https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1484583313427812352
Surely the President has the ability to regulate his workers, no?
https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1484585972906012676
GG
TBF, Pikes at my school drugged and raped a coed which prompted their alumni to mount an unsuccessful cover-up campaign.
Just because a Greek organization does something doesnât make it acceptable or any less depraved/crazy.
fwiw, I read viridianâs post as indicating itâs more depraved/crazy
that said, I went to a school that had a seriously out of control greek system
Yeah, pikes were known as roid heads and rapists at UF when I was there, too.
I wasnt trying to justify the behavior, fwiw.
Iâm good with permanently banning fraternities.
6 Likes
Next up after Roe, affirmative action
https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1485621994691383302
Going to go with the Supreme Court will rule that race cannot be taken into account when considering college admissions.
Supreme Court justices when getting nominated, âI respect precedentâ. Supreme Court justices on the court
Well, itâs important to remember that they arenât political. The law just always falls on the side of white grievance.
They can just re-use the voting rights âsouthern states arenât racist anymoreâ.
1 Like
I donât remember. From what I remember they left off with the ârace can be in the calculus, but canât be explicitly usedâ with some conservative groups pushing it but they couldnât get over the Breyer hump to fully abolish it.
Ah yes, Affirmative Action has no place in a meritocracy, but legacy admissions are A-OK!
1 Like
https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/status/1485649193591095311
One got counted wrongly so itâs actually 14.
And are they all right wing nonsense?
A meritocracy where 57% of the population starts on third base and 12% have to play blindfolded with their hands tied behind their back.
1 Like
But the Courtâs five Republican justices ignored both the clear language and purpose of the law, erecting numerous extratextual bars that make it all but impossible to win a case like this without showing discriminatory intent. As Justice Elena Kagan wrote in an unanswerable dissent, Justice Samuel Alitoâs opinion for the Court was a âlaw-free zone,â basing its holding on âon a list of mostly made-up factors.â (Among them: The majority invented a rule that restrictions on the vote that existed when the Voting Rights Act was enacted should be presumptively constitutional, which, if true, would sort of obviate the purpose of a Voting Rights Act in the first place.)
Sound familiar? In essence, a six-justice conservative supermajority âinterpretedâ the Voting Rights Act as if Roberts had prevailed in 1982, when in fact Congress had repudiated his vision for what the law should look like. The same is true of the Courtâs opinion in NFIB: None of the ârulesâ are found in the text of the statute. Theyâre simply meant to frustrate the will of Congress whenever Congress does something that leads to results the justices donât like.
NFIB and Brnovich are especially ominous for American democracy because they leave Congress with no outs. Courts that willfully ignore the text and purpose of major statutes are an existential threat to democratic self-rule, because even if majorities can surmount the formidable obstacles to legislating, Republican-controlled courts can simply rewrite the law to suit their own preferences. In his concurrence in NFIB , Justice Gorsuch claimed to be standing up for âthe peopleâs elected representatives in Congress.â In reality, the Court has found another way to consolidate power in itself.
Damn not an âunanswerable dissentâ
Guess Lena Kags just had to do it too em
https://twitter.com/cnbcnow/status/1486382329450930180?s=21
In b4 Biden nominates some 65-year-old center-right slapdick.
12 Likes
Itâll be a 59-year-old center-right slapdick.
Or Merrick Garland.
2 Likes
2 Likes