SCOTUS Justice Breyer is Out

NY SC says illegals can't vote.

2 students...at some southern university now have to be paid remuneration by the school because the school violated their right to free speech and religion.

The praying coach.

You know...i was just thinking this past week too that they stuffed all these rulings in at the last minute before Kiddie Porn Kitanji jackson comes in. Wonder what it must feel like to watch your elite club being infiltrated by those who are clearly unqualified. I'm thinking sotomeyer and kagan too here.

2cent wrote:

RV wrote:

2cent wrote: @HawkTheSlayer, it's W.VA vs. EPA that I was thinking of, and yup, that decision/ruling will be handed down tomorrow, as well.

I might not be so excited, but considering the latest rulings - on prayer on the field, and Roe vs Wade - my faith in the high court is starting to return.

Oh please let tomorrow's ruling come down on the side of the Constitution.  

It's odd, SCOTUS should have NEVER tried to legislate from the bench. Why people allowed it is beyond me. Why it was even attempted is also beyond my understanding. I would agree with you that I would LOVE to see SCOTUS get back to ruling by sticking to the U.S. Constitution.

Where, exactly, has the SCOTUS ruled from the bench of late?  ???  

Roe vs. Wade:  Straight from the Constitution.  And the right side - the side of what is constitutional - won.

W VA vs. EPA:  Another win for the constitution, as that is what 6 of the 9 justices sided with.  Yes, the law.  They didn't make one up; they simply ruled on what is correct and proper, according to the U.S. Consitution.

One that I was kinda bummed about, but they actually were correct, I believe.  That would be the one where Biden can change the 'Stay in Mexico' policy Trump had used.  This back-and-forth-ing would quit, if Congress would, once and for all, sign a rock solid foreign policy, where our borders are concerned.  
Not what I'd consider a win, but the SCOTUS did follow the rule of law.  Again, did not make law.

Another win for the Constitution:  the SCOTUS ruled AGAINST a  Maine law that excluded religious schools from their list of private schools that the state could provide funding for a student.  Again we see the SCOTUS doing its proper job.

Yet another:  The SCOTUS ruled that New York's stringent rules against 'Concealed Carry' were unConstitutional.  

*All these WINS, in every sense of the word, and yet, you and Casey persist in pushing the "IT'S ALL NEGATIVE!" narrative.  

Well I'm here to say, that NO, IT'S NOT!  Five cases right there off the top of my head where the SCOTUS ruled properly, yet I guess there'll always be some out there in the crowd who insist that we're losing when we're winning!  

"of late"? OF LATE? I'm sorry but, you sound like a liberal Democrat. The past very much DOES affect the future. What rock have you been living under? We have tampons in some elementary boys restrooms not to mention the unConstitutional "mandates" and blatant discrimination for crying out loud!

Because of some luny liberals who use firearms to hurt, maim and kill the innocent, Democrats are pushing the narrative that certain firearms are "evil", not the actual perpetrators mind you, the tools that criminals use! The SCOTUS should have NEVER weighed in on the abortion issue. SCOTUS weighed in due to politics plan and simple. One corrected decision which should have NEVER been rendered in the first place does not erase the many bad unConstitutional decisions that they have made over the years.

Yes, there have been some positive decisions from SCOTUS lately but, remember that they allowed voter fraud, mail in ballots and illegal election timelines as a result of their hatred for President Trump! If you've been paying attention, there are/were many decisions where SCOTUS either legislated from the bench, avoided the case altogether or ruled contrary to Constitutional law.

I'm sorry if you see reality based comments as "negative" but, reality is reality whether you happen to agree/like it or not.

Personally, I think the United States is in far too much trouble for any politician OR SCOTUS to "fix" or correct the situation. There is some more reality/negativity for you! Been to the gas station lately or are the prices too "negative" for you...

RV wrote:

2cent wrote:

RV wrote:

2cent wrote: @HawkTheSlayer, it's W.VA vs. EPA that I was thinking of, and yup, that decision/ruling will be handed down tomorrow, as well.

I might not be so excited, but considering the latest rulings - on prayer on the field, and Roe vs Wade - my faith in the high court is starting to return.

Oh please let tomorrow's ruling come down on the side of the Constitution.  

It's odd, SCOTUS should have NEVER tried to legislate from the bench. Why people allowed it is beyond me. Why it was even attempted is also beyond my understanding. I would agree with you that I would LOVE to see SCOTUS get back to ruling by sticking to the U.S. Constitution.

Where, exactly, has the SCOTUS ruled from the bench of late?  ???  

Roe vs. Wade:  Straight from the Constitution.  And the right side - the side of what is constitutional - won.

W VA vs. EPA:  Another win for the constitution, as that is what 6 of the 9 justices sided with.  Yes, the law.  They didn't make one up; they simply ruled on what is correct and proper, according to the U.S. Consitution.

One that I was kinda bummed about, but they actually were correct, I believe.  That would be the one where Biden can change the 'Stay in Mexico' policy Trump had used.  This back-and-forth-ing would quit, if Congress would, once and for all, sign a rock solid foreign policy, where our borders are concerned.  
Not what I'd consider a win, but the SCOTUS did follow the rule of law.  Again, did not make law.

Another win for the Constitution:  the SCOTUS ruled AGAINST a  Maine law that excluded religious schools from their list of private schools that the state could provide funding for a student.  Again we see the SCOTUS doing its proper job.

Yet another:  The SCOTUS ruled that New York's stringent rules against 'Concealed Carry' were unConstitutional.  

*All these WINS, in every sense of the word, and yet, you and Casey persist in pushing the "IT'S ALL NEGATIVE!" narrative.  

Well I'm here to say, that NO, IT'S NOT!  Five cases right there off the top of my head where the SCOTUS ruled properly, yet I guess there'll always be some out there in the crowd who insist that we're losing when we're winning!  

"of late"? OF LATE? I'm sorry but, you sound like a liberal Democrat. The past very much DOES affect the future. What rock have you been living under? We have tampons in some elementary boys restrooms not to mention the unConstitutional "mandates" and blatant discrimination for crying out loud!

Because of some luny liberals who use firearms to hurt, maim and kill the innocent, Democrats are pushing the narrative that certain firearms are "evil", not the actual perpetrators mind you, the tools that criminals use! The SCOTUS should have NEVER weighed in on the abortion issue. SCOTUS weighed in due to politics plan and simple. One corrected decision which should have NEVER been rendered in the first place does not erase the many bad unConstitutional decisions that they have made over the years.

Yes, there have been some positive decisions from SCOTUS lately but, remember that they allowed voter fraud, mail in ballots and illegal election timelines as a result of their hatred for President Trump! If you've been paying attention, there are/were many decisions where SCOTUS either legislated from the bench, avoided the case altogether or ruled contrary to Constitutional law.

I'm sorry if you see reality based comments as "negative" but, reality is reality whether you happen to agree/like it or not.

Personally, I think the United States is in far too much trouble for any politician OR SCOTUS to "fix" or correct the situation. There is some more reality/negativity for you! Been to the gas station lately or are the prices too "negative" for you...

Land sakes, get a grip.
Since when did the Supreme Court weigh in on feminine hygiene products being available in boys' restrooms?

SHOW ME the last ruling from the SCOTUS that negated 2nd Amendment rights.

Of COURSE the SCOTUS should have weighed in on the Constitutional right/wrong of abortion.  And this time they got it right!  One should think you'd be elated!

Show me where the SCOTUS "allowed voter fraud," even weighed in on "illegal election timelines," and/or mail-in ballots.  I'd like to see the evidence.  

Also of, "If you've been paying attention, there are/were many decisions where SCOTUS either legislated from the bench, avoided the case altogether or ruled contrary to Constitutional law."
Oh, I have a few examples.  I'd just like to see if you'd like to offer a few of your own.

I'm perfectly even-tempered, when it comes to accepting reality.  I certainly don't go running my top off about prices at the gas pump, when the subject matter is rulings from the Supreme Court.  lol.

But don't you ever, EVER!, refer to me as a Liberal Democrat again!  GOT IT?!

2cent wrote:

RV wrote:

2cent wrote:

RV wrote:

2cent wrote: @HawkTheSlayer, it's W.VA vs. EPA that I was thinking of, and yup, that decision/ruling will be handed down tomorrow, as well.

I might not be so excited, but considering the latest rulings - on prayer on the field, and Roe vs Wade - my faith in the high court is starting to return.

Oh please let tomorrow's ruling come down on the side of the Constitution.  

It's odd, SCOTUS should have NEVER tried to legislate from the bench. Why people allowed it is beyond me. Why it was even attempted is also beyond my understanding. I would agree with you that I would LOVE to see SCOTUS get back to ruling by sticking to the U.S. Constitution.

Where, exactly, has the SCOTUS ruled from the bench of late?  ???  

Roe vs. Wade:  Straight from the Constitution.  And the right side - the side of what is constitutional - won.

W VA vs. EPA:  Another win for the constitution, as that is what 6 of the 9 justices sided with.  Yes, the law.  They didn't make one up; they simply ruled on what is correct and proper, according to the U.S. Consitution.

One that I was kinda bummed about, but they actually were correct, I believe.  That would be the one where Biden can change the 'Stay in Mexico' policy Trump had used.  This back-and-forth-ing would quit, if Congress would, once and for all, sign a rock solid foreign policy, where our borders are concerned.  
Not what I'd consider a win, but the SCOTUS did follow the rule of law.  Again, did not make law.

Another win for the Constitution:  the SCOTUS ruled AGAINST a  Maine law that excluded religious schools from their list of private schools that the state could provide funding for a student.  Again we see the SCOTUS doing its proper job.

Yet another:  The SCOTUS ruled that New York's stringent rules against 'Concealed Carry' were unConstitutional.  

*All these WINS, in every sense of the word, and yet, you and Casey persist in pushing the "IT'S ALL NEGATIVE!" narrative.  

Well I'm here to say, that NO, IT'S NOT!  Five cases right there off the top of my head where the SCOTUS ruled properly, yet I guess there'll always be some out there in the crowd who insist that we're losing when we're winning!  

"of late"? OF LATE? I'm sorry but, you sound like a liberal Democrat. The past very much DOES affect the future. What rock have you been living under? We have tampons in some elementary boys restrooms not to mention the unConstitutional "mandates" and blatant discrimination for crying out loud!

Because of some luny liberals who use firearms to hurt, maim and kill the innocent, Democrats are pushing the narrative that certain firearms are "evil", not the actual perpetrators mind you, the tools that criminals use! The SCOTUS should have NEVER weighed in on the abortion issue. SCOTUS weighed in due to politics plan and simple. One corrected decision which should have NEVER been rendered in the first place does not erase the many bad unConstitutional decisions that they have made over the years.

Yes, there have been some positive decisions from SCOTUS lately but, remember that they allowed voter fraud, mail in ballots and illegal election timelines as a result of their hatred for President Trump! If you've been paying attention, there are/were many decisions where SCOTUS either legislated from the bench, avoided the case altogether or ruled contrary to Constitutional law.

I'm sorry if you see reality based comments as "negative" but, reality is reality whether you happen to agree/like it or not.

Personally, I think the United States is in far too much trouble for any politician OR SCOTUS to "fix" or correct the situation. There is some more reality/negativity for you! Been to the gas station lately or are the prices too "negative" for you...

Land sakes, get a grip.
Since when did the Supreme Court weigh in on feminine hygiene products being available in boys' restrooms?

SHOW ME the last ruling from the SCOTUS that negated 2nd Amendment rights.

Of COURSE the SCOTUS should have weighed in on the Constitutional right/wrong of abortion.  And this time they got it right!  One should think you'd be elated!

Show me where the SCOTUS "allowed voted fraud," even weighed in on "illegal election timelines," and/or mail-in ballots.  I'd like to see the evidence.  

Also of, "If you've been paying attention, there are/were many decisions where SCOTUS either legislated from the bench, avoided the case altogether or ruled contrary to Constitutional law."
Oh, I have a few examples.  I'd just like to see if you'd like to offer a few of your own.

I'm perfectly even-tempered, when it comes to accepting reality.  I certainly don't go running my top off about prices at the gas pump, when the subject matter is rulings from the Supreme Court.  lol.

But don't you ever, EVER!, refer to me as a Liberal Democrat again!  GOT IT?!  

Would never picked you as that 2 lol

lol

2cent wrote:lol

A few peeps think I'm on the left, couldn't be further from the truth , I just accept that there are certain obligations we have to the less fortunate, That doesn't mean I like it lol

vege57 wrote:

2cent wrote:lol

A few peeps think I'm on the left, couldn't be further from the truth , I just accept that there are certain obligations we have to the less fortunate, That doesn't mean I like it lol

You don't strike me as Left. You strike me as personal choice. That's as Right as it goes, even if some on the Right don't grasp the Constitutional properness of that.

2cent wrote:

vege57 wrote:

2cent wrote:lol

A few peeps think I'm on the left, couldn't be further from the truth , I just accept that there are certain obligations we have to the less fortunate, That doesn't mean I like it lol

You don't strike me as Left.  You strike me as personal choice.  That's as Right as it goes, even if some on the Right don't grasp the Constitutional properness of that.

We don't have a constitution in NZ, the closest would be the bill of rights , quite basic

vege57 wrote:

2cent wrote:

vege57 wrote:

2cent wrote:lol

A few peeps think I'm on the left, couldn't be further from the truth , I just accept that there are certain obligations we have to the less fortunate, That doesn't mean I like it lol

You don't strike me as Left.  You strike me as personal choice.  That's as Right as it goes, even if some on the Right don't grasp the Constitutional properness of that.

We don't have a constitution in NZ, the closest would be the bill of rights , quite basic

Sorry, I forgot. I was selfishly referring to our Constitution - making it all about ME! :DRAMA: LOL

Okay, reality. I don't know if we look at obligations to the less fortunate the same way or not, but we certainly do see eye-to-eye when it comes to property rights - and obligations - along with how much encroachment we're willing to give mr. government upon our private property, which includes our wages, our belongings, and what we have upon ourselves in our whereabouts.
Some things are no business of the nosey.

2cent wrote:

vege57 wrote:

2cent wrote:

vege57 wrote:

2cent wrote:lol

A few peeps think I'm on the left, couldn't be further from the truth , I just accept that there are certain obligations we have to the less fortunate, That doesn't mean I like it lol

You don't strike me as Left.  You strike me as personal choice.  That's as Right as it goes, even if some on the Right don't grasp the Constitutional properness of that.

We don't have a constitution in NZ, the closest would be the bill of rights , quite basic

Sorry, I forgot.  I was selfishly referring to our Constitution - making it all about ME!  :DRAMA:  LOL

Okay, reality.  I don't know if we look at obligations to the less fortunate the same way or not, but we certainly do see eye-to-eye when it comes to property rights - and obligations - along with how much encroachment we're willing to give mr. government upon our private property, which includes our wages, our belongings, and what we have upon ourselves in our whereabouts.  
Some things are no business of the nosey.  

""Sorry, I forgot.  I was selfishly referring to our Constitution - making it all about ME!  :DRAMA:  LOL""

Don't be sorry, I'm reasonable familiar with the US constitution so knew exactly where you were coming from