So let's see who at the Court refuses to take a polygraph exam

Yup. I will just say again.

The Dem Plantation owners could not be happier with this Supreme Court flap.

All they care about is the election. Just like Ukraine. It's another campaign issue for them that is not related to their own flub-ups. Or so they think.
 
Last edited:
The dumb ones are usually to blame for leaks.

They tend to get emotional and all wacked out of their minds leading to more dumb ideas thinking they can stop the inevitable.


dumb.jpg


sot.jpg
 
UsualName said:
Ok. I will admit that if one of the justices leaked the draft it would be absolutely astonishing. I did not even consider that because it is so inconceivable. That would nearly break the court. Even a clerk if determined as being a cats paw for a justice would be extremely divisive.
More...



It could be that there was negligence by the system or a justice that greatly contributed to leak even though that person was not the perpetrator.

Example: A justice leaves documents that are usually protected out on his desk overnight and the cleaning lady scores a photocopy or the like.

That is one of the reasons why Roberts needs to - and has- taken steps to request and investigation - but he needs to stay out of it too in some ways because he is within the scope of the investigation.
 
Politicians wholly dedicated to locking people up and forcing vaccines and censoring anyone who disagreed are now railing against the idea that government could interfere in personal decisions that affect our lives.
 
Tsing Tao said:
Politicians wholly dedicated to locking people up and forcing vaccines and censoring anyone who disagreed are now railing against the idea that government could interfere in personal decisions that affect our lives.
More...

You’re showing true lack of depth on the issue of privacy. This is an issue that is marrow deep in the constitution. Your silly arguments about vaccines are nowhere near the level of what is implied from overturning Roe and Casey.
 
UsualName said:
You’re showing true lack of depth on the issue of privacy. This is an issue that is marrow deep in the constitution. Your silly arguments about vaccines are nowhere near the level of what is implied from overturning Roe and Casey.
More...

Yeah, I don't care that you don't agree.
 
TreeFrogTrader said:
Not exactly sure how to unpack that statement.

The court is bound overwhelmingly bound by precedent- per stare decisis- but- acknowledging that the instances should be few- the court can nevertheless flat out decide that a previous case was wrongly decided- which appears to be what Alito is saying from the limited excerpts I have seen.


In other words, something can be "settled law" but nevertheless be wrongly settled so needs to be overturned. This of course has been the dance that court nominees have had to make. The left got them to state that they considered Roe to be settled law but they would not state that there were never instances where settled law can and should be changed. Plessy and so on. And round and round we go, and here we are, apparently.

Roberts no doubt will need to marshmallow and weasel around more. It's what he does.
More...


My point is the decision has a detailed carve out as to why abortion and the associated right to privacy is not part of the Constitution and therefore being bumped back to the States. If they are not careful they set a bad precedent where many other rights can be bounced out of the constitution to the states if the test/criteria are not robust enough or the judges went decision first/justification second.
 
Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia made her most outlandish claim yet, this time suggesting that women choose to get abortions because Satan himself "whispers" that men will marry them if they do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top