U.S. Supreme Court: Post-Ginsburg Edition

Have at it.

I nominate AOC

i nominate tom cotton, a good guy with a gun

get in here, goons

Can Trump nominate himself?

and continuing the SCOTUS term limit discussion, reposting the explainer
https://fixthecourt.com/2019/11/myth-facts-scotus-term-limits/

https://www.texastribune.org/2020/09/09/ted-cruz-supreme-court-donald-trump/

No idea if these proposed changes are ideal or if they could ever plausibly come to pass, but I like that they are being put out there. It's a good step to start getting people used to the idea of major changes to the court.

Bryant Johnson, Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s personal trainer, does push-ups as Justice Ginsburg lies in state in the U.S. Capitol.

Full video: https://t.co/vri1sJcUV6 pic.twitter.com/C11uVFeQlQ

— CSPAN (@cspan) September 25, 2020

He isn’t stupid so wtf is he thinking https://t.co/uyEcGDZRIy

— Doug Henwood (@DougHenwood) September 25, 2020

I'm very sorry but if the pushup video is real it's extremely funny

CNN reporting that it's Barrett:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/25/politics/donald-trump-amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court/index.html

South Bend is really knocking it out of the park this year.

Whoever Trump was going to pick was going to be a horror story, so I expect soon to be reading about the many horrors of Ms. Barrett, which no doubt will be many and hair-raising. Lindsey Graham will love her.

democrats will have grave concerns and strongly worded appeals to decency

democratic fundraising will go through the roof, blood will boil, the election will be won (eventually) by democrats. and at the end, it'll be a 6-3 conservative court for the forseeable future, and possible a 5-4 majority for another 20-30 years, unless the golden boy or gorsuch unexpectedly croak, which would be a tragedy

those are impressive lifespans you're projecting for thomas and alito imo

They get magic life drugs injected in their butts

haha, well it also builds in known unknowns, like republicans preserving a seat in a future GOP presidency. let's role play it

2020 (the present. you are in hell)
barrett is confirmed before election. fuck you liberals
6-3 conservative majority

roberts is 65
thomas is 72
alito is 70
gorsuch is 53
the golden boy is 55
barrett is 48

breyer is 82
sotomayor is 66
kagan is 60

2021 (biden is elected. you are in tartarus)
biden wins. breyer tags out for a younger replacement. i will create SC justice names using this thread Fighting Baseball for Super Famicom: A League of Fake Americans POLL
6-3 conservative majority

roberts is 66
thomas is 73
alito is 71
gorsuch is 54
the golden boy is 56
barrett is 49

sotomayor is 67
kagan is 61
willie dustice is 50

EVENT
2024 election. The democrat has a 70% chance of victory (same as clinton v trump), due to me running this simulation. RNG: no joke, i rolled a random number from 1 to 10, with 1-7 being democratic victory and 8-10 being republican, and i rolled an 8. REPUBLICANS WIN

2025 (tom cotton is the president of the united states. you have killed 2 people now and haven't talked in weeks.)
tom cotton casts Executive Righteousness on thomas, 77 years old, who is replaced by Sleve McDichael
6-3 conservative majority

roberts is 70
alito is 75
the golden boy is 60
barrett is 53
sleve mcdichael is 50

sotomayor is 71
kagan is 65
gorsuch is 58
willie dustice is 54

EVENT
World War III, totally started by tom cotton. 2028 election. The democrat has a 80% chance of victory, due to me running this simulation. RNG: 3, democratic victory

2029 (first influencers on mars)
AOC is the president of the united states of america, fuck yeah. sotomayor, the second oldest justice at 75, taps out. bobsun dugnutt is the new junior united states supreme court justice.
6-3 conservative majority

roberts is 74
alito is 79
gorsuch is 62
the golden boy is 64
barrett is 57
sleve mcdichael is 54

kagan is 69
willie dustice is 58
bobsun dognutt is 50

EVENT
in 2031, the golden boy brett kavanaugh, just 66 years old, FUCKING DIES OUT OF NOWHERE and it's REALLY EMBARRASSING FOR HIM

2031 (VR sex surpasses videogames in revenue generation)
brett kavanaugh fucking dies out of nowhere, best thing that's happened in a generation. president AOC appoints a justice so left-leaning that she's impeached by sergeant ivanka trump, leader of the paramilitary republican subcommittee known as Gold Team. Onson Sweemey, the first justice with a normal name in 11 years, takes the golden boy's spot and shifts the balance toward a near-balance.

5-4 conservative majority

roberts is 76
alito is 81
gorsuch is 64
barrett is 59
sleve mcdichael is 56

kagan is 71
willie dustice is 60
bobsun dognutt is 52
onson sweemey is 50

EVENT
2032 Election. there's no more random numbers, it's just me making it up. the democrats win again. AOC is on the wheaties box.

then, near the end of her second term, the unspeakable happens. Samuel Alito, at the age of 85, just fucking dies out of nowhere.
2035
some observers expect the krang-like brain of mitch mcconnell to somehow delay a democratic confirmation in his spot, but AOC casts total victory and again appoints an extremely-left greatest of time justice named Todd Bonzalez.
5-4 liberal majority

roberts is 80
gorsuch is 68
barrett is 63
sleve mcdichael is 60

kagan is 75
willie dustice is 64
bobsun dognutt is 56
onson sweemey is 54
todd bonzalez is 50

EVENT
2036 Election. it's been 8 years of supreme relaxation and greatness. even gum is genuinely _better_. everything's great. something has to change, so somehow it's time for PRESIDENT CHARLIE KIRK

2037
under PRESIDENT CHARLIE KIRK, roberts immediately resigns. the new chief justice of the united states is SCOTT DOURQUE, 50 years old, catholic conservative
5-4 liberal majority

chief justice scott dourque, 50
gorsuch is 70
barrett is 65
sleve mcdichael is 62

kagan is 77
willie dustice is 66
bobsun dognutt is 58
onson sweemey is 56
todd bonzalez is 52

I actually think that’s not a terrible way of gaming things out. The arc of the moral universe is long. We fight the fights that we have today, and we train our young folks. Good post KM.

DOGNUTT

https://res.cloudinary.com/teepublic/image/private/s--QTcxwhPT--/t_Preview/b_rgb:ffffff,c_limit,f_jpg,h_630,q_90,w_630/v1495739359/production/designs/1624926_1.jpg

in 2031, the golden boy brett kavanaugh, just 66 years old, FUCKING DIES OUT OF NOWHERE and it's REALLY EMBARRASSING FOR HIM

whoa how did he die?!

Shot by one of Dick Cheney's grandkids

Karl, that was perfect (ly horrifying).

Shot by one of Dick Cheney's grandkids

― LaRusso Auto (Neanderthal), Friday, September 25, 2020 6:49 PM (four minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

At a UB40 reunion concert

in 2031, the golden boy brett kavanaugh, just 66 years old, FUCKING DIES OUT OF NOWHERE and it's REALLY EMBARRASSING FOR HIM

whoa how did he die?!

he dies of doing a kegstand in the kitchen of amy klobuchar's wake

karl this is some excellent scenario running and first rate use of the Fighting Baseball thread and i applaud it

i have a rejoinder percolating but it may take a while to get around to crunching the hard numbers so i just wanted to say that for now

_in 2031, the golden boy brett kavanaugh, just 66 years old, FUCKING DIES OUT OF NOWHERE and it's REALLY EMBARRASSING FOR HIM_

whoa how did he die?!

xp thanks doctor c! your questioning of that was really valid, and i don't think my answer is any sort of proof of anything. i got lazy and didn't project it out to 2045 (my original goal), but even though i ended with a slim 5-4 liberal majority by 2037, i don't think it takes much to keep it at a 5-4 conservative majority either. then again, maybe the republicans will truly never win again (lol) and it will be 6-3 liberal by 2040, who knows

So we get 40 some years of this...from an article Barrett co-wrote as quoted by SCOTUS blog

The article also noted that, when the late Justice William Brennan was asked about potential conflict between his Catholic faith and his duties as a justice, he responded that he would be governed by “the oath I took to support the Constitution and laws of the United States”; Barrett and Garvey observed that they did not “defend this position as the proper response for a Catholic judge to take with respect to abortion or the death penalty.”

https://www.scotusblog.com/2018/07/potential-nominee-profile-amy-coney-barrett/

Can't wait for her book, "Jesus is the Speaker of MY House"

@ Karl - okay! you've already gotten there, but yeah basically my rejoinder would be that you didn't actually end up showing "a 6-3 conservative court for the forseeable future, and possible a 5-4 majority for another 20-30 years." but the scenario was worth it anyway. a quibble: you don't game out the Senate, which i respect because that would be even more absurd fanfic work, but it's worth allowing at least dice-roll possibilities that the Dems control the Senate during your Republican admins, AND that they stand firm against prematurely ghoulish ideologues like Sleve McDichael, whose pasty-faced appearance and hot-mic comments during the nominations process turn the public against him. i would not put money on that chance myself, but it's at least possible.

also though, a fair bit hinges on that first d10 roll and some choices about the EVENTS - suppose Biden rolls a 6 in 2024, and is re-elected to a foggy but popular second term, his "Reagan in the late 80s" zone, AND ALSO that during that term, Thomas has a health scare and decides to retire. i don't know that the odds are so heavily stacked against something like that.

obviously in that event, Biden's replacement pick would be the mushy, not-all-that liberal Rey McSriff (48), a former bank-industry lobbyist, seen as a move back in the direction of racial and gender diversity on the court who will at least be a reliable liberal vote in civil-rights and abortion cases.

so in january 2029, we've got:

roberts is 74
alito is 79
gorsuch is 62
the golden boy is 64
barrett is 57

kagan is 69
willie dustice is 58
bobsun dognutt is 50
rey mcsriff is 50

eight years of the biden administration have left many festering wounds unaddressed, but thankfully the republican "gold team" have been mostly braying in the margins without control of either congress or the executive to formally empower them. on the other hand, in the absence of the Cotton presidency, World War III has not happened, but let's say AOC wins in 2028 anyway. why not?!

thus, following B.K.'s horrible death in 2031, AOC's super left-wing appointee is able to remain in office. you didn't name them but it's pretty obvious you had Shown Furcotte in mind. maybe kagan is worried enough about the next election, and spooked by what is by then a Sunday-morning-show conventional wisdom about "the Tragedy of Ginsburg," that she retires too. by this point AOC is not fucking around at all and appoints millennial twitter SJW Raul Chamgerlain, 44. if AOC goes on to win a second term and also grabs the Alito seat, then in 2035 we have:

roberts is 80
gorsuch is 68
barrett is 63

raul chamgerlain is 49
willie dustice is 64
bobsun dognutt is 56
rey mcscriff is 56
shown furcotte is 53
todd bonzalez is 50

... and our biggest problem is that sometimes McSriff aligns with the conservatives to dissent in 5-4 corporate-law decisions, and we see a lot of online left grousing about how Biden wasted a pick on her.

now yes, i admit........... this depends on the democrats winning four straight national elections. IMPOSSIBLE you say? or merely... improbable???! depends how much faith you put in changing demographics etc. but if none of the Dem-appointed justices die in office, they can also afford to lose one of those elections! because it might be that the Republicans can only replace Thomas or Alito with McDichael or Dorque, giving them an edge in age but not a leg up in the balance of the court.

todd bonzalez makes history as the first male latino justice

is there a relevant quote linking Barrett's sect to The Handmaid's Tale?

there must be. ominous lord, truth is stranger than fiction

xp

doc casino, first of all, obviously i had Shown Furcotte in mind. but secondly, the rest of your scenario seems plausible!

obviously gaming it out like that is a goof, but i did actually learn a few things. or maybe not. i feel like just laying out their ages, combined with the fact that they have lifetime appointments, explains 99% of the game:

christmas near-future:

roberts is 65
thomas is 72
alito is 70
gorsuch is 53
the golden boy is 55
barrett is 48

breyer is 82
sotomayor is 66
kagan is 60

that there is a stacked deck, combined with republican weakness (in terms of what we might expect, possibly overoptimistically, from their presidential chances for the next few decades after elevating a white supremacist fascist to the presidency and then ripping the country to shreds in an attempt to keep him there). even with a couple 2-term democratic administrations in a row, through 2036, there is still a decent chance that at least 5 or even all 6 of the conservative majority stays right where they are, their ass-molds worn deep

in unrelated news, just before i fell asleep face down on the couch last night, i ran across a disturbing headline about increasing the maximum human lifespans beyond its current soft limit of 125. apparently the consensus is that it will soon (10 years?) be possible to extend human lifespans using genetic modifiers, physical devices, and secret codes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_extension jfc

agreed, it's a useful exercise to grasp exactly how much the age advantage of the GWB and DJT appointees presses on into the future. but also, focusing too much on that just takes us into a zone of gloom, so unless it's directly useful for motivating present-day action and the long-term fight, i think it's also useful to bear in mind all the ways that the scenario could suddenly break down. nobody saw Scalia's death coming, for example, even though he was 79. that ended up working out horribly for the cause of justice and freedom, but it could have gone differently. so long as our rights are subject to these bizarre matters of fate and circumstance, we may as well remind ourselves that there are ways the probabilistic parts could break our way.

and the stacked deck there does look better the moment Biden can replace Breyer, which i think we all do need to be praying for (or whatever equivalent practice).

and... all these scenarios also presume a successful barrett confirmation. tbh, i'm pretty doom-and-gloom about that, seems like there's no reason to think it won't happen. but it's still probably not good for my head to already accept her as a solid number until 2049 or w/e. like if i'm driving myself crazy with all the bad things that have already happened, and the ones that could probably happen, and the ones that are near-certainties, that's a lot to do to my head, if i'm not also considering the good equivalents of all of those things.

there's also some non-zero chance that, in the event that a Democrat wins the presidential race four times in a row and this permanent 5-4 Court keeps shutting down every exciting thing the people are turning out to vote for, then a mandate for court-packing develops much much more quickly than we might expect right now.

so long as our rights are subject to these bizarre matters of fate and circumstance, we may as well remind ourselves that there are ways the probabilistic parts could break our way.

otm

i know that's not a convincing or comforting thought for everyone, but to me that really is what gives me hope

NEW: Senate Democrats say they will press President Trump’s SCOTUS nominee to commit to recuse herself if the justices hear a case that could impact the outcome of the fall elections, @mkraju reports.

— Ana Cabrera (@AnaCabrera) September 25, 2020

That seems a little dumb

I mean it makes sense but they'd still have a 5-3 advantage anyway

"Will you commit to not doing the exact thing you were hired for" is a dumb question

and... all these scenarios also presume a successful barrett confirmation. tbh, i'm pretty doom-and-gloom about that, seems like there's no reason to think it won't happen

i will continue to return to my dumb "we simulate the future and then experience it in real time, somehow diminished, as something that was already familiar" theory, until someone or something convinces me that it's not accurate. in that line of thinking, you can already see the barrett confirmation and how it happens. i already saw a headline, last night, talking about how barrett was confirmed in October. i looked at the calendar and it was september 25th, then re-read the headline and it still said that she was confirmed in October, past tense. i can't remember where i saw it, and i had a socially distanced hangout with a friend last night and got way too drunk. but still, it was there all the same.

that was just a drunken horror, but i woke up today and it's still there. the republicans have the votes. 2 have been allowed to deviate (murkowski and collins), which just so happens to allow exactly enough remaining republicans to unilaterally install barrett. what a coincidence. this outcome has already been focus-grouped on a national scale - it turns out that most republicans think it's a great idea, most democrats think it's a bad idea, and the majority of "independents" think it's a bad idea. it sounds like most ideas these days. so they'll do it, because they can.

we're currently simulating the outraged response, right now. at least, i am. and then, when it happens, it won't be the first time.

---

^i think all of that is a very bad way to go about thinking about life, believe it or not. but that's what i see happening over and over, lately.

xpost they're not asking her to not be a justice, they're saying 'Hey, you were literally just nominated by one of the President candidates in this election 5 minutes before the election, maybe it's a conflict of interest for you ruling on a case challenging his results".

But this is the primary reason they are in such a rush. If she can't guarantee to hand over the election, it's pointless for Trump. Surely he already told her she needs to deliver that vote, or there would be a different pick.

lol of course it's not going to actually happen but would you rather the Democrats not try it first so that they can frame it as "Justice Coney Barrett refused to recuse, she and Trump win, while Americans lose!"

I mean, compared to other things they should be trying, this is VERY low on my list of importance and I wouldn't want it to take the place of promising to pack the fuck out of courts, but we're kinda fucked unless someone has a McCain surprise during the vote.

yeah i'm not, like... arguing, or saying you're WRONG or anything. i'm just trying to figure this stuff out myself. i gotta catch up with y'all, y'all spend a LOT more time thinking about this stuff than I do. nah i think i'm starting to pick up what you're laying down, and i like it. nah this is good. what y'all are doing is good. thank you for all the work you've been doing on this, i know it can be frustrating to try and explain this stuff to someone like me who's just not getting it lol.

can you share (or re-share) a link to the full dissent? again my apologies, i'm not a regular here, this just sounds like some real good shit

Starts at pg. 32:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25-365_4hdj.pdf

lol the footnotes:

I suspect, though, that JUSTICE THOMAS and I disagree about when
and how that promise has been denied by this Court. My list is long (and
sadly only getting longer). For a sampling, consider: Civil Rights Cases,
109 U. S. 3 (1883); Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U. S. 537 (1896); De Lima v.
Bidwell, 182 U. S. 1 (1901) (otherwise known as the Insular Cases);
Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U. S. 244 (1901) (same); Korematsu v. United
States, 323 U. S. 214 (1944); Milliken v. Bradley, 418 U. S. 717 (1974);
McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U. S. 279 (1987); Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School Dist. No. 1, 551 U. S. 701 (2007); Shelby
County v. Holder, 570 U. S. 529 (2013); Students for Fair Admissions,
Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, 600 U. S. 181 (2023)
(SFFA); Louisiana v. Callais, 608 U. S. ___ (2026)

awesome, thanks for sharing!

NPR has formally apologized for wishing Alito's death

Alito is going to stay on the Court another term because fuck NPR.

“Bartender, I want you to set Alfred up with a Negroni. Now, every hour, on the hour, make him another one. He may not drink all of them, but do it anyway. This is how it’s going to be until this Supreme Court business sorts itself out.”

I would absolutely write my own opinions. I'd reduce my clerks to 5 p.m. Negroni prep.

Some people think that NPR got ahead of its skis and printed something meant to run later this week. But wasn't it already reported a couple of months ago that neither Alito nor Thomas were planning to retire this year?

Pretty sure Alito will retire before the new term begins; she read the B-matter.

In April unidentified sources said Alito was NOT planning to retire this year, and that Thomas had no plans to step down.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-justices-alito-thomas-not-retiring-sources-say/

Meanwhile on X, right-wingers are refusing to address the majority take on the history of birthright citizenship and some are urging red states to just nullify the decision by somehow not accepting that some folks born here are citizens and by trying to deport pregnant immigrants.

xpost Yeah, that's what I was thinking of. People were surprised because it would obv. be better for them to retire while Repubs still have a Senate majority.

If Thomas stepped down he'd get to join some corporate boards and be hired as a speaker to conservative groups, but without his seat on the court he'd soon find himself treated like a has been and non-entity. He'll put that off as long as he can.

Nina falling on her sword, saying it was all her fault

xpost It’s also a choice between letting Trump cement the majority with 30 year old Nazi judges or sticking around and continuing to win win win!

Stephen Miller says on Fox that Trump Administration Will Examine Banning Pregnant Foreign Women from Entering United States; chyron under him says "birth tourism is a ticking time bomb"

Stephen Miller says on Fox that Trump Administration Will Examine Banning Pregnant Foreign Women from Entering United States; chyron under him says "birth tourism is a ticking time bomb"

https://www.timesofisrael.com/stephen-millers-uncle-calls-him-an-immigration-hypocrite/

Yep. Saw that back then. Plus Trump's current wife and a prior wife have shakey immigration status which means their kids under Stephen Miller's idiocy could be kicked out too. But Republicans don't seem to care and as others here note the racism is a feature for them that they like and not a bug. They're not reading Justice Jackson's concurrence. But it's good to know and remember .

In April unidentified sources said Alito was NOT planning to retire this year, and that Thomas had no plans to step down.

i don’t put much stock in this because of course the sources said that. if they said he WAS planning on retiring, or that Thomas was planning to step down, that would be huge news. instead, the sources kept the status quo, that neither were planning anything.

however, i don’t know much. further along that line of barely knowing, i barely know (but think) that thomas and alito must be having the time of their lives right now. they both spent their entire lives waiting to weigh in on cases like this, it must be thrilling to hurt so many people with their pen

it’s that thrill of cruelty that you can see in alito’s eyes, mixed with the position that literally says “you represent judgment"

you’re a fucking cruel ass judge, and your cruelty is cloaked in procedure - nice, you did it

In its term that ended last October, the Supreme Court passed an important milestone that went unnoticed: For the first time, it decided more cases by secret ballot, and with few signed opinions, than it did for cases argued in open court.

These decisions, which make up the court’s “shadow docket,” are a fast-track way to get a decision from the top court. They rarely include arguments, have limited briefings and have expedited timetables, and justices infrequently provide explanation of how they voted or to cite legal precedent.

https://www.propublica.org/article/supreme-court-shadow-docket-rulings-milestone

how long i been saying impeach roberts for dereliction of duty plus corruption if as suspected by me?

Kagan and Barrett testified before a House committee today because they want more money for security for justices and want Congress to build a new building on the Supreme Court plaza I think for doing the security check on visitors to the court, rather than the current security check in the Court building itself. They got some questions on other subjects -

Representative Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, called for more transparency from the court through increased financial disclosure requirements. She characterized the court’s current ethics rules as “woefully insufficient.”

Justice Kagan has previously suggested that the code could be enforced by a committee of respected federal judges — and told lawmakers on Tuesday that she continued to support such a system. Justice Barrett, on the other hand, said she was fully committed to following the court’s ethics rules but said she would have concerns about the complexities involved in devising a system of enforcement.

On other topics Kagan tried to be nice unfortunately including this on the shadow docket--

In dissenting opinions, Justice Kagan has routinely criticized the court’s conservative majority for issuing such quick-turn decisions. But she offered a brighter view on Tuesday, telling the committee that the court has been doing a better job of providing explanations for its emergency rulings.

“I don’t think that’s so much of a problem anymore,” Justice Kagan said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/14/us/politics/supreme-court-congress-takeaways.html?campaign_id=190&emc=edit_ufn_20260715&instance_id=178743&nl=from-the-times®i_id=210660293&segment_id=223105&user_id=39ef3cad74c29941c7ed3667d5427a52

Alex Aronson,Co-founder & Executive Director, Court Accountability on Bluesky re Barrett testimony before Congress today :

Amy Coney Barrett just told Congress that it would be inappropriate to explain the reasoning behind the Court’s unreasoned shadow docket orders. As if unreasoned judicial orders are a thing. They are not. The reasoning is the whole point.

Note that this is a distinctly different reason for refusal to answer than the normal line that it would be inappropriate to discuss the Court’s work (which she also said).

more from others re Barrett testimony-

Am I supposed to have sympathy for a Supreme Court justice who says she didn’t expect to have to tell her kids what a bulletproof vest is

meanwhile, my kids gotta take a bulletproof backpack to school every day in case of a school shooting.

zero empathy.

elana kagan has revealed herself to be a bad politician

the good news is that politics and the supreme court have very little to do with one another

*giant winky face*

but yeah if kagan were in the senate she’d be one of those really shitty democratic senators

i am willing to say she's a poor understander of things and ALSO a bad person, based upon this statement. NOT OK.

The Supreme Court on Friday temporarily allowed President Trump to continue construction of a luxury White House ballroom to replace the East Wing he demolished last fall.

In a one-sentence order, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., acting on his own, issued a placeholder that gives all nine justices additional time to more fully consider whether construction of the planned 90,000-square-foot ballroom can proceed.

The chief justice’s order did not provide a timeline for when the court would act next, stating only that a lower-court ruling against the Trump administration was paused “pending further order of the undersigned or of the court.”

Lower court judges had ruled that Mr. Trump exceeded his authority by moving ahead with the construction without approval from Congress. Even so, they had allowed the project to continue in recent months while litigation was underway.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/21/us/politics/supreme-court-trump-ballroom.html?smid=url-share&smid=nytcore-ios-share&rsrc=cl-share

honestly just let him do it

the cost is large and it'll be as tacky looking as everything else he touches, but it distracts our national child president from making even worse decisions

somewhere to stand, alone, with "YMCA" blasting through the speakers, quietly swaying side to side, smiling softly

https://www.midcoastvillager.com/news/politics/oyez-and-ahoy-paddlers-protest-john-roberts-private-island/article_a51132bb-9915-497a-ac54-4c1fd84683fe.html

Protest on boat near Chief Justice Roberts summer home on a private island off in Maine - part of article below

Chief Justice John Roberts keeps a low profile while vacationing on his private island off Port Clyde, but that peace was interrupted last weekend by progressive activists who arrived by kayak, canoe and rowboat to protest the nation's top jurist.

Twenty-one people — and one dog — used small paddle craft to hold a one-hour “floating vigil” in the waters between Port Clyde and Hupper Island, where Roberts has a home, while another 20 people lined the edge of the public landing.

the ballroom’s gonna have a dungeon for teenage sex slaves isn’t it

no they’ll just be in the ballroom

ouch - too true

This is what the Roberts Court did in the NIH grant cancellation cases, and the mass firing (RIF and probationary) cases too: allow the Trump actions to continue as the cases make their way through the courts.

It’s a move to stay below the radar while the Court supports the Trump admin

https://bsky.app/profile/markhisted.org/post/3mtmpehzuu222

wtf?

these fucks

The US supreme court sided with Donald Trump on Monday in his effort to crack down on mail-in voting, though it remains unclear if his administration can take action ahead of the midterm elections in November.

Justices on the court voted 6-3 along ideological lines to lift an injunction from June that a judge in Massachusetts placed on an executive order issued by the president. But a second injunction remains in place and the ruling leaves room for legal challenges.

maybe if there’s enough popular mass action he can’t respond in enough states

Justice Jackson wrote her own 23 page dissent, and Sotomayor wrote another one signed on by Kagan

Ketanji Brown Jackson, the Supreme Court's junior liberal justice, excoriated her colleagues for lifting a block on President Trump's mail-in voting executive order on Monday, saying it "needlessly injects chaos" into this year's elections.

"It also lets another shoe drop in the Kafkaesque nightmare that our precedents have been steadily creating for certain plaintiffs who seek to bring election-related challenges," Jackson wrote.

She didn't sign on to the dissent authored by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, which was joined by Elena Kagan, the third member of the court's liberal wing. Instead, Jackson penned 23 pages of her own, saying the case wasn't a "close call."

Jackson said her colleagues lacked "situational awareness" in ruling that blue states needed to wait for the U.S. Postal Service to at least begin implementing Trump's policy before challenging it. She called it a "catch-me-if-you-can"

approach.

"When the Government's obvious goal is to interfere with the Plaintiff States' practices and prerogatives in a manner that the Constitution does not authorize, it is both a serious legal error and a grave misuse of our equitable emergency powers to let the Executive proceed even one step further," Jackson wrote.

The Supreme Court's emergency ruling enables Trump to move closer to implementing his March executive order targeting mail-in ballots in time for the midterms. But the decision is not a final ruling on the legality of the new requirements.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/jackson-calls-supreme-court-mail-231040653.html

The basic deal here is that if you want an executive whose power can be checked by the courts and Congress, you have to elect a Democrat. In this Court's view, if you vote for a Republican, you're voting for an all-powerful autocrat. Fully expect a future ruling that "Because we are a republic, not a democracy, Republicans are inherently presumed to be acting legally, and Democrats are not."

And that the decision was just made by a shadow docket decision with no written explanation by the right wing Fox News watching majority while the dissents were written out is even more aggravating.

From the NY Times

Monday’s order from the Supreme Court was unsigned, as is typical in such emergency rulings. The majority wrote that it agreed with the government’s argument that it should be able to move forward with its plans, finding that the Trump administration was “likely to suffer irreparable harm” unless the justices lifted a freeze that had been imposed by lower courts.
Monday’s order from the Supreme Court was unsigned, as is typical in such emergency rulings. The majority wrote that it agreed with the government’s argument that it should be able to move forward with its plans, finding that the Trump administration was “likely to suffer irreparable harm” unless the justices lifted a freeze that had been imposed by lower courts.

Oops on the cut and paste twice

what’s most infuriating about these lifts of stays is that it allows the Trump administration to dismantle an agency or whatever mischief they cause become a fait accompli. And once it works it’s way through the process and the action is eventually declared illegal or whatever after years of litigation, you can’t unbreak that egg. that’s the whole point of stays.

I know that’s the Supreme Court’s agenda, though, let the big guy rum rampant while the SC majority says “let’s let the courts sort it out, doesn’t that sound fair?”

lol the 'irreparable harm' of losing a congressional majority