2022 SCOTUS rulings

Political discussions
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by UNI88 »

kalm wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 7:44 am
BDKJMU wrote: Thu Jul 14, 2022 1:25 pm
Posting someone's address, and protesting at someone's house like the left did with SCOTUS justices, is whole another level (and a violation of fed and state laws) than simply giving the name and showing the picture of someone on a TV screen. The SCOTUS justices all have their names and faces on TV screens every day. Did FNC post her address and say go protest at her house? If not, there's no comparison.
They’re different but both are shitty. :coffee:
Maybe BDK is right. "Posting someone's address, and protesting at someone's house like the left did with SCOTUS justices" is an attack on the highest level of our judicial system, one of our three branches of government. It's kind of like the January 6 insurrection, an attack on the highest level of our legislative system, one of our three branches of government. "Giving the name and showing the picture of someone on a TV screen" is more of an attack on our system at a local level. It's kind of like the AnTiFa riots of 2020.

Cue BDK twisting himself into a logic pretzel explaining why protesting outside of a SCOTUS justice's house is a major problem but January 6 wasn't a big deal.
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by UNI88 »

‘Oh, God, no’: Republicans fear voter backlash after Indiana child rape case
“These are the kind of things that are going to breathe life into the Democrats’ hopes of maintaining some sort of coalition,” said John Thomas, a Republican strategist who works on House campaigns across the country. “I don’t think this is the dominant issue as we’re going into November, but these kinds of unforced errors are lifelines for the Democrats.”
...
“Every day that we’re talking about anything but Biden’s cost of living is a wasted day politically,” said Scott Reed, a veteran Republican strategist. “You know, we’ve got a historic opportunity here this November, and let’s not blow it.”
...
For weeks, the widely held expectation among both Democratic and Republican political professionals had been that Roe would almost certainly not be enough to stop Republicans from gaining a majority in the House in November, but that it could limit their gains, scaring off moderates and suburban women.

Abortion still ranks below other issues — most of all, the economy — as a top priority of voters, and the electoral landscape is so bleak for Democrats this year that they are likely to sustain widespread losses regardless of fallout from Roe. By November, said Dave Carney, a national Republican strategist based in New Hampshire, “it’s not going to matter what Bopp or whatever … his name is says. It’s not going to trump 9.1 percent inflation.”

But abortion has been ticking up as a priority since the court’s ruling on Roe. And in close House races and statewide contests in swing states, even a shift at the margins may be consequential.

Sean Walsh, a Republican strategist who worked in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush White Houses, said the Indiana case will not only turn off moderate Republicans but will serve as a “motivator to get younger voters to vote — who usually are spotty in casting ballots.”
Sands appear to be shifting and the cost to Republicans rising.
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by BDKJMU »

UNI88 wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 10:18 am
kalm wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 7:44 am

They’re different but both are shitty. :coffee:
Maybe BDK is right. "Posting someone's address, and protesting at someone's house like the left did with SCOTUS justices" is an attack on the highest level of our judicial system, one of our three branches of government. It's kind of like the January 6 insurrection, an attack on the highest level of our legislative system, one of our three branches of government. "Giving the name and showing the picture of someone on a TV screen" is more of an attack on our system at a local level. It's kind of like the AnTiFa riots of 2020.

Cue BDK twisting himself into a logic pretzel explaining why protesting outside of a SCOTUS justice's house is a major problem but January 6 wasn't a big deal.
Well, since people were arrested en masse for misdemeanor tresspass on 1/6, they sure as hell should have been arrested en masse at every SCOTUS house they protested at, which is a blatant violation of fed law.
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by UNI88 »

BDKJMU wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 4:52 pm
UNI88 wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 10:18 am
Maybe BDK is right. "Posting someone's address, and protesting at someone's house like the left did with SCOTUS justices" is an attack on the highest level of our judicial system, one of our three branches of government. It's kind of like the January 6 insurrection, an attack on the highest level of our legislative system, one of our three branches of government. "Giving the name and showing the picture of someone on a TV screen" is more of an attack on our system at a local level. It's kind of like the AnTiFa riots of 2020.

Cue BDK twisting himself into a logic pretzel explaining why protesting outside of a SCOTUS justice's house is a major problem but January 6 wasn't a big deal.
Well, since people were arrested en masse for misdemeanor tresspass on 1/6, they sure as hell should have been arrested en masse at every SCOTUS house they protested at, which is a blatant violation of fed law.
I didn't realize they were protesting in the SCOTUS house(s). If they were then yes, they should be arrested en masse for misdemeanor trespass. :kisswink:
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by kalm »

UNI88 wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 5:30 pm
BDKJMU wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 4:52 pm
Well, since people were arrested en masse for misdemeanor tresspass on 1/6, they sure as hell should have been arrested en masse at every SCOTUS house they protested at, which is a blatant violation of fed law.
I didn't realize they were protesting in the SCOTUS house(s). If they were then yes, they should be arrested en masse for misdemeanor trespass. :kisswink:
They were just looking for beer…and porn.
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by UNI88 »

kalm wrote:
UNI88 wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 5:30 pm I didn't realize they were protesting in the SCOTUS house(s). If they were then yes, they should be arrested en masse for misdemeanor trespass. :kisswink:
They were just looking for beer…and porn.
Good thing they weren't looking for ice cream. Nancy Pelosi has that stashed in her freezers. :D

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by BDKJMU »

UNI88 wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 5:30 pm
BDKJMU wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 4:52 pm
Well, since people were arrested en masse for misdemeanor tresspass on 1/6, they sure as hell should have been arrested en masse at every SCOTUS house they protested at, which is a blatant violation of fed law.
I didn't realize they were protesting in the SCOTUS house(s). If they were then yes, they should be arrested en masse for misdemeanor trespass. :kisswink:
Don’t be obtuse. Protesting outside the SCOTUS homes was breaking the law just as much as most of those protesting inside the Capital.
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by kalm »

BDKJMU wrote: Sat Jul 16, 2022 1:30 am
UNI88 wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 5:30 pm

I didn't realize they were protesting in the SCOTUS house(s). If they were then yes, they should be arrested en masse for misdemeanor trespass. :kisswink:
Don’t be obtuse. Protesting outside the SCOTUS homes was breaking the law just as much as most of those protesting inside the Capital.
So arrest them for insurrection.
Image
Image
Image
Baldy
Level4
Level4
Posts: 9609
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:38 pm
I am a fan of: Georgia Southern

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by Baldy »

kalm wrote: Sat Jul 16, 2022 4:47 am
BDKJMU wrote: Sat Jul 16, 2022 1:30 am
Don’t be obtuse. Protesting outside the SCOTUS homes was breaking the law just as much as most of those protesting inside the Capital.
So arrest them for insurrection.
That would only happen if Conks were protesting outside the homes of Donk justices.
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by UNI88 »

BDKJMU wrote:
UNI88 wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 5:30 pm I didn't realize they were protesting in the SCOTUS house(s). If they were then yes, they should be arrested en masse for misdemeanor trespass. :kisswink:
Don’t be obtuse. Protesting outside the SCOTUS homes was breaking the law just as much as most of those protesting inside the Capital.
But they weren't trespassing so it's different.

But I actually agree with you, they should be arrested. We shouldn't be picking and choosing which laws to enforce and how to enforce them based on the ideology of the perpetrator any more then we should based on skin color, sexual orientation, etc.

I'm just using a nitpicking, obtuse approach similar to what you frequently use to argue that MAGAt behavior wasn't as bad. :D



Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
LeadBolt
Level3
Level3
Posts: 3584
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 12:44 pm
I am a fan of: William & Mary
Location: Botetourt

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by LeadBolt »

They weren’t trespassing, but there is a separate law that makes it illegal to protest at Justice’s homes to influence their decisions or to intimidate them. I believe that would apply in this case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by kalm »

Nothing says freedom caucus like states rights.

A group of Texas Republican legislators sent a letter to one of the biggest law firms in the U.S. threatening the company and its lawyers with disbarment and prosecution if they facilitate abortions, even outside of Texas, according to a report. The letter, which TMZ has obtained, says the 11 members of the Texas Freedom Caucus have become aware of Sidley Austin “reimbursing travel costs of employees who leave Texas to murder their unborn children.”
https://www.thedailybeast.com/texas-rep ... &fs=e&s=cl
Image
Image
Image
houndawg
Level5
Level5
Posts: 23236
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
I am a fan of: SIU
A.K.A.: houndawg
Location: Egypt

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by houndawg »

BDKJMU wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 4:52 pm
UNI88 wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 10:18 am

Maybe BDK is right. "Posting someone's address, and protesting at someone's house like the left did with SCOTUS justices" is an attack on the highest level of our judicial system, one of our three branches of government. It's kind of like the January 6 insurrection, an attack on the highest level of our legislative system, one of our three branches of government. "Giving the name and showing the picture of someone on a TV screen" is more of an attack on our system at a local level. It's kind of like the AnTiFa riots of 2020.

Cue BDK twisting himself into a logic pretzel explaining why protesting outside of a SCOTUS justice's house is a major problem but January 6 wasn't a big deal.
Well, since people were arrested en masse for misdemeanor tresspass on 1/6, they sure as hell should have been arrested en masse at every SCOTUS house they protested at, which is a blatant violation of fed law.
:ohno:

They were just tour groups checking out the local real estate market.
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
User avatar
AZGrizFan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59959
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:40 pm
I am a fan of: Sexual Chocolate
Location: Just to the right of center

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by AZGrizFan »

houndawg wrote: Tue Jul 26, 2022 4:39 am
BDKJMU wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 4:52 pm
Well, since people were arrested en masse for misdemeanor tresspass on 1/6, they sure as hell should have been arrested en masse at every SCOTUS house they protested at, which is a blatant violation of fed law.
:ohno:

They were just tour groups checking out the local real estate market.
The folks filing single file through the capitol building and snapping pictures looked a lot more like tour groups than the violent mobs descending upon SCOTUS houses.
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
Image
houndawg
Level5
Level5
Posts: 23236
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
I am a fan of: SIU
A.K.A.: houndawg
Location: Egypt

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by houndawg »

AZGrizFan wrote: Tue Jul 26, 2022 6:44 am
houndawg wrote: Tue Jul 26, 2022 4:39 am

:ohno:

They were just tour groups checking out the local real estate market.
The folks filing single file through the capitol building and snapping pictures looked a lot more like tour groups than the violent mobs descending upon SCOTUS houses.
Did they break windows? Shit on the lawn? Chant "Hang Sam Alito? :coffee:
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
Baldy
Level4
Level4
Posts: 9609
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:38 pm
I am a fan of: Georgia Southern

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by Baldy »

houndawg wrote: Thu Jul 28, 2022 11:04 pm
AZGrizFan wrote: Tue Jul 26, 2022 6:44 am

The folks filing single file through the capitol building and snapping pictures looked a lot more like tour groups than the violent mobs descending upon SCOTUS houses.
Did they break windows? Shit on the lawn? Chant "Hang Sam Alito? :coffee:
One of them is in jail right now for attempting to assassinate a Supreme Court Justice.
Does that count? :?
houndawg
Level5
Level5
Posts: 23236
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
I am a fan of: SIU
A.K.A.: houndawg
Location: Egypt

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by houndawg »

Baldy wrote: Thu Jul 28, 2022 11:19 pm
houndawg wrote: Thu Jul 28, 2022 11:04 pm

Did they break windows? Shit on the lawn? Chant "Hang Sam Alito? :coffee:
One of them is in jail right now for attempting to assassinate a Supreme Court Justice.
Does that count? :?
typical overeaction.... :ohno:

Which justice? :mrgreen:
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by kalm »

Matt Gaetz continues to be a hell of a fundraiser for reproduction rights. :clap:

Image
Image
Image
houndawg
Level5
Level5
Posts: 23236
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
I am a fan of: SIU
A.K.A.: houndawg
Location: Egypt

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by houndawg »

BDKJMU wrote: Sat Jul 16, 2022 1:30 am
UNI88 wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 5:30 pm

I didn't realize they were protesting in the SCOTUS house(s). If they were then yes, they should be arrested en masse for misdemeanor trespass. :kisswink:
Don’t be obtuse. Protesting outside the SCOTUS homes was breaking the law just as much as most of those protesting inside the Capital.
The street is public territory
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 27897
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by BDKJMU »

houndawg wrote: Tue Aug 09, 2022 4:49 pm
BDKJMU wrote: Sat Jul 16, 2022 1:30 am
Don’t be obtuse. Protesting outside the SCOTUS homes was breaking the law just as much as most of those protesting inside the Capital.
The street is public territory
Irrelevant. It is a violation of federal law to protest outside of a fed judges residence, punishable by up to 1 year in prison. Doesn’t matter if the protestors are on the street, sidewalk, or lawn.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1507
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
..But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions.
User avatar
Skjellyfetti
Anal
Anal
Posts: 14411
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 9:56 pm
I am a fan of: Appalachian

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by Skjellyfetti »

But, the Constitution just says the people have the right to peaceably assemble. There are no qualifications.

So, following a strict constructionist interpretation, the people have the right to peaceably protest outside of a fed judge's residence on public property and that law is unconstitutional.
"The unmasking thing was all created by Devin Nunes"
- Richard Burr, (R-NC)
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by UNI88 »

Skjellyfetti wrote: Tue Aug 09, 2022 7:46 pm But, the Constitution just says the people have the right to peaceably assemble. There are no qualifications.

So, following a strict constructionist interpretation, the people have the right to peaceably protest outside of a fed judge's residence on public property and that law is unconstitutional.
Can they assemble without attempting to influence a judge?
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
Skjellyfetti
Anal
Anal
Posts: 14411
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 9:56 pm
I am a fan of: Appalachian

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by Skjellyfetti »

The Constitution doesn't say anything about influencing a judge. The Constitution says Congress can't make a law that prohibits the people from peaceably assembling. The law BDK cites outlaws peaceably assembling outside a federal judge's home. That is pretty clearly unconstitutional if you are a strict constructionist. No?
.
"The unmasking thing was all created by Devin Nunes"
- Richard Burr, (R-NC)
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19955
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by UNI88 »

Skjellyfetti wrote: Tue Aug 09, 2022 8:22 pm The Constitution doesn't say anything about influencing a judge. The Constitution says Congress can't make a law that prohibits the people from peaceably assembling. The law BDK cites outlaws peaceably assembling outside a federal judge's home. That is pretty clearly unconstitutional if you are a strict constructionist. No?
.
So infringing upon the right to assemble to prevent attempts to influence judges would be kind of like infringing upon the right to bear arms to limit assault weapons?
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59305
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: 2022 SCOTUS rulings

Post by kalm »

UNI88 wrote: Tue Aug 09, 2022 9:41 pm
Skjellyfetti wrote: Tue Aug 09, 2022 8:22 pm The Constitution doesn't say anything about influencing a judge. The Constitution says Congress can't make a law that prohibits the people from peaceably assembling. The law BDK cites outlaws peaceably assembling outside a federal judge's home. That is pretty clearly unconstitutional if you are a strict constructionist. No?
.
So infringing upon the right to assemble to prevent attempts to influence judges would be kind of like infringing upon the right to bear arms to limit assault weapons?
If you’re a “strict constructionist” I would think so.
Image
Image
Image
Post Reply