Its not obvious that it has to involve gatherings of people. Mass has been delivered via TV for decades for older people that can’t easily make it to church.
1 Like
Another side effect of this is that the media will begin to portray Kennedy as more liberal than he actually is. Decisions like this will give him cover to side with the liberals when a conservative outcome is already locked up.
I think you mean Roberts.
(Though Kennedy will probably also be retconned into being a moderate.)
2 Likes
Yeah, whoops, Roberts
Already done.
1 Like
WOAT 1-term impeached president who lost the popular vote by a wide margin gets 3 30-year evil religious SCOTUS dipshits. Just incredible.
1 Like
Yep, the rest of my life hearing from these clowns
Not to mention all the lower court appointments. The entire judicial branch is fucked for a VERY long time.
1 Like
And he doesn’t even care.
He cares to the extent he can troll Obama, Biden and libs with it in perpetuity.
He doesn’t give a shit about what they’ll rule on unless they bail him out on his taxes or something.
1 Like
And yeah as others have said the problem is not and never was that Trump is going to be installed as dictator-for-life by the Supreme Court. It’s just going to be decades of ruling that it’s unconstitutional to make conservatives sad.
These people just absolutely must be the victims, always. Literally all they do it complain. When you start looking for it, it is so obvious and tilting.
5 Likes
I dont know about Australia, but in Canada we’ve had basically the opposite rulings because our judges aren’t partisan hacks.
1 Like
Catholics are like a majority on the court, they got away with running a fucking global pedophilia ring for generations without consequence, they are exempt from taxes, and they run around complaining. Fuck you.
12 Likes
Cant remember the last time I hugged someone in the Hardware store or when the bike salesman put bread in my mouth. The court knows what they are doing here. They are fanning the flames of pseudo Republican libertarian principles.
Funny how the same court will empower government to force women to have children against their will. Or get permission slips from their husbands to terminate a pregnancy. Or restrict birth control, the most effective mechanism to prevent abortions, from subgroups of women.
When and how this court will decide to empower people or governments will always come down to ideology.
7 Likes
I often sing a few feet behind the same person in a hardware store for an hour and a half.
3 Likes
In a speech to the conservative Federalist Society earlier this month, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. amplified his objections, saying the pandemic “has resulted in previously unimaginable restrictions on individual liberty.”
He continued: “This is especially evident with respect to religious liberty. It pains me to say this, but in certain quarters, religious liberty is fast becoming a disfavored right.”
JFC
This is actually the perfect demo of what lol lawbros is. Like when I and others were saying pre election “the courts won’t save Trump unless it’s close” and some people were like “lol lawbros”, that’s not the deal. lol lawbros is not understanding that the law, at least at the higher levels of policy-making, is a game that people play to get what they want. The point is not that the game is Calvinball and so the law will never save us from anything, there are actually rules. The point is that broadly within those rules, people will cheat, angle-shoot and (for want of a better phrase) rules-lawyer to get what they want. It’s related to lol Democrats in that it’s this raised-by-wolves idiot assumption that your opponents are doing what they do in service of lofty principles or for the good of the country or whatever. That the law is some objective shining edifice of logic and not a game.
Like even the “realization” in the tweet itself is lol lawbro because the word isn’t “over-estimated” you rube, it’s “misunderstood”. You thought Gorsuch was going to be a principled jurist with deep respect for sound legal argument and instead he’s a guy willing to use the law as a tool to do what he thinks is right in any given situation. I can’t remember which poster it was who said his con-law professor asked the class why Scalia would rule one way in one case and apparently a contradictory way in another case and the poster said “because he’s a political hack devoid of principle” and the professor was like “hohoho, of course not”. Distilled essence of lol lawbro right there.
2 Likes