Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

In SC dissent, Thomas cites Thomas in arguing to overturn decision authored by Thomas

Collapse

Google Ads

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

  • In SC dissent, Thomas cites Thomas in arguing to overturn decision authored by Thomas

    Even by Supreme Court standards, this development takes a minute to wrap your head around.

    In a dissent to the high court's decision Monday not to hear a tax case, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas managed to cite an opinion that he wrote while making the case for why the tribunal should overturn a precedent he authored.
    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/in-...ored-by-thomas

    I think I'd be good with giving Trump whoever he wanted on the bench if he got rid of this clown.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Spartan View Post

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/in-...ored-by-thomas

    I think I'd be good with giving Trump whoever he wanted on the bench if he got rid of this clown.
    Clarence Thomas is the most retarded person on the court - he used to basically +1 all Scalia's decisions

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Spartan View Post

      https://www.foxnews.com/politics/in-...ored-by-thomas

      I think I'd be good with giving Trump whoever he wanted on the bench if he got rid of this clown.
      https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/24/u...ni-thomas.html

      His wife is a political lobbyist using her husband's position on the bench for personal enrichment and political entanglement.

      But yeah guys, let's talk about Hunter Biden getting a stupid gig for an energy company that largely means nothing. We have a wife of a Supreme Court Justice working hand in hand with the administration to purge the government of political dissidents. FFS

      Comment


      • #4
        So y'all don't you feel better about the Supreme Court by with him on there knowing it looks more like America?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by TTURedRaider View Post
          So y'all don't you feel better about the Supreme Court by with him on there knowing it looks more like America?
          A corrupt sexual abuser with room temperature IQ throwing his weight around on the nation's highest court? No, looks just like America to me.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by DPR View Post

            A corrupt sexual abuser with room temperature IQ throwing his weight around on the nation's highest court? No, looks just like America to me.
            Plus he makes the pictures of the court look better unlike those awful pictures of the Republican staffers. Right?

            Comment


            • #7
              HAve said it repeatedly, but worst justice of the last 100 years and not particularly close.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by TTURedRaider View Post

                Plus he makes the pictures of the court look better unlike those awful pictures of the Republican staffers. Right?
                Why? He's one of six men. We should aim to have it to 5-4.

                Originally posted by General_Grantlocks View Post
                HAve said it repeatedly, but worst justice of the last 100 years and not particularly close.
                He's only 71 and he's been on the court since 1991. He has a real chance at hitting 40 years if he wants it, smashing the prior record of 36 years. So not only will is he one of the worst Justices of the last century, he'll be potentially the longest serving Justice ever.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by DPR View Post

                  Why? He's one of six men. We should aim to have it to 5-4.
                  Yeah but he's black. So representation.

                  He's only 71 and he's been on the court since 1991. He has a real chance at hitting 40 years if he wants it, smashing the prior record of 36 years. So not only will is he one of the worst Justices of the last century, he'll be potentially the longest serving Justice ever.
                  You can always hope for a heart attack. Honestly I'm not sure we shouldn't pick justices the way the UK does it.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by TTURedRaider View Post

                    Yeah but he's black. So representation.
                    I don't see color.

                    You can always hope for a heart attack. Honestly I'm not sure we shouldn't pick justices the way the UK does it.
                    How does the UK do it?

                    And I don't hope for people to die. Though I have no doubt if it is President Sanders and Majority Leader McConnell in 2021 and ole Clarence keels over that seat will be left open for 4 years.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Actually, to push on that further, there is zero percent chance, and I mean a zero percent chance, that McConnell will confirm a single judge for Sanders for 4-8 years as long as he's Majority Leader. Sanders will go down as the only president in history to serve for more than a year and not fill a single judicial vacancy.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by DPR View Post

                        I don't see color.
                        That isn't true.

                        How does the UK do it?
                        https://www.vox.com/2019/9/25/208818...lection-brexit

                        And I don't hope for people to die. Though I have no doubt if it is President Sanders and Majority Leader McConnell in 2021 and ole Clarence keels over that seat will be left open for 4 years.
                        Besides wanting to beat Dubya to death of course.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by TTURedRaider View Post

                          That isn't true.




                          Not sure if such a system would work in the US. I still think rotating terms of 18 years opening every 2 is the best. Senate must vote to reject, not confirm, and must do so with at least 60 votes. This would avoid a political party with a slight majority stonewalling the opposition.

                          Besides wanting to beat Dubya to death of course.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X