I guess it wasn’t “settled law” after all

[jclay]

Roe.

Big surprise; is there no mechanism by which a sitting SCOTUS judge may be removed for lying, deception (aka lying), obfuscation (aka lying under the circs framing the confirmation process)?

And as a bonus, more firearms in the streets!

A wet dream for those who think they're the Marlboro Man or mourn that they missed the Dodge City daze of Marshal Dillon.

[72gmc]

Impeachment, yes? Although that is its own barrel of monkeys.

"Justices may remain in office until they resign, pass away, or are impeached and convicted by Congress."

https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the...dicial-branch/

[Bob Ross]

My wife was furious this morning when she read the news about SCOTUS striking down the New York law restricting carrying handguns in public; she's gonna be absolutely apoplectic when she checks her news feed this afternoon!

And I'm gonna be right there with her. This angers me like no other political issue I can recall, because this more than anything has been a simple litmus test for my personal moral compass: Do individuals have autonomy over their own bodies? If not, we do not live in a democracy...and it's a stretch to even suggest that we live in a civilized society. I am livid. This is not America.

:::angryface:::

[jclay]

And the whole Schmieg, rejecting Roe, liberalizing (irony) our already promiscuous interpretation of 2A (innocent blood as the ante, thoughts and prayers as the salve), that Trump and the rest of the insurrectionists were not immediately stuck in prison, bail denied, while the adults sorted through the legal aspect, a pandemic with all the associated disruption sucked into its wake, war on Ukraine and innumerable other examples of avarice and fuck up, all of human genesis, are framed by an accelerating trajectory into irreversible climate and ecological disaster.

About seven years ago I figured a 30 year planning horizon was both genetically reasonable and practically useful as an aid to navigating the balance of my life; I ruminated on what my mental and physical reality might allow me to do for each of those three decades; and that afforded me some planning focus. Ignoring the fun recreational activities I’d imagined, implicit was the notion that our world, or at least our country, would remain pretty much functionally as it was then. It was not lost on me that thirty years would be a long time in today’s world but I figured....”surely we can manage that before the wheels come off”. Both of my older brothers laughed. I’m six or seven years into that planning budget and if I was now in a galactic poker game, somewhere on a planet far, far away, and the bet was whether or not the Earth would be essentially as functional and livable (for US) as it is today (thermometer on our deck, in the shade, in the woods, reading 98°, and for Tally Town at the worst of summer (August) that is seriously fucking hot) I’d fold and walk away from the table.

We have folks, so-called Christians, who have been working diligently for over half a century to maintain their social/cultural and economic primacy (imagined or otherwise), pushing us back into a modern dark age; and if that weren’t dismal enough, which it surely ought to be, we are demolishing this planet’s ability to sustain the sorts of life and environment that make our lives possible.

That has got to be the definition of complete and utter insanity.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone

[jimcav]

my wife is angry
I'm sad. The last several years make me question my decision to wear a uniform for 28 years.

I'm hoping the 20-25% of us that don't bother to/can't vote are now motivated about this, and the future of many other rights that exist under the due process/privacy umbrella, to now vote. That is assuming they can get the requisite voter ID cards and can spend hours in line to vote...

[bcm119]

Getting up for work this morning, I felt like one of those clowns in the memes. I live in this country? If only the bullhorns on the left had focused on defeating Trump instead of the DNC in 2016.

[j44ke]

Here comes the evangelical theocracy.

[fastupslowdown]

Roe.

Big surprise; is there no mechanism by which a sitting SCOTUS judge may be removed for lying, deception (aka lying), obfuscation (aka lying under the circs framing the confirmation process)?

And as a bonus, more firearms in the streets!

A wet dream for those who think they're the Marlboro Man or mourn that they missed the Dodge City daze of Marshal Dillon.

It's called extreme coaching. I paid extra attention during the confirmation of Amy Comey Barrett where I started hearing a term I had not before "Super Precedent" . There's no way to know how a Supreme Court justice will decide for sure in most cases, but this was different. The Federalist Society vetted first and foremost on this one issue. Those put on the court know why they are there. Even if it was never discussed, it didn't need to be.

I'm surprised at the extreme position. The decision makes no room for abortion to protect the mother's life which would be consistent with the Orthodox Jewish view. And even though Orthdox Judaism doesn't support abortion in other cases, the fetus is not considered a full human being until after born -Mike G

[COVRTDESIGN]

It's called extreme coaching. I paid extra attention during the confirmation of Amy Comey Barrett where I started hearing a term I had not before "Super Precedent" . There's no way to know how a Supreme Court justice will decide for sure in most cases, but this was different. The Federalist Society vetted first and foremost on this one issue. Those put on the court know why they are there. Even if it was never discussed, it didn't need to be.

I'm surprised at the extreme position. The decision makes no room for abortion to protect the mother's life which would be consistent with the Orthodox Jewish view. And even though Orthdox Judaism doesn't support abortion in other cases, the fetus is not considered a full human being until after born -Mike G

Isn't there a high profile rabbi that is suing for this exact reason? I'll try to find the article and post here with further thoughts.

[fastupslowdown]

Isn't there a high profile rabbi that is suing for this exact reason? I'll try to find the article and post here with further thoughts.

Congregation L’Dor Va-Dor of Boynton Beach, hardly orthodox . I found a 1965 article from an orthodox source. When the life of the mother is at risk there is no debate among rabbis. After that I suspect Orthodox Jews would agree. I'm just gobsmacked that the fetus is now more important than the mother. This is both radical and extreme. Where I further add hypocrisy is when those same forces that deny abortion are unwilling to fund child day care, school lunches, head start programs and the like. Seems once you are born the right loses interest, that is until you are of age to pick up an AR-15

[COVRTDESIGN]

Congregation L’Dor Va-Dor of Boynton Beach, hardly orthodox . I found a 1965 article from an orthodox source. When the life of the mother is at risk there is no debate among rabbis. After that I suspect Orthodox Jews would agree. I'm just gobsmacked that the fetus is now more important than the mother. This is both radical and extreme. Where I further add hypocrisy is when those same forces that deny abortion are unwilling to fund child day care, school lunches, head start programs and the like. Seems once you are born the right loses interest, that is until you are of age to pick up an AR-15

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/16/u...w-judaism.html Looks like it was only against the state, bbut obviously it would be a supreme court case in the future.

[fastupslowdown]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/16/u...w-judaism.html Looks like it was only against the state, bbut obviously it would be a supreme court case in the future.

This Supreme Court? I suspect they'd refuse to take the case

[fastupslowdown]

There's a pattern going on.

Illinois Representative Mary Miller at a rally with Trump:

"President Trump, on behalf of all the MAGA patriots in America, I want to thank you for the historic victory for white life in the Supreme Court yesterday," Miller said.


This is the same Member of Congress who praised Hitler. Now she’s standing right next to Trump, praising the Supreme Court for protecting “white life.”

"If we win a few elections, we’re still going to be losing unless we win the hearts and minds of our children. This is the battle," Miller is heard saying in the footage. "Hitler was right on one thing. He said, ‘Whoever has the youth has the future.’”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...hite-life-trum

[j44ke]

I think this should pretty much kill any impulse among Democrats to switch parties in Montana to protect Cheney’s seat in Congress.

As well as cease all the compliments paid to Pence for merely doing his fcking job on Jan. 6. Pence is now advocating a national law against abortion, if you had any doubts about the real agenda. States schmates.

[fastupslowdown]

I think this should pretty much kill any impulse among Democrats to switch parties in Montana to protect Cheney’s seat in Congress.

As well as cease all the compliments paid to Pence for merely doing his fcking job on Jan. 6. Pence is now advocating a national law against abortion, if you had any doubts about the real agenda. States schmates.

I agree, but they should. Unlike many Republicans today, she says what she means and she means what she says. She's always been right to life but she's also been rule of law. Anyone who Trump promotes will be about Fuhrerprinzip

[j44ke]

I agree, but they should. Unlike many Republicans today, she says what she means and she means what she says. She's always been right to life but she's also been rule of law. Anyone who Trump promotes will be about Fuhrerprinzip

Then they should negotiate terms. No free lunch. Stakes are too high.

[fastupslowdown]

Then they should negotiate terms. No free lunch. Stakes are too high.

So here's the question, Will a Democrat win the state? If so you support the candidate that gets you most of what you want. And this is just for the primaries. They can vote differently in the general. Maybe that's too Machiavellian for you. I'm thinking back to Democrats who didn't like Hillary and didn't play this game, and wound up with an overturn of Roe v Wade.

[j44ke]

So here's the question, Will a Democrat win the state? If so you support the candidate that gets you most of what you want. And this is just for the primaries. They can vote differently in the general. Maybe that's too Machiavellian for you. I'm thinking back to Democrats who didn't like Hillary and didn't play this game, and wound up with an overturn of Roe v Wade.

I think that at the legislative (state or fed) level, you have to vote the party. Otherwise you simply strengthen the Republicans and weaken the Democrats. Look at how the Republicans have overtaken the Democrats at every level up to the President. Democrats believe in in the executive branch and the judicial branch, and both have been very good to them over the last 50 years. But their attention span is far to short on races in all levels of legislature. If they have the national majority - as they prove in the popular vote in Presidential elections - they should have far more representation at the state level and at each and every level of legislature. But the Democrats have not paid close enough attention, and they've made budgetary decisions based on winnability that the Republicans would never make. Grass roots efforts in the Democratic Party often have to beat both the National Democratic Party and the Republican opposition. WTF? And I cannot fully blame gerrymandering either - that's a symptom that became a cause. Always run a candidate in every race, always work with localized platforms, always beware of long-term incumbencies, and stop putting the party in a place where constituencies are voting for the known devil rather than the unknown devil. Or lesser of two evils.

The only time Republicans cross over to vote for a Democrat in the primaries is to decrease the likelihood that the Democrat will win in the general. Democrats should never view a Republican primary as a place to do anything other than weakening the opposition.

I don't think the anti-Hillary vote theory has stood up against later analysis. The difference was the number of Obama voters who switched to Trump - mostly white working class, Latinx and African-Americans. So overall turnout wasn't down, it was just redistributed in several blind spots for the Democrats.

[j44ke]

Here's what I would do vis a vis the current Supreme Court. I would start working Roberts for retirement. Promise to replace him as Chief Justice with a moderate with a history of distinguished soundly reasoned decisions with full awareness of history, tradition and precedent, who will lead the court towards a more moderate tone and work to rebuild its reputation for the entire country (not just the Neo-Puritan Falangists.) Republicans will still have a 5 - 4 majority for quite a while, but obviously he's no longer in charge, and obviously no one is listening to what he has to say. Biden will even give him a going away party and hang some sort of medal around his neck. Plus waive all his late fees at the Library of Congress.

[ColonelJLloyd]

I think this should pretty much kill any impulse among Democrats to switch parties in Montana to protect Cheney’s seat in Congress.

As well as cease all the compliments paid to Pence for merely doing his fcking job on Jan. 6. Pence is now advocating a national law against abortion, if you had any doubts about the real agenda. States schmates.

Did you mean Wyoming or is there something I'm missing badly?