Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Supreme Court

Collapse
X
Collapse
First Prev Next Last
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by sandiego17 View Post
    Nah, Lindsey Graham, might be a better call for Weekend at Ruths replacement. Same gender. No?
    I don't like Lindsey Graham's warmongering, but that dude has the biggest balls in the Senate.

    This should be his theme song ...

    You can be mean when you're looking that clean. He's a classic man. ... Elegant old-fashioned man.

    Comment


    • #62
      Everything always has 'ft. blah blah blah'. Like Weekend at Ruths ft. a huge staff to do all the work. Shes so hip.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by sandiego17 View Post
        Everything always has 'ft. blah blah blah'. Like Weekend at Ruths ft. a huge staff to do all the work.
        Shes so hip.
        I hope she doesn't break one.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Lightningwill_420 View Post
          Good example of a qualified asshole.
          good thing SC nominees aren't competing in your personality contest to get nominated.
          Chagras Got no barg!!!!!!!

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by SDfan View Post
            good thing SC nominees aren't competing in your personality contest to get nominated.
            Key word, 'your'. Sotomayor is a racist, but somehow passes 420's asshole test.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by sandiego17 View Post
              Key word, 'your'. Sotomayor is a racist, but somehow passes 420's asshole test.
              yep. and Keegan is an unqualified (never served as a judge IIRC) incompetent progressive ideologue guaranteed vote for any liberal cause that only got nominated for loyalty to Obama and expectation of a rubber stamp to carry out his agenda. Meanwhile RBG flies around the world badmouthing America and encouraging other countries not to use our Constitution as a benchmark for governing their countries and ignoring SC protocol by publically criticizing a President over policy differences. There should be a senility test to force retirement for idiots like her.
              Chagras Got no barg!!!!!!!

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by SDfan View Post
                yep. and Keegan is an unqualified (never served as a judge IIRC) incompetent progressive ideologue guaranteed vote for any liberal cause that only got nominated for loyalty to Obama and expectation of a rubber stamp to carry out his agenda. Meanwhile RBG flies around the world badmouthing America and encouraging other countries not to use our Constitution as a benchmark for governing their countries and ignoring SC protocol by publically criticizing a President over policy differences. There should be a senility test to force retirement for idiots like her.
                Weekend at Ruths has always despised the Constitution, her look to South America or Europe advice was pitiful, but expected. Her senility did help, she didn't resign a couple years ago and now is on the clock...

                Comment


                • #68
                  Your guys' arguments are ridiculous. There is nobody on the court who despises the Constitution, is senile, is racist, or is dumb. Sorry. Not buying it.

                  I don't like the decisions the Republican judges make, but I don't think any of them is dumb, senile, or racist. And Ruth Bader-Ginsburg? Wait until you find out that the right-wing hero, Justice Scalia, was her best friend. He was the smartest judge on his side of the aisle, and she is right up there with him.

                  The Constitutional claptrap about how saintly the right wingers are is garbage. The only part of the Constitution I would say the right wing is more on point with is the Second Amendment. The left wing is more apt to support the Fourth Amendment. And, other than maybe the Pauls, I hardly ever see any politician standing up for the body of the Constitution. Hell, the people who wrote the Constitution didn't agree on much of anything either. It's not like debates over its meaning started in the last decade. It started day 1.
                  Last edited by Lightningwill_420; 04-12-2017, 04:21 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Nope, not garbage. No conservative would recommend looking at South Africa as a basis for a constitution rather than America or talk about how foreign law influences their warped decision making. Thank God she's 84 and decided not to retire 2 years ago. Good decision.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Free speech case:

                      http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-w...demark-dispute ...

                      Members of the Asian-American rock band The Slants have the right to call themselves by a disparaging name, the Supreme Court says, in a ruling that could have broad impact on how the First Amendment is applied in other trademark cases.

                      ...

                      The judgment was unanimous with two asterisks: Justice Neil Gorsuch, who wasn't yet on the court when the case was argued in January, did not take part. And with different parts of the case drawing differing legal explanations, four opinions were written.
                      ---

                      This case will probably close the issue with the trademark office denying the Washington Redskins with registration.

                      Comment


                      • captaind
                        captaind commented
                        Editing a comment
                        The media should go interview the prior resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and get his reaction to this unanimous public humiliation.

                    • #71
                      http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/3d28...7c7e91082f813e

                      The Supreme Court is taking on a new clash between gay rights and religion in a case about a wedding cake for a same-sex couple in Colorado.

                      The justices said Monday they will consider whether a baker who objects to same-sex marriage on religious grounds can refuse to make a wedding cake for a gay couple.

                      --

                      Also, there is a lot of talk about Kennedy retiring at the end of this session. His announcement may be as early as today... or not.

                      Comment


                      • SDfan
                        SDfan commented
                        Editing a comment
                        everywhere I go to eat or most retail outlets there is usually a sign that says "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone". I wonder why the Gay mafia is able to create a special exemption to a private business owners' right to refuse service- which is clearly posted in advance of them strolling in and ordering a wedding cake?

                    • #72
                      Just announced... SCOTUS overturns a Missouri law preventing funding a church schools' playground... 7-2

                      Comment


                      • #73
                        Travel Ban will be heard in the Fall term, but there will be lifting of most parts of the injunctions against the ban. Looks like Trump is winning here.

                        Only persons that aren't banned are those people that have 'close familiar relationships' with someone or an "entity" in the US. Essentially, someone that has already have family or has a real job with company or university can enter the US, but that essentially that takes any plaintiffs from the Hawaii filing...making that case moot.
                        Last edited by Bolt-O; 06-26-2017, 06:42 AM.

                        Comment


                        • captaind
                          captaind commented
                          Editing a comment
                          Shouldn't even be in court. Executive branch has clear authority to set the parameters. Lesser gods in the Judiciary trying to provoke Olympus to usurp power illegally from another branch. Should be a mandatory public bitch-slapping of the lesser gods.

                      • #74
                        The gods of Olympus speak.

                        (Some gods are more senile than others)
                        Weve got a good team. You see how we played for three quarters. --Mike McCoy

                        Comment


                        • Bolt-O
                          Bolt-O commented
                          Editing a comment
                          Yeah... for the travel ban case, there were no objections to the framework of the case, but not necessarily to the merits of the case. 9-0. There is a lot more senility in the 9th and 4th circuits though.

                      • #75
                        Ha... remember the ban was to be only for 90 days... which will expire before the case is heard, so the court may say the case is moot, and they could just not rule on it.

                        Comment


                        • #76
                          I haven't been paying attention. What is the court up to? When is weed getting legalized?

                          Comment


                          • #77
                            Originally posted by thelightningwill View Post
                            I haven't been paying attention. What is the court up to? When is weed getting legalized?
                            Should be any minute now.

                            Wait, what were you saying? Pass the Cheez-Its.
                            Weve got a good team. You see how we played for three quarters. --Mike McCoy

                            Comment


                            • #78
                              Originally posted by captaind View Post

                              Should be any minute now.

                              Wait, what were you saying? Pass the Cheez-Its.
                              I have left junk food behind and have been eating vegetables for a year. Soon I should be ready to turn Vegan. Once I get back into yoga, you all will never hear the end of it.

                              Wait. What was I saying?

                              Comment


                              • #79
                                Pretty big deal... but not sure if I want to post it in the main forum...

                                Comment


                                • #80
                                  Originally posted by Bolt-O View Post
                                  Pretty big deal... but not sure if I want to post it in the main forum...

                                  Nice ruling. Freedom wins.

                                  Comment


                                  • Bolt-O
                                    Bolt-O commented
                                    Editing a comment
                                    Well, maybe. The ruling wasn't about gambling, but the restrictions that the federal law would have put on states. The federal government could in theory restrict individuals from gambling (like the blanket ban on weed) if no law exists in a state, but they can't restrict the states from on how they could enact the law. Of course, the state governments want their cut of the pie, and that could make it too expensive for companies to do it on their own. Pennsylvanians are seeing that with their setup which includes a 'integrity tax' which goes to the sports leagues. Some states had legal sports gambling, but aren't really worth it (Delaware has a parlay card, for example).

                                    I'd rather let the free market figure this out, but I fear that government will screw things up, at least initially. Got to see how Jersey does this, it's probably going to be ready before football season.
                                Working...
                                X