In before, scotus version of fuck you no. Scotus rules that Congress can’t investigate scotus because of separation of powers, and Senate Democrats are all ‘whelp nothing we can do.’
I mean, it’s not even goin got be fuck you, no. It’s going to be, “Case about ignored /quashed subpoenas doesn’t even get to Supreme Court before Republicans take the Senate in ‘25 and withdraw the subpoenas.”
https://x.com/jaywillis/status/1730627267586650539
She was a real Kavanaugh of her time, providing the fifth vote to conservative decisions while being adored by the media as a “moderate” because she wrote mealy-mouthed opinions swearing she wasn’t totally on board with the full logical consequences of her actions. And as an architect of Bush v. Gore she handed the 2000 election to the man who appointed her replacement, Sam Alito, and ensured that any legacy of moderation she had would be erased and replaced with Fox News-level conservative dogma. Rest in piss.
8 Likes
“We shouldn’t have to pay taxes” aka Moore being heard today.
the idea of “realized” gains sort of makes sense in the general sense but in practice as it’s currently implemented it’s obviously bogus. e.g. the idea that gains that you are borrowing against are somehow “unrealized” doesn’t pass the giggle test.
1 Like
lol this is such disingenuous horseshit
Justice Neil Gorsuch found that argument troubling, saying the government’s argument opened the door to taxing “millions of Americans who hold small amounts of stock in their retirement investment accounts.”
1 Like
SCOTUS famously looking out for the little guy
this goes back to that post earlier itt pointing out that they use “fairness” as an excuse to rule for whatever whim they have at the moment without having to think of an actual legal justification
Yeah the student loan case was like entirely about what whiny conservative judges thought was “fair” to people like themselves despite the fact that “fairness” has nothing to do whatsoever with the legal arguments
Weird how they don’t care about fairness the rest of the time. Executing innocent people is totally fair guys!
This passage offers significant clues about who most likely leaked the draft opinion, and why:
The most glaring irregularity was the leak to Politico of Justice Alito’s draft. The identity and motive of the person who disclosed it remains unknown, but the effect of the breach is clear: It helped lock in the result, The Times found, undercutting Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Breyer’s quest to find a middle ground.
Literal bribery. Nothing matters.
It’s not bribery. It’s American style corruption.
So bribery is taking a bag of money and giving it to Senator Menendez to specifically do what you ask him to do on your behalf. American style corruption is finding someone who agrees with you about everything and sponsoring them financially so that they can attain political power. You aren’t paying them directly to do your specific bidding so it’s kosher.
Of course the net result is identical and the reason why our entire system has been in decline since ~1973. It’s the reason why the eDems are trash as well. The conventional wisdom is that to run a competitive campaign for a major office the people in wine caves are going to have to write checks to make it happen… which means you have to be palatable to a group of people who are quite literally the problem.
Clarence Thomas is a textbook example of everything wrong with the system as it currently exists.
2 Likes
“Pay me or I retire” is plainly beyond what you describe.
1 Like
Is it? The legal definition for bribery is comically narrow.
The 5-4 episode on McDonnell v US (unanimous decision!) is illuminating about the absurd standard this court set for bribery. So there’s the traditional definition (which this is) and the legal definition (lol Thomas will never face any consequences).
Yeah, I’m pretty sure a bribe has to be in writing and notarized for it to be illegal now.