U.S. Supreme Court & judicial system

Aussie Willy

Hates both vegemite and peanut butter
Messages
26,140
Meh. We don't have to liberate ourselves from the past. We have to learn from it. Learn from it's successes and its flaws, and continue to move forward in positive ways from it. We've known this & have been doing this ever since the Constitution was written, particularly notably since the Civil Rights Act. We don't have to cast the past as something to be severed or as something to be venerated. It is the past. It is what helped us progress & led us here. For example, it would be extremely wise of the Supreme Court to take heed of the flaws within the States' Rights movement of the past & where that movement led the country. There are many many different time periods & different forms of legislation that can enlighten us on our steps forward. We cannot limit our ability to learn to one particular point in time.
No the Supreme Court don't care and will now do whatever the Republicans want and heaven help those who are going to be impacted by their decision.

Interestingly I had a friend who suggested to me that the US should just split itself into two (aligned with Red and Blue states). He wasn't aware that the Blue states financially support the Red states. So that really ain't an option.
 

Trillian

Well-Known Member
Messages
694
Interestingly I had a friend who suggested to me that the US should just split itself into two (aligned with Red and Blue states). He wasn't aware that the Blue states financially support the Red states. So that really ain't an option.

Plus the fact that no state is a political monolith, people move from state to state a lot, and many people who live in blue states aren’t willing to say, “Peace out, sorry about your human rights!” to friends and family in red states.

Anyway, I live in one of the most closely contested states in the country, in the exact area of the state that the NY Times visited in 2020 for a nice human interest article about how the fate of the world might rest in the hands of myself and my neighbors, so I’m just picturing someone going door to door down my street with a piece of chalk trying to figure out where they’re supposed to draw the border.
 

Amy L

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,010
Plus the fact that no state is a political monolith, people move from state to state a lot, and many people who live in blue states aren’t willing to say, “Peace out, sorry about your human rights!” to friends and family in red states.
I feel like this is already happening. I live in a red as hell town in Texas, but it's also located very close to purple/blue (violet?) cities of Galveston and Houston. What the hell are we supposed to do? I hear from blue-state types who are basically telling us, "just move and leave the hellscape" but like, there's millions of us. California has its own housing crisis as-is, how would ten million urban Texans help that situation? My husband actually just proposed we move to Missouri :lol: since he has friends relocating there soon and there may be better job opportunities for him, but um. yeah. My prospects aren't great and I'd rather not live with Confederacy 2: Electric Boogaloo Boys. I'd rather we try as hard as we can to make things better for all Americans and not dismiss half the country because 10% would like us to live in an Evangelical apartheid dystopia.
 

Dobre

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,289
I feel like this is already happening.
I don't think it is. Biden met with a bunch of Democratic governors--I think maybe 9--to strategize protecting the right to choose. The governors of the three West Coast states all said they want to help women from other states who need health care access. (In my state, this means setting up a clinic in a small city on the Idaho border. Not easy, politically, as that's the Republican heavy portion of Oregon. Currently I don't think there are any abortion clinics on that half of the state. The closest would be in the Tri-Cities, WA). I'm sure other states are making similar attempts.

Anyway, Amy, I'm with the poster earlier who said that she intended to stay & fight. Texas was only pale red in the last election. You've probably more power to change things where you are than you would anywhere else.

Here there's a political push to try to make rural Oregon part of Idaho. (They're collecting signatures & having counties vote on it. I'm pretty sure the measures are just saying that counties want to look at the practicalities of doing so, but meanwhile, propagandists are using those measures to claim that everyone in those counties wants to be part of Idaho). And, I'm sorry, but no. We do not need to waste our tax dollars on this garbage. People should be discussing how impractical it is before putting these measures on the ballot, much less passing them. Has there been any discussion about what this would do to the minimum wage, the road department budget, salaries for policemen, teachers, the jobs of people who work at state prisons, etc? How about the likely legal brick wall? No discussion that I've heard. A. We don't need to be a test case. And B. if this actually happened, I know it would completely tank at least my salary. People here really need to look at the practical side of things, instead of letting propagandists use us to make their political statements.
 
Last edited:

Dobre

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,289
SCOTUS Justices ‘Prayed With’ Her — Then Cited Her Bosses to End Roe

"At an evangelical victory party in front of the Supreme Court to celebrate the downfall of Roe v. Wade last week, a prominent Capitol Hill religious leader was caught on a hot mic making a bombshell claim: that she prays with sitting justices inside the high court. 'We’re the only people who do that,' Peggy Nienaber said.

This disclosure was a serious matter on its own terms, but it also suggested a major conflict of interest. Nienaber’s ministry’s umbrella organization, Liberty Counsel, frequently brings lawsuits before the Supreme Court. In fact, the conservative majority in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, which ended nearly 50 years of federal abortion rights, cited an amicus brief authored by Liberty Counsel in its ruling."
 

PRlady

Well-Known Member
Messages
41,424
Liberty, along with Alliance Defending Freedom which Barrett was associated with, are the two most powerful organizations litigating for Christian nationalists. They were counsel to the praying coach. I’m not surprised at all that they’re praying with their Justices, they already own them.
 

Dobre

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,289

once_upon

Enough
Messages
24,071
I cannot listen to this court's case selection with any confidence that they will consider the case seriously. It is my belief the decisions have already been made and all that's left is to write the decisions and take away any rights women and minorities have.
 

DORISPULASKI

Watching submarine races
Messages
13,275
The Onion filed an amicus brief with SCOTUS in the case of an Ohio man, Anthony Novak, who was arrested in 2016 for creating a Facebook page parodying the Parma, Ohio, police department’s page. The cops threw him in jail for it. He was eventually acquitted by a jury, but sued the cops. The lower courts threw the case out, not because the cops did not violate his rights, but because of the bogus doctrine of qualified immunity for cops.

Here is the brief. It's a pip.

 

VGThuy

Well-Known Member
Messages
39,533
Conservative stalwart J. Michael Luttig is joining a coalition of veteran lawyers and nonpartisan judicial watchdog groups to oppose a far-right legal theory that state legislatures had the constitutional right to reject election results certified by state officials. He knows that this is the most threatening thing to American democracy. Luttig isn’t just a conservative judge but THE conservative judge who might be known as the most conservative judge in the country.

 

VGThuy

Well-Known Member
Messages
39,533
In case anyone is interested, here is the amicus brief submitted by the Asian-American Legal Defense and Education Fund in support of Harvard’s race-conscious admission policies. It’s thoroughly researched and has arguments dispelling myths that it hurts Asian-American students with legal precedent backing. It was written with or with support of 121 Asian-American or related organizations and individuals from around the country listed in the appendix.


We’re still not sure who all the petitioners are, but we do know SFFA's founder.

SFFA is not interested in the experience of Asian American students or in advocating for Asian American rights. SFFA’s founder, Edward Blum, is a white anti–affirmative action strategist who has orchestrated dozens of lawsuits opposing laws and programs that increase the presence or prominence of racial minorities.2 He has spent years crusading against affirmative action on behalf of white students, without success. See, e.g., Fisher v. Univ. of Tex., 579 U.S. 365 (2016) (Fisher II). Now, SFFA has switched tactics, using Asian American students as pawns in its political chess game and litigating under the guise of fighting for Asian Americans. But the absence of Asian American student testimony from SFFA’s submission is glaring. SFFA has not identified a single instance in which Harvard or UNC denied a student admission because of their Asian American identity. And SFFA’s “race-neutral alternatives” are specifically engineered to benefit white students; they muzzle, rather than help, Asian American applicants. SFFA does not elevate Asian American voices; it seeks to silence them.
 
Last edited:

Allskate

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,866
This article is primarily about Alito leaking the Hobby Lobby holding and access by right wingers to certain Justices, but it does make me wonder if Alito was involved with the leak of the Dobbs draft opinion. It's clear from the article that I'm not the only one thinking that way:

 

Amy L

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,010
This article is primarily about Alito leaking the Hobby Lobby holding and access by right wingers to certain Justices, but it does make me wonder if Alito was involved with the leak of the Dobbs draft opinion. It's clear from the article that I'm not the only one thinking that way:
I did notice that FOX News, Ted Cruz, et al stopped demanding which "probably liberal" clerk leaked the Dobbs decision a long time ago. I think they all found something out and stopped trying to put so much attention on the subject.
 

Dobre

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,289
"Gov. Gretchen Whitmer has chosen Kyra Harris Bolden to fill a seat on the Michigan Supreme Court, making her the first Black woman to serve on the state's high court."

Michigan Supreme Court pick celebrates journey 'from injustice to a capital J Justice'​


"Bolden, a 34-year-old, second-term state Representative and new first-time mother, will be the youngest Michigan Supreme Court justice, in addition to being the first Black woman on the court."


"Bolden spoke of her great-grandfather on Tuesday, who was lynched at the age of 20 in 1939, with his death ruled as an accidental drowning.

“This is the reason why I set myself on the path to public service. My commitment to the pursuit of justice is inherent in me and my family because we know injustice,” Bolden said. “In just a few generations, our family has gone from lynching to law school, from injustice to a capital J Justice.”

Bolden earned both of her degrees in Michigan, receiving her bachelor's degree from Grand Valley State University and her Juris Doctorate from University of Detroit Mercy School of Law. She went on to become a civil litigation attorney, and as a state Rep. representing Southfield, Bolden has advocated for criminal justice reform and sexual violence survivor protections."
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information