory thing, but Plaintiff's cant say his cabinet officials were listening to Trump when they did the exact thing he told them to do. Much like the Muslim Ban opinion, it basically says, "you can do that, just don't do it that blatantly; give yourself some BS pretext." As I was saying: Link to comment
QMany Posted June 19, 2020 Share Posted June 19, 2020 Quote The more than 300 Obama-nominated judges are considered to be the most diverse group in U.S. history in terms of terms of gender, ethnicity, and nationality. According to a White House spokesperson, 19 percent of the [Obama's] confirmed judges have been African American, compared to 16 percent under President Bill Clinton and seven percent under President George W. Bush. Obama has made 62 lifetime appointments of African Americans to serve on the federal bench: this includes nine African-American circuit court judges, and the appointment of 53 African American district court judges—26 of whom are African-American women. Indeed, Obama appointed more African-American women than any president in history. https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/president-obama-the-legacy/obama-s-legacy-judicial-appointments-numbers-n709306 And it would have been more if McConnell didn't block/delay Obama's last 1-2 years. Link to comment
Recommended Posts