Supreme Court shoots itself in the foot.

[beautress]

The Supreme Court denied an injunction. They could have placed an injuntion on the law until it came before them for review. They chose not to.

That's what has pro-abortionists' bowels in an uproar.

I have little doubt the Supremes will ultimately strike the Texas law down.

When is that going to happen, Mr. Nostradumass.

 

[g5000]

When is that going to happen, Mr. Notradumass.

Just as soon as the abortionists find someone who has standing.

 

[OKTexas]

What the Senate did with Garland's appointment was typical historically, presidential appointments with a hostile senate iin election years have always been difficult UNLESS the appointment was one that could truly be seen as having bipartisan support. Garland didn't. Obama could have made more appointments until he found a justice that was acceptable on a bipartisan level, but he didn't.

And Garland is proving the wisdom of the senate every day.

.

 

[beautress]

Just as soon as the abortionists find someone who has standing.

That would be President Donald Trump, and he wouldn't stand with people who collectively murdered 70 million and counting little unborn American citizens in the USA and counting. In fact if you think people who murder babies have standing or who would bolster or brainwash even one young mother to kill the little human being in her belly, your priorities are so low a microbial snake couldn't slither under it.

 

[Slade3200]

The non-decision. They refused to act on a law that any idiot who can see lightning and hear thunder knows is unconstitutional.

I haven’t read the law yet so forgive my ignorance. What about it is unconstitutional ?

 

[Slade3200]

Do you think the commies wouldn't have done the same if the rolls were reversed? What was maobamas favorite sayings, elections have consequences? Of course that saying only goes for the commies when elections go their way, otherwise it's time to change the rules.

.

I really couldn’t care less what the commies would or wouldn’t do. I like to just try and do the right thing whenever im in a position to make a decision. What choice somebody else would make doesn’t really play a factor. Sounds like it does for you…. Why is that?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

commies

lol

 

[Orangecat]

The republicans already packed the courts.
Adding to the court isn't packing it.
Packing it is filling it with only republicans or only democrats.

Educate yourself, Dana:
Definition of COURT-PACKING

Definition of court-packing​

: the act or practice of packing (see PACK entry 3 sense 1) a court and especially the United States Supreme Court by increasing the number of judges or justices in an attempt to change the ideological makeup of the court"Court-packing adds new seats to a court in order to alter its partisan balance. …"— Darrell West​

What is court packing? Packing the courts is the idea of adding justices to the Supreme Court or lower courts to shift the balance in a liberal, conservative or other direction. And it wouldn't require changing the constitution, either.— Jared Gilmour

 

[Colin norris]

The supreme court has just handed out a ton of free ammunition, both for expansion of the court and limiting of it's "shadow docket".

Personally I was firmly against expanding the court. I see that leading to a never ending battle and a court with dozens of possibly even hundreds of justices that can't decide on anything. However this latest shenanigan has pushed me in the other direction. I'm still against it, but I see no alternative to it unless we want to let the current appointees, some of them blatantly illegal BTW, ignore and or circumvent the constitution and pervert our great nation into something it was never meant to be.

Supreme Court Shoot Themselves in Foot as Democrats Prepare for Battle to Expand Court

What you really mean is you're against Biden getting the court back to an equaliberum after trump stacked it with republicans.
You said nothing when that was happening yet you bellow about being fair.

 

[lantern2814]

The issue is that we have a Supreme Court that clearly does not reflect the will of the people; a Court whose composition is the result of a non-democratic process – a president elected by the states, not the people, making Supreme Court appointments; a Senate elected by the states, not the people, that confirms those appointments.

The people have the right through the legislative process to address the issue of a Supreme Court that does not reflect the will of the people.

Garbage. The SCOTUS is not supposed to reflect the “Will of the people”. Translation: they’re supposed to do what DEMS want or else. The job of SCOTUS is to determine constitutionality of laws. Not bend to the will of a few crybabies.

 

[lantern2814]

The republicans already packed the courts.

Adding to the court isn't packing it.

Packing it is filling it with only republicans or only democrats.

Right now it's packed with republicans. And the republicans violated their duty according to the constitution to get it packed as badly as it is.

there are 6 republicans and 3 democrats on the Supreme Court.

If adding to the court is packing it then all the presidents who added seats to the Supreme Court packed the court and the court we now have is a packed court.

In fact, adding seats to the court will unpack the court that the republicans packed.

Please, stop with the drama and exaggerations.

You truly are stupid. Filling vacancies is not packing the court. Yes YOU should stop with the drama and outright lying.

 

[lantern2814]

lol

True rightwing ignorance and idiocy – the Court is supposed to be not partisan at all.

Yet YOU claimed the court should do what YOU idiots want. You can’t even keep your shit straight. The court rules on constitutionality of laws. Not your feels.

 

[lantern2814]

Perversion. It's what conservatives do.

No, it’s you people who want men in the girls bathroom and locker room. Pervert.

 

[Lastamender]

The supreme court has just handed out a ton of free ammunition, both for expansion of the court and limiting of it's "shadow docket".

Personally I was firmly against expanding the court. I see that leading to a never ending battle and a court with dozens of possibly even hundreds of justices that can't decide on anything. However this latest shenanigan has pushed me in the other direction. I'm still against it, but I see no alternative to it unless we want to let the current appointees, some of them blatantly illegal BTW, ignore and or circumvent the constitution and pervert our great nation into something it was never meant to be.

Supreme Court Shoot Themselves in Foot as Democrats Prepare for Battle to Expand Court

The Supreme Court lost all credibility not hearing cases involving the massive fraud. You are a little late.

 

[busybee01]

That's a damn good communist idea you have there, well thought out.

Don't like the outcome? Change the dynamics so that you can override what you don't agree with. Stalin would be proud, comrade

Using more words that you have no clue what they mean. It is better thought out than recent Supreme Court decisions.

The Congress has the power to do this so it has nothing to do with Stalin. The Republicans did this when they refused to take up Obama's nomination to the Supreme Court. The court is hopelessly corrupt. It clearly responds to whether the president has a R or a D in front of their name. You are the Communist trying to seize power in this country.

 

[justinacolmena]

The Court has also handed the Dems a victory in 2022 and 2024

Dems will run on “Republicans are going to end Roe v Wade”
While they have always threatened it, now it is a reality.

Dems will get out the vote

The baby killers, abortion mills, and slaughterhouses for hospitals don't impress us.

 

[busybee01]

Would you have "griped" if the democrats did what McConnell did if the rolls were reversed?
Because they would have done the exact same thing, make no mistake about that.

The Democrats did not do it. They could have filibustered Thomas' nomination to the Supreme Court but they agreed to a vote.

 

[Unkotare]

The supreme court has just handed out a ton of free ammunition, both for expansion of the court and limiting of it's "shadow docket".

Personally I was firmly against expanding the court. I see that leading to a never ending battle and a court with dozens of possibly even hundreds of justices that can't decide on anything. However this latest shenanigan has pushed me in the other direction. I'm still against it, but I see no alternative to it unless we want to let the current appointees, some of them blatantly illegal BTW, ignore and or circumvent the constitution and pervert our great nation into something it was never meant to be.

Supreme Court Shoot Themselves in Foot as Democrats Prepare for Battle to Expand Court

fdr is dead. Let it go.

 

[Lastamender]

The Democrats did not do it. They could have filibustered Thomas' nomination to the Supreme Court but they agreed to a vote.

What McConnell did was enforce the the Biden rule.

 

[whitehall]

This isn't "current events, it's a a cheap effort sponsored by Newsweek's "Derrogh Roche" for democrats to expand the Supreme Court.