The Supremes

[S.A. Boggs]

The current term ends in a few weeks, wonder what is decided? Most curious as to the census question that the administration wants to add. If it goes for the administration there will be loud wailing and gnashing of teeth and rendering of cloaks!
Sam

[bruce]

The dems will need a dentist. Gnashing of their teeth will lead to broken teeth, crowns, etc. JMHO. Sincerely. bruce.

[Major Tom]

I have no love for the United States Supreme Court since they took away our union won medical benefits for retirees.

[togor]

No doubt this court is at least 5-4 for business against working people. How did George Bailey put it to Mr. Potter (not Harry) back in the day, when talking about the Bailey Brothers Building and Loan?

[Dan Shapiro]

Is it just me, or do the Supremes, led by Roberts appear to go out of their way to AVOID deciding cases?

[Allen]

Just like obama--the less he did the better because he didn't do anything much that was legal or for the good of the country. Same can be said about the supremes--the less they decide on the better. Instead of going by our existing laws and their experiences of being a former judge they just seem to "guess" or decide using their opinions. A group of 8 year olds can do that too and perhaps better. The ones who are referred to as "swing judges" are no doubt paid by the special interest groups.

[blackhawknj]

John Connally said it best:
"Why should we let the Supreme Court decide everything? "

[togor]

Just like obama--the less he did the better because he didn't do anything much that was legal or for the good of the country. Same can be said about the supremes--the less they decide on the better. Instead of going by our existing laws and their experiences of being a former judge they just seem to "guess" or decide using their opinions. A group of 8 year olds can do that too and perhaps better. The ones who are referred to as "swing judges" are no doubt paid by the special interest groups.

I agree with Allen on the general sentiment here. The judges decide how they want to rule, and send their clerks on a hunt to find reasons to support it. For Federalism, except when they are not, and vice versa.

[free1954]

they weren't worth a damn after Diana ross left in the early seventies.

[S.A. Boggs]

I agree with Allen on the general sentiment here. The judges decide how they want to rule, and send their clerks on a hunt to find reasons to support it. For Federalism, except when they are not, and vice versa.

How so?
Sam

[togor]

How so?
Sam

Need an example? Bush v. Gore, famously.

Clarence Thomas is a little different though. He actually shows respect for state courts in ways that the others don't.

[Allen]

Is it just me, or do the Supremes, led by Roberts appear to go out of their way to AVOID deciding cases?

Here's the latest example.

They're avoiding a ruling on the baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a couple of fags. They are kicking the ruling back down to the lower courts. Well duh, the issue already occurred in the lower courts (who sided with the baker). That's how it made it to the supreme court in the first place.

It looks like they are trying to stay democrat PC and the baker obviously doesn't have enough money to pay them off.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-tosses-ruling-against-172825736.html

[Vern Humphrey]

If you can sue a baker for not making a cake for a homosexual wedding, why can't we sue Sears for not selling guns anymore?

[togor]

If you can sue a baker for not making a cake for a homosexual wedding, why can't we sue Sears for not selling guns anymore?

Sears? Well if they only sold washing machines to white housewives for example and not to blacks or asians, or Hindus then they could expect a lawsuit.

[lyman]

If you can sue a baker for not making a cake for a homosexual wedding, why can't we sue Sears for not selling guns anymore?

I would rather have the original vs a JC Higgins or Ted Williams version,,,,