https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2023/06/30/clarence-thomas-affirmative-action/
We do… nothing.
Guys please. American expert Clovis the Canadian said that PPP loans were good
PPP loans really infuriating to me. I did EIDL like a sucker. I honestly can’t rember why I did this or why I was told to do this. I didn’t even get the 10k promised.
2 Likes
Not a lawyer, not a historian, but didn’t say “Brown vs Board of Education” criticize “Plessy vs Ferguson”?
1 Like
It’s literally kangaroo court. They decided a case based on a made up premise. Where the fuck am I?
3 Likes
I mean that is really the completion of the circle, is it not?
-destroy any sense of civility as the minority
-gain power
-enact policy that wafflecrushes opposition, erodes freedom, etc
-bemoan lack of “civility” when minority screams and yells
Every time Alito dissents it is like an enraged YouTube comment diatribe about how idiotic the majority is, but when a Black woman dissents forcefully the Chief Justice suddenly decides it’s time to get all Chief Justice-y about the decorum of SCOTUS discourse.
Eat shit John Roberts.
8 Likes
To be fair, he’s probably talking more about op-ed writers for NYT and WaPo than he is about the scary woman with the dreads down the other end of the table.
1 Like
The PPP loans were fine. But they should have been subject to means testing after.
Like your revenue went up 10-% a year you obv didn’t need the cash. So now it’s a loan
But nah. Just keep all the cash rich people.
Congrats. You managed to mix ad hominem with zero content. A+ internet stupidity.
Support for PPP = support for trickle down economics in general
Looking at some reports it looks like my impressions of ppp were wrong as most of the money went to high income earners.
I still wonder about the political appetite at the time for haggling about means testing as the pandemic raged and the world was shutting down.
2 Likes
This is true for both the web designer case and affirmative action. Neither had any standing and both would have never been reviewed by any previous court in US history.
Listening to a lot of analysis the angle that isn’t getting enough play is that most of these decisions in the past few years have one through line. SCOTUS is giving itself more and more power and setting itself up as the primary branch of government.
It’s why Sotamayor said the court was actually breaking the law in their recent ruling to counter the idea the majority holds that they literally can’t contravene the constitution because they are the sole interpreters of it.
The quote was something like “it has become a disturbing feature of some opinions to criticize the decisions with which they disagree.”
I take “opinions” here to mean SCOTUS opinions, not op-eds and stuff.
2 Likes
Yeah, he clarifies it further on that he’s talking about his fellow Justices
What really stands out is the final paragraph of Chief Justice John Roberts’s majority opinion. Ever the institutionalist, he takes issue with criticism of the court by some of its own members who fault it for overstepping its powers. “It has become a disturbing feature of some recent opinions to criticize the decisions with which they disagree as going beyond the proper role of the judiciary,” Roberts laments. He argues that they reached Friday’s ruling based on normal judicial methods of statutory interpretation.
“Reasonable minds may disagree with our analysis—in fact, at least three do,” the chief justice concludes, referring to the court’s three liberal members who dissented from Friday’s ruling. “We do not mistake this plainly heartfelt disagreement for disparagement. It is important that the public not be misled either. Any such misperception would be harmful to this institution and our country.”
2 Likes
Fair enough. Fuck that guy.
