They’ll blame the Dems for threatening to pack the courts. “They left us no choice”.
2 Likes
for new thread title
3 Likes
Impressive. 6 MAGA words to rile up the rubes in one sentence.
A judge calling it “the Democrat Party” says a lot right there.
2 Likes
That’s what they call it on his Facebook.
1 Like
“I think Supreme Court appointments should be a bipartisan effort.” J. Manchin
1 Like
For fuck’s sake
Liberals on the court have a brain disease. As 5-4 points out all the time they NEVER call out the CLEAR bad faith in dissents, they will dunk on the rulings calling the illogical because they are, sometimes they will point out the hypocrisy on earlier rulings, but they will never, ever point out that the conservatives are doing it in bad faith to advance their ideological goals. They 100% treat them like they are just viewing the law in a legitimate way and just coming to these dumb illogical hypocritical decisions in good faith. while anytime there is a liberal victory Republicans will dissent calling it judicial activism, legislating from the bench, and just shit all over the liberals.
They lived their whole lives thinking shit was one way, and have been unable to evolve with the times despite it being insanely obvious to even barely paying attention.
4 Likes
I don’t think this is true always. Sotamayor seems to be sounding the alarm in her dissents and directly calling out the conservative justices hypocrisy. You are correct that publicly she still talks about how they are all buddies and non-partisan. It’s like she is handcuffed by the standard SCOTOS talking points in public but screaming at the top of her lungs in formal dissents.
Basically, Breyer timing his resignation to coincide with when Democrats have a majority is the action of a partisan hack and the problem is Breyer’s unwillingness to appear as a partisan hack.
I haven’t read her recent dissents so I’m not sure how far she is going, but like I said they have called out hypocrisy before. The issue is they never call out the bad faith pure political and ideological drive of the conservatives. Which the conservatives do EVERY TIME a liberal win happens.
Calling out hypocrisy is one thing, saying the conservatives on the court are being hypocritical because they are pushing a political goal is another. It’s what the right did, and its a part of why they are dominating us. It’s why conservatives vote only for supreme court seats while the left doesn’t even pay attention. The right put it into everyones mind that the courts are a political battlefield, while the left still pretends in apolitical and while sometimes they’re hypocritical and illogical it’s still coming from good faith apolitical law practices.
On the right for decades they were screaming the left is legislating from the bench, they’re pushing ideological and political agendas and not the law. This got the base, and then the politicians, the political capitol and votes to own us in the judiciary war.
The left needs to do the same. Calling out hypocrisy isn’t enough, make everyone aware it’s now a political battlefield like everything else.
Like when they rolled back the VRA, they owned them with logic about how it didn’t make sense, but they didn’t call them out on the fact that they did it to disenfranchise black voters to help Republicans win elections. That’s what they need to do.
11 Likes
Totally agree with all of this. A+
If you call out conservatives acting in bad faith, you start to lose cases where the liberals have been on the good end of a 5-4 decision, joined by some random conservative. Someone like Sotomayor might start throwing bombs if she keeps losing 6-3, but so long as there exist some close cases where her side has a shot of winning, she feels she has an incentive to keep things civil and take whatever incremental victories she can get.
Nah dude RBG was legit BFF with fucking Scalia, one of the evilest most vile people I’m aware of. They aren’t pretending.
The ocassional 5-4 liberals win isn’t doing the liberals any fucking good, its pure political strategy from Roberts to make the courts seem apolitical and keep idiots thinking the supreme court is legitimate.
It would be way better if we lost every fucking case and we dissented calling them ideologue monsters. That will get us closer to packing the court.
Not to say some of the wins don’t help people, but for ALL the cases that matter the conservatives own us and toss us a bone from time to time to placate and let people think its still apolitical and nothing needs to change.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ToddRuger/status/1399826902660136962
https://mobile.twitter.com/tedfrank/status/1399802106643636228
https://mobile.twitter.com/MaxKennerly/status/1399870979829080065
Its a failure that they even have to rely on legislation here. In the private sector usually the employer would have enforceable policies that prohibit access to private information for personal reasons anyway, you dont need a law to tell you thats wrong.
Without having read the opinion, this seems ok to me. The CFAA is already very friendly to aggressive use by prosecutors, and I think it’s reasonable to say “Hey, this Act relates to actual serious crimes where individuals gain unauthorized access to computers”. As an example I saw on Twitter, a ruling the other way (supported by the dissent) would say “Accessing Facebook on your work computer is a crime if your employer says that you’re only allowed to use your computer for work purposes.” Seems bad.
[Also, I feel pretty comfortable supporting any ruling where Thomas, Roberts, and Alito are the 3 dissenters.]
3 Likes
Yea I read the headlines and saw 6-3 decision. Then saw Alito, Thomas and Roberts were the dissenters and had to do a double take.