Jump to content
Latbear4blk

SCJ rules 6-3 against work discrimination

Recommended Posts

Posted

As Joe Biden might say, "this is a big fucking deal."

Glad this happened.  Disappointed our President and his administration were on the wrong side of this and fought against it. Glad a few of the Supremes jumped on board with the liberal block. However, more court cases to come.

  • Members
Posted

Well, Justice Kavanugh came through for the president as Senator Graham forecast. Bad news for Senator Collins in Maine though. As a result, the Republicans may give up a Senator seat.

Posted
4 hours ago, tassojunior said:

Next week they are going to rule that religious belief overrides this though. So not really such a big fucking deal. We've been around this wedding cake before. 

We will see. I think you might be right in the ruling. But, this is still a big deal.

  • Members
Posted

It is a huge victory, although Tasso's may be right to be pessimistic. As it right now, this considerably more consequential (beneficial) than previous victories, like the dismissal don't tell don't ask, and gay marriage.

  • Members
Posted

It was a GREAT day yesterday thanks to the ruling. Bodes extremely well for Gorsuch and Roberts. A big fuck you to Kavanaugh, Thomas, and Alito.

I have never felt anti-gay discrimination in any job I held or pursued. I am grateful for this. So this victory is not as important to me as gay marriage. 

There are several important cases coming, and the conventional wisdom is Trump will get some important wins. The most important thing that needs to happen for our future: GET TRUMP OUT. No more uber-conservative judges. We need progressive thinkers in our Supreme Court.

Posted
26 minutes ago, Latbear4blk said:

I am afraid the Dems will have to increase the number of judges in the SCJ, but why not?

You will recall FDR got into a very great deal of hot water when he proposed that idea.

  • Members
Posted
8 minutes ago, AdamSmith said:

You will recall FDR got into a very great deal of hot water when he proposed that idea.

It is going to be hell. But if it is the only way to reset the SCJ in the right direction, perhaps the fight would be worthy.

Posted
18 minutes ago, Latbear4blk said:

It is going to be hell. But if it is the only way to reset the SCJ in the right direction, perhaps the fight would be worthy.

I agree wholeheartedly. The Court makeup is a hot mess today. I just don’t think it could get through.

Posted
1 hour ago, AdamSmith said:

The Court still works, thank God.

Somewhat surprisingly.

Freed from political meddling, the absolute independence granted Justices is one of the strongest backbones of the Constitution; and succeeding precedence.

Also, Justices tend to drift toward the center over time, wherever they started at. If memory recalls (I may be repeating myself) Burger himself authored the unanimous opinion requiring Nixon to hand over the Watergate tapes.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burger_Court

  • Members
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, AdamSmith said:

Also, Justices tend to drift toward the center over time, wherever they started at. If memory recalls (I may be repeating myself) Rehnquist himself authored the unanimous opinion requiring Nixon to hand over the Watergate tapes.

Hugo Black had been in the KKK and Earl Warren was appointed as a conservative. 

The earth-shaking aspect of this case is Sotomyer's concurring opinion. Controversial. 

Edited by tassojunior
Posted
7 minutes ago, tassojunior said:

Hugo Black had been in the KKK and Earl Warren was appointed as a conservative. 

One has to say the current Chief is doing a far more responsible job than I expected of steering the thing down the center-line.

  • Members
Posted
6 minutes ago, tassojunior said:

Hugo Black had been in the KKK and Earl Warren was appointed as a conservative. 

Early Warren supported Dwight Eisenhower in 1952, not the more conservative Republican candidate, Senator Robert Taft from Ohio.

  • Members
Posted
1 minute ago, AdamSmith said:

One has to say the current Chief is doing a far more responsible job than I expected of steering the thing down the center-line.

But also people need to remember this case was not on the constitutionality of DACA but just on Trump's authority to  unilaterally overturn it. There are other cases brought by Texas and some states challenging DACA in a court that overturned DAPA. 

Posted
4 minutes ago, tassojunior said:

But also people need to remember this case was not on the constitutionality of DACA but just on Trump's authority to  unilaterally overturn it. There are other cases brought by Texas and some states challenging DACA in a court that overturned DAPA. 

The Court cannot overreach. They have to wait for these cases to reach them through the court appeals system.

  • Members
Posted
2 minutes ago, AdamSmith said:

The Court cannot overreach. They have to wait for these cases to reach them through the court appeals system.

But it's worth searching the decision to see if there's an indication they will uphold DACA (and DAPA) as constitutional when it gets to them. 

Posted
2 hours ago, tassojunior said:

But it's worth searching the decision to see if there's an indication they will uphold DACA (and DAPA) as constitutional when it gets to them. 

Agree. But repeating myself from above, one has the sense that Roberts. Increasingly the deciding vote, is drifting from the right toward the center.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...