Supreme Court Ready to Rule In Favor of Trump on DACA Termination

The Supreme Court had earlier upheld a circuit court ruling that DAPA -- DACA for adults -- was unconstitutional.

Then Trump used an executive order to cancel Barack Obama's previous DACA executive order.

Leftwing activists filed suit, claiming the Something precedent, and obviously a Hawaiian Judge found this argument plausible and issued a, get this, national injunction against the president's use of his executive authority.

Based on the day's oral arguments and questions from the justices, court watchers expect the Supreme Court to uphold Trump's order and end the injunction.

They're even questioning on what basis courts are even presuming to overrule an executive decision to cancel a prior executive decision.

Something we're all wondering.


A closely divided Supreme Court seemed inclined to uphold President Donald Trumpís bid to terminate the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program during arguments Tuesday morning.

The high courtís conservative majority appeared to think the administration has provided an adequate basis for ending the policy, and in spaces even wondered if the courts have power to review the dispute.

...

"You've got a court of appeals decision affirmed by an equally-divided Supreme Court," Roberts said, in reference to the earlier DAPA case. "Can't he just say that's the basis on which Iím making this decision?"

Apart from concerns about DACAís legality, Justice Brett Kavanaugh said the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) identified independent policy reasons for ending the program. He repeatedly challenged lawyers representing left-leaning states and civil rights groups to identify what more the government should have done.

Posted by: Ace of Spades at 03:20 PM




Comments

(Jump to bottom of page)

1 st

Posted by: DR.WTF at November 12, 2019 03:19 PM (aS1PU)

2 not st

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, Just All about the Billy Wilder movies at November 12, 2019 03:19 PM (q80AH)

3 They're even questioning on what basis courts are even presuming to overrule an executive decision to cancel a prior executive decision.

=========

Hey, maybe by ending Chevron we could clear this up.

"Is it in the statue explicitly? No? Then no, the executive isn't allowed to do this."

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, Just All about the Billy Wilder movies at November 12, 2019 03:20 PM (q80AH)

4 th

Posted by: Deep State is in Deep Shit at November 12, 2019 03:21 PM (BqBId)

5 hiya

Posted by: JT at November 12, 2019 03:21 PM (arJlL)

6 SCROTUS has ruled in favor of gun grabbers today as well.

This.Is.Not.Winning.

Posted by: Galil at November 12, 2019 03:21 PM (Pzzpr)

7 Before doing too much celebrating, recall all the legal so called experts predicted SCOTUS would nuke Obamacare based on how the justices acted and what they said.

How did that work out?

Posted by: Hotgas VIP Member at November 12, 2019 03:21 PM (wneaL)

8 The Court literally has no Standing here, do they?

I mean...

The Executive holds this power alone.

And Obama and Trump, in this case, are the same person.

Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2019 03:21 PM (AIGhm)

9 Well, I'm heartened to hear that our Supreme Court might rule in favor of following the fucking law.

Posted by: jwest at November 12, 2019 03:21 PM (U6f/q)

10 Now, that really would require my shocked face.

Posted by: Howard Johnson at November 12, 2019 03:21 PM (z1DPh)

11 They're even questioning on what basis courts are even presuming to overrule an executive decision to cancel a prior executive decision.
----------------------

It's in the Good and Plenty Clause.

Posted by: ... at November 12, 2019 03:22 PM (uEbPt)

12 i'll believe it when i see it

Posted by: BIG ALFREDO at November 12, 2019 03:22 PM (Vdukr)

13 You think our forebears are spinning in their graves, knowing that an elected president cannot undo the (illegal) thing that the previous president did?

Posted by: Murrican Ninja War Eeyore at November 12, 2019 03:22 PM (xptlg)

14 7 Before doing too much celebrating, recall all the legal so called experts predicted SCOTUS would nuke Obamacare based on how the justices acted and what they said.

How did that work out?
Posted by: Hotgas VIP Member at November 12, 2019 03:21 PM (wneaL)

===========

Well, they did, until Roberts changed his opinion at the last second. They were going to uproot the ACA completely until that sudden last second change.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, Just All about the Billy Wilder movies at November 12, 2019 03:23 PM (q80AH)

15 Something in the way, they legislate,
Attracts me like, no other legal theory!


Eh, maybe not ...

Posted by: Adriane the Chronological Critic ... at November 12, 2019 03:23 PM (LPnfS)

16 This makes me so happy I want to go to San Francisco and piss on a sidewalk.

Posted by: Aetius451AD at November 12, 2019 03:23 PM (ycWCI)

17 might've been first but caught reading the post below.



Posted by: golfman at November 12, 2019 03:23 PM (M3a0a)

18 Justice Brett Kavanaugh said the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) identified independent policy reasons for ending the program. He repeatedly challenged lawyers representing left-leaning states and civil rights groups to identify what more the government should have done.
------

Kneel before Zod, of course.

Posted by: WisRich at November 12, 2019 03:23 PM (G0vdT)

19 Build the dang wall!

Posted by: zombie John McStain at November 12, 2019 03:23 PM (/FMDH)

20 I very much doubt that the Justices could even hear the argument over the noise from Ginsberg's Iron Lung.


Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2019 03:23 PM (AIGhm)

21 11 They're even questioning on what basis courts are even presuming to overrule an executive decision to cancel a prior executive decision.
----------------------

It's in the Good and Plenty Clause.
Posted by: ... at November 12, 2019 03:22 PM (uEbPt)

Interstate Commerce, of course!

Posted by: Don Q at November 12, 2019 03:24 PM (NgKpN)

22 Trump violated the arbitrary and capricious clause. All decisions must be justified to not be arbitrary and capricious in the eyes of every single federal judge. If one finds a decision arbitrary and capricious, that judge has full unopposable veto power.

Posted by: Cat Ass Trophy at November 12, 2019 03:24 PM (UB/j7)

23 It's A Tax!!!

Posted by: Roberts at November 12, 2019 03:24 PM (NiXyF)

24 Anybody think one of the liberal wing will split off and vote correctly on this?

Yeah, me neither.

Posted by: Murrican Ninja War Eeyore at November 12, 2019 03:24 PM (xptlg)

25 SCOTUS allowed sandy hook lawsuits to proceed even though the law states clearly they cannot. So much for a conservative court. Even when we win we end up losing.

This is what the left is salivating at, bankrupting the gun industry through lawsuits. Voila, gun control without any actual votes on it. What scotus did today was disastrous.

Posted by: Hotgas VIP Member at November 12, 2019 03:24 PM (wneaL)

26 20 I very much doubt that the Justices could even hear the argument over the noise from Ginsberg's Iron Lung.


Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2019 03:23 PM (AIGhm)

=========

That's just the noise she makes when she squats more than three hundred pounds.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, Just All about the Billy Wilder movies at November 12, 2019 03:25 PM (q80AH)

27 Deport!
Deport!
Deport!

Posted by: squirrelly dan at November 12, 2019 03:25 PM (P0nip)

28 >>They're even questioning on what basis courts are even presuming to overrule an executive decision to cancel a prior executive decision.


If it so much as touches the penumbras, they have to consider it.

Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2019 03:25 PM (AIGhm)

29 "You've got a court of appeals decision affirmed by an equally-divided Supreme Court, Roberts said, in reference to the earlier DAPA case. "Can't he just say that's the basis on which I'm making this decision."
------------

One would think this would be a good rationale for the courts to stay out of a lot of disputes.

But what the heck, let's just change the millennial age definition of "marriage"

Posted by: SH at November 12, 2019 03:25 PM (sX1BW)

30 Yeah, now if only there were a legal equivalent of LOLGF for the circuit judges issuing national injunctions.

Posted by: joncelli, because somebody had to at November 12, 2019 03:25 PM (RD7QR)

31 I too, am of the believe it when I see it party.
This should not even be a court case.
The judiciary has abrogated to itself, with the collusion of congress, the lawmaking for our country.
At every level from traffic court to the SCOTUS.

Posted by: Winston a dreg of society at November 12, 2019 03:25 PM (Tt761)

32 "Aloha" not only means "Hello" and "Goodbye," it also means "Take it up the ass, stupid rednecks!"

Posted by: zombie at November 12, 2019 03:25 PM (fK2gX)

33 I will be shocked if it's a 6-3, if not a 5-4 decision. It's not going to be 9-0 as it plainly should be.

We have at least 3 and often 4 justices for whom law and the Constitution are impediments to their politics and they don't even try to hide it.

Posted by: Grump928(C) at November 12, 2019 03:25 PM (QQ+il)

34 At lunch was listening to Scott Adams and he was unsure which way the new tiebreaker Roberts would go.

Posted by: Skip at November 12, 2019 03:26 PM (ZCEU2)

35 24 Anybody think one of the liberal wing will split off and vote correctly on this?

Yeah, me neither.
Posted by: Murrican Ninja War Eeyore at November 12, 2019 03:24 PM (xptlg)

========

I can easily imagine Kagan voting in favor of letting Trump end DACA. She's probably the most honest liberal on the court.

And I think Breyer has a long history of deferring to the executive that could push him that way.

RBG and Sotomayor, though, are insane progtards and will never contribute to a major Trump victory.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, Just All about the Billy Wilder movies at November 12, 2019 03:26 PM (q80AH)

36 Hmmm, I'm reading and get to the bottom with no comments... and then it hits me *facepalm*

Posted by: NALNAMSAM at November 12, 2019 03:26 PM (+ldAm)

37 Speaking of SCOTUS, how's Rutabaga doing?

Posted by: wth at November 12, 2019 03:27 PM (v0R5T)

38 Justice Ginsberg asked of the Defendant Counsel, "What about your GAINZ, Bro? Do you even lift?"

Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2019 03:27 PM (AIGhm)

39 25
SCOTUS allowed sandy hook lawsuits to proceed even though the law states
clearly they cannot. So much for a conservative court. Even when we win
we end up losing.



This is what the left is salivating at, bankrupting the gun industry
through lawsuits. Voila, gun control without any actual votes on it.
What scotus did today was disastrous.


This is a huge black eye for Trump.

Posted by: Galil at November 12, 2019 03:27 PM (Pzzpr)

40 Kinda OT but relevant to the side bar links:

So Matt Reeves "The Batman" the one staring Twilight princess Robert Pattison has apparently race swapped 3 of the leads. Commissioner Gordon, Cat Woman and Batgirl (by default, being commissioner Gordon's daughter) are all apparently POCs now. I haven't given up hope. It still might be good or even great. The casting of Gordon is apparently Jeffrey Wright, who was outstanding in West World. But it's still a troubling sign. The first clue that this may end up being a woke cluster fuck.

Posted by: Max Power at November 12, 2019 03:27 PM (q177U)

41 At lunch was listening to Scott Adams and he was unsure which way the new tiebreaker Roberts would go.
Posted by: Skip at November 12, 2019 03:26 PM (ZCEU2)


What does the New York Times say? That's the way he will go.

Posted by: DR.WTF at November 12, 2019 03:27 PM (aS1PU)

42 Hmmm, I'm reading and get to the bottom with no comments... and then it hits me *facepalm*
Posted by: NALNAMSAM

You coulda been a contendah !

Posted by: JT at November 12, 2019 03:27 PM (arJlL)

43 Aloha" not only means "Hello" and "Goodbye," it also means "Take it up the ass, stupid rednecks!"
Posted by: zombie at November 12, 2019 03:25 PM (fK2gX)


Mahalo means "Bless your heart"

Posted by: Cat Ass Trophy at November 12, 2019 03:27 PM (UB/j7)

44

I don't care if I ever see my wife and kids again, but I want my dog back...

Posted by: J. Roberts, SCROTUS at November 12, 2019 03:27 PM (ZKH8Q)

45 7-2

Posted by: squirrelly dan at November 12, 2019 03:27 PM (P0nip)

46 It's different when Drumf does it!

Posted by: steevy at November 12, 2019 03:27 PM (KNsKs)

47 I can easily imagine Kagan voting in favor of letting Trump end DACA. She's probably the most honest liberal on the court.

And I think Breyer has a long history of deferring to the executive that could push him that way.

----------

Dems are more likely to use the executive to expand government, so deferring to the executive is a good idea, even if it grants Trump a temp victory of sorts.

Posted by: SH at November 12, 2019 03:28 PM (sX1BW)

48 37 Speaking of SCOTUS, how's Rutabaga doing?
Posted by: wth at November 12, 2019 03:27 PM (v0R5T)

Absorbed three souls just this morning. Winning!

Posted by: joncelli, because somebody had to at November 12, 2019 03:28 PM (RD7QR)

49 Not sure an argument that says that the Government needs to show they've "done all that they can" is even valid in the case, regardless. They can end DACA because they are given the Constitutional powers to do so, not because they offered everyone sufficient proof they've done "all that they can."

Posted by: Boswell at November 12, 2019 03:28 PM (32YRo)

50 46 It's different when Drumf does it!
Posted by: steevy at November 12, 2019 03:27 PM (KNsKs)

==========

How did you find the DNC's top secret motto for 2020?

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, Just All about the Billy Wilder movies at November 12, 2019 03:28 PM (q80AH)

51 Anybody have a sense of how long it'll be before they issue a decision?

Posted by: Zombie Robbo the Llama-Butcher at November 12, 2019 03:28 PM (uRVQN)

52 >>RBG and Sotomayor, though, are insane progtards and will never contribute to a major Trump victory.

From reports I've heard Sotomayer was complaing about the disruption this would cause and not arguing the law.

This is the famous Wise Latina compassion and empathy Obama told us about.

Posted by: JackStraw at November 12, 2019 03:28 PM (ZLI7S)

53 I'll believe it when I see it. I expect a Roberts' ruling that DACA is a tax.

Posted by: Dan Smoot's Apprentice at November 12, 2019 03:28 PM (H8QX8)

54 C'monnnnn, Trump!

By which I also mean, appoint some more strict constructionalist justices next year and/or during your second term. At least one when RBG finally goes shrieking off into the night. Are there any other current justices old enough to think about retiring?

Posted by: Wolfus Aurelius at November 12, 2019 03:28 PM (Ejm1K)

55 I wish one of these idiots would just look at the assholes who brought this lawsuit and say
"You gotta be fucking kidding me.. do you even understand what powers the president has? Constitution! Motherfuckers, do you even? Get the fuck outta here! And tell those stupid fucks that ruled in your favor before to read the constitution.

Posted by: madamemayhem (uppity wench) at November 12, 2019 03:28 PM (myjNJ)

56 19 Build the dang wall!
Posted by: zombie John McStain at November 12, 2019 03:23 PM (/FMDH)
=======
So much this.

Posted by: Murrican Ninja War Eeyore at November 12, 2019 03:28 PM (xptlg)

57

So DACA is probably going to be unconstitutional?

All those DACA kids out in the cold, no citizenry?

You know, just maybe a body of oh, I guess, maybe 535 people, could come together and create a complete system of logical laws and procedures to thoughtfully control immigration? To the benefit of both American citizens AND the millions of immigrants that want to do work here?


No, I am dreaming wild, crazy dreams again. Gonna ask JackStraw for a bong hit or two. Maybe that will stop these crazy dreams.

Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at November 12, 2019 03:29 PM (sy5kK)

58 52 >>RBG and Sotomayor, though, are insane progtards and will never contribute to a major Trump victory.

From reports I've heard Sotomayer was complaing about the disruption this would cause and not arguing the law.

This is the famous Wise Latina compassion and empathy Obama told us about.
Posted by: JackStraw at November 12, 2019 03:28 PM (ZLI7S)

===========

This lady is one of Obama's biggest legacies, huh?

I swear, any history of the Obama administration that's remotely accurate is going to be savage regarding that man's failures.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, Just All about the Billy Wilder movies at November 12, 2019 03:29 PM (q80AH)

59 ALL of the Judiciary is too safe in their sinecure.

We need to put a stop to lifetime appointments.

Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2019 03:30 PM (AIGhm)

60 Obama's DACA was an Executve 'ACTION' not an Order. even less weight than an Order.

Posted by: DBCooper at November 12, 2019 03:30 PM (ynKzW)

61 53: On our patience and on every taxpayer. So: legal.

Posted by: CN at November 12, 2019 03:30 PM (U7k5w)

62 The Hawaiian judge ruled under the precedent of The Law vs. GFY, and we know which side he and lefties will always choose.

Posted by: TheHoser at November 12, 2019 03:30 PM (IDjUx)

63 SCOTUS allowed sandy hook lawsuits to proceed even though the law states clearly they cannot. So much for a conservative court. Even when we win we end up losing.

This is what the left is salivating at, bankrupting the gun industry through lawsuits. Voila, gun control without any actual votes on it. What scotus did today was disastrous.
Posted by: Hotgas VIP Member at November 12, 2019 03:24 PM (wneaL)
***********
The ruling is insane. What a damn nightmare for the gun industry.

Posted by: redridinghood at November 12, 2019 03:30 PM (wiXsO)

64 Well, I'm heartened to hear that our Supreme Court might rule in favor of following the fucking law.

Why even bother to do that anymore? The Progs certainly don't care about the rule of law, why should we?

I'd like to see PDT start signing EO's at the rate of one per day or so to do things like end the idiotic idea of "anchor babies" and birthright citienship, close the Mexican border, and make Big Tech follow the Constitution to the letter (which means no more of their censorship of conservatives). Then outlaw sanctuary cities and begin arresting the mayors and/or city councils that pass those laws in opposition to the Constitution.


Now, what to do on Saturday? Outlaw "gun-free" zones. Sunday? Make American Civics a mandatory class (where the Founders writings are studied studiously) everywhere from K-kollidge.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy does whatever his television tells him at November 12, 2019 03:30 PM (HaL55)

65 Seriously, if the Court gives Trump (our country) the win, and deportations don't immediately begin, it will be a major fuck you.

Posted by: squirrelly dan at November 12, 2019 03:30 PM (P0nip)

66 38
Justice Ginsberg asked of the Defendant Counsel, "What about your GAINZ, Bro? Do you even lift?"
+++LOL. These jokes still crack me up. I am simple that way.

Posted by: washrivergal at November 12, 2019 03:30 PM (xlprn)

67 Adam Schiff has preemptively constrained what words Republicans may use. If, for example, they say the words "Eric Ciaramella", the Ethics Committee will take a break from examining Ilhan Omar's creative filings to smack yo' ass.

Not fucking kidding, Schiff is telling people not to say the words he himself published just a couple days ago and now pretends away.


https://tinyurl.com/yfpfl94s

Posted by: Huck Follywood at November 12, 2019 03:30 PM (NVYyb)

68 >>RBG and Sotomayor, though, are insane progtards and will never contribute to a major Trump victory.

From reports I've heard Sotomayer was complaing about the disruption this would cause and not arguing the law.

This is the famous Wise Latina compassion and empathy Obama told us about.

-------------

Sotomayer is not very smart, and RGB is too old to play the long game and just wants the affirmation of going against Trump.

Kagan will use this to bring Roberts to her side on something. Plus, she see's the benefit of expanded executive power.

Posted by: SH at November 12, 2019 03:30 PM (sX1BW)

69 This lady is one of Obama's biggest legacies, huh?


That's why she has the diabetes.

Posted by: Grump928(C) at November 12, 2019 03:30 PM (QQ+il)

70 This is a banana

Posted by: CNN at November 12, 2019 03:31 PM (FZYNt)

71 Well of course this means Trump should be impeached ... for (spins wheel) appointing justices to the Supreme Court

It's clearly an abuse of power to appoint only judges who share his judicial philosophy

Posted by: RoyalOil, Vicroy Canadian Territories at November 12, 2019 03:31 PM (k81AA)

72 68
Sotomayer is not very smart,
Posted by: SH at November 12, 2019 03:30 PM (sX1BW)

========

But have you seen her credentials, huh?

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, Just All about the Billy Wilder movies at November 12, 2019 03:31 PM (q80AH)

73 >>The ruling is insane. What a damn nightmare for the gun industry.


Now do alcohol.

Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2019 03:31 PM (AIGhm)

74 No more immigration. Deport the motherfuckers now.

Posted by: squirrelly dan at November 12, 2019 03:32 PM (P0nip)

75 Based on the day's oral arguments and questions from the justices, court watchers expect the Supreme Court to uphold Trump's order and end the injunction.

Yeah, and >70% expected SCOTUS to dropkick O-care. Justice Roberts will call it a tax or something and let the Orange Man Bad precedent become enshrined as precedent nationwide.

Posted by: physics geek at November 12, 2019 03:32 PM (huQJB)

76

I'm curious just how involved Ruthie was with the arguments. Or any talking at all. Or even eyes blinking. Once for 'YES", twice for "NO".

Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at November 12, 2019 03:32 PM (sy5kK)

77 I guess the Left is really going to have to start calling Roberts all sort of names if they expect him to pull their fat out of the fire this time!

Posted by: Ernst Schreiber at November 12, 2019 03:32 PM (xmKbk)

78 But what the heck, let's just change the millennial age definition of "marriage"
Posted by: SH at November 12, 2019 03:25 PM (sX1BW)
=======
Are we still allowed to disagree with SC decisions? I thought that once they shine rainbow colors on the White House, all arguments must cease.

Posted by: Murrican Ninja War Eeyore at November 12, 2019 03:32 PM (xptlg)

79 This is a huge black eye for Trump.

Posted by: Galil at November 12, 2019 03:27 PM (Pzzpr)

It's a devastating self-own for the Supreme Court. The President will correctly ask why the hell we need judges if gun makers are held to a standard no other company could meet.

It makes my idea of Trump as the new Caesar gain a lot of momentum.

Posted by: trev006 at November 12, 2019 03:32 PM (V+8Zu)

80 I smell Gelfling!!

Posted by: Ruth Bader Ginsburg at November 12, 2019 03:33 PM (QQ+il)

81 Posted by: squirrelly dan at November 12, 2019 03:30 PM (P0nip)

And how will that effect your vote for President in 2020? Do tell.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at November 12, 2019 03:33 PM (WI7YS)

82 I like listening to the moonbats wail over SCOTUS nominations, but honestly, SCOTUS doesn't mean fuckall anymore beyond determining which specific things aging lefties will piss and moan about a generation or two from now.

We are beyond the rule of law and heading into a contest the left will lose spectacularly.

Posted by: lurker (the other one, but spelled with a P) at November 12, 2019 03:33 PM (67XdO)

83 FIRST!!!!!

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:33 PM (Zz0t1)

84 Meanwhile, Mark Sanford is dropping out of the presidential race in order to spend more quality time with his mistress.

Posted by: Reformed NeverTrumper at November 12, 2019 03:33 PM (0jZvB)

85 Let the sandy hook lawsuits wind their way through the courts. They will hit trump Jrs Supreme Court in 2026 where the lone dissenter will be RBG.

Posted by: Cat Ass Trophy at November 12, 2019 03:33 PM (UB/j7)

86 The leftist justices were injecting the feelz into a case brought under law. That has no place in the judiciary at all. That is something the legislative and maybe the executive can indulge in, but not the judiciary. Especially at that level.

Posted by: AZ Hi Desert (Gringo fuertemente armado) at November 12, 2019 03:33 PM (GvT9q)

87 >>I smell Gelfling!!
Posted by: Ruth Bader Ginsburg at November 12, 2019 03:33 PM (QQ+il)


One of the Top 3 running gags at this dump.

Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2019 03:33 PM (AIGhm)

88 I will believe their decision when the vote is released. I trust a vast majority of my government NOT ONE BIT.

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:34 PM (Zz0t1)

89 65: We're not even deporting the ones with deportation orders, just be happy Cocaine Mitch hasn't passed a blanket amnesty.

Posted by: CN at November 12, 2019 03:34 PM (U7k5w)

90 I swear, any history of the Obama administration that's remotely accurate is going to be savage regarding that man's failures.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison

Everything the man touched turned into a superfund site - Iran, Libya, Cash for Clunkers, DACA, etc, etc, etc

Posted by: Boswell at November 12, 2019 03:34 PM (32YRo)

91 Anybody have a sense of how long it'll be before they issue a decision?
Posted by: Zombie Robbo the Llama-Butcher


#TwoWeeks

Posted by: rickb223 at November 12, 2019 03:34 PM (s2OJe)

92 6 SCROTUS has ruled in favor of gun grabbers today as well.

This.Is.Not.Winning.

Posted by: Galil at November 12, 2019 03:21 PM (Pzzpr)

This scares the bejesus out of me.

If you've had your eye on a gun - go get it. Today. Usually I'm not a panic buyer but the SC just gave a greenlight to anyone who has been shot to be able to file a lawsuit against the firearm manufacturer.

This is going to be catastrophic IMO.

Posted by: Defenestratus at November 12, 2019 03:34 PM (9V81o)

93 SCOTUS is really just now a second executive branch that's elected through a stupid parliamentary process anyway.

Posted by: joe, living dangerously at November 12, 2019 03:34 PM (KUaJL)

94 The ruling is insane. What a damn nightmare for the gun industry.





Now do alcohol.


Or cars and trucks.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy does whatever his television tells him at November 12, 2019 03:34 PM (HaL55)

95 I beat up a news producer and my mom gave me $5.

Posted by: Humphreyrobot at November 12, 2019 03:34 PM (pB6Gt)

96 They will hit trump Jrs Supreme Court in 2026 where the lone dissenter will be RBG.

========
Are you thinking RBG will be animatronic at that point?

Posted by: Huck Follywood at November 12, 2019 03:35 PM (NVYyb)

97 Love to hear Clarence Thomas say:
"I hear the Sinaloa Cartel is hiring."

Posted by: wth at November 12, 2019 03:35 PM (v0R5T)

98 >>Now do alcohol.

>>Or cars and trucks.


Legal Weed / Medical Marijuana

Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2019 03:35 PM (AIGhm)

99 If Nancy is smart she will but a deal with Trump on border security and changes to visa lottery and chain migration plus wall funding for some sort of DACA compromise.

We'll see how smart she really is.

Posted by: JackStraw at November 12, 2019 03:36 PM (ZLI7S)

100 SCROTUS has ruled in favor of gun grabbers today as well.


Details? Not seeing anything mentioned on SCOTUSblog but that might not mean anything.

Posted by: Bob the Bilderberg at November 12, 2019 03:37 PM (qc+VF)

101 25. Go to SCOTUS blog and read for yourself what the court did regarding the Sandy Hook lawsuit. The Sandy Hook families now have to prove that Remingtons advertising caused Adam Lanza to flip out steal his mothers gun shoot her then walk into Sandy Hook and open fire.

Posted by: Jen the original at November 12, 2019 03:37 PM (96m0f)

102 99 If Nancy is smart she will but a deal with Trump on border security and changes to visa lottery and chain migration plus wall funding for some sort of DACA compromise.

We'll see how smart she really is.
Posted by: JackStraw at November 12, 2019 03:36 PM (ZLI7S)

She's not in control of her caucus any longer.

Posted by: joncelli, because somebody had to at November 12, 2019 03:37 PM (RD7QR)

103 I'm convinced that most court decisions are made using the "making it up as I go along because OrangeManBad" rule of law.

Posted by: G. Gnome at November 12, 2019 03:37 PM (al6UK)

104 Sotomayer is not very smart,
Posted by: SH

Oh c'mon.

I sent her a gift card for Krispy Kreme.

Posted by: Miklos, a kindly sort at November 12, 2019 03:37 PM (QzkSJ)

105 Adam Schiff has preemptively constrained what words Republicans may use. If, for example, they say the words "Eric Ciaramella", the Ethics Committee will take a break from examining Ilhan Omar's creative filings to smack yo' ass.

This proves that he's the whistleblower, right? Now they can say they need him to testify because Schiff released his name.

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:37 PM (Zz0t1)

106 Expansive executive orders from liberal presidents: No arguments.

Rescinding those orders by sane/moderate/conservative presidents: Unspeakably unconstitutional.

Posted by: Nick in Tallahassee at November 12, 2019 03:38 PM (wGbBR)

107 When will they rule on this?

Posted by: Lizzy at November 12, 2019 03:38 PM (bDqIh)

108 She's not in control of her caucus any longer.
Posted by: joncelli, because somebody had to at November 12, 2019 03:37 PM (RD7QR)


For a fleeting moment I read that as caca, which is also true.

Posted by: DR.WTF at November 12, 2019 03:38 PM (aS1PU)

109 81 Posted by: squirrelly dan at November 12, 2019 03:30 PM (P0nip)

And how will that effect your vote for President in 2020? Do tell.
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at November 12, 2019 03:33 PM (WI7YS)

It won't but our country will never recover. The demographic change will be irreversible. It's not about voting for Trump, but keeping our country.

Posted by: squirrelly dan at November 12, 2019 03:38 PM (P0nip)

110 Any SC Justice not upholding the President's right to rescind a prior Executive Order should themselves be impeached.

There is no legal basis to give a President's Executive action the force of legislation. That, and any vote to the contrary is a clear assault on the Constitution itself (separation of powers).

Posted by: xnycpeasant at November 12, 2019 03:38 PM (koNhm)

111 20 I very much doubt that the Justices could even hear the argument over the noise from Ginsberg's Iron Lung.

Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2019 03:23 PM (AIGhm)

Man that was funny g.

Posted by: Cannibal Bob 'it's an eating disorder!' at November 12, 2019 03:38 PM (lmBz3)

112 Prager yesterday was talking polling shows women are more likely to be for curtailing free speech, it seems mostly so as not to offend or hurt someone's feelings.
Personally I would throw every one of those mother's sons out of the country so fast your head would spin.

Posted by: Skip at November 12, 2019 03:38 PM (ZCEU2)

113 Someone was freaking out over Trump's tweet on this, where he said he'd make a deal with them Dems once the court ruled in his favor.

How many times do we have to calm the excitable that this is another of Trump's offers they have to refuse?

I mean, no matter what the deal is, some illegals are getting the boot.
And even one is 100% unacceptable to the Dem base.

So, once again, Trump gets to claim the middle ground without moving an inch.

Posted by: RoyalOil, Vicroy Canadian Territories at November 12, 2019 03:38 PM (k81AA)

114 Gun stocks all down sharply on scotus news.

Fucking roberts does it again

Posted by: Hotgas VIP Member at November 12, 2019 03:39 PM (wneaL)

115 >>She's not in control of her caucus any longer.

I bet she gets a bit of her control back with this impeachment farce blows up in Schiff's face.

Besides, she will only need a fraction of her caucus. Republicans will contribute a lot of votes on this.

Posted by: JackStraw at November 12, 2019 03:39 PM (ZLI7S)

116 LNSSEOTJY, kids.

Posted by: Winston Wolf at November 12, 2019 03:39 PM (ejd/p)

117 We'll see how smart she really is.
Posted by: JackStraw

She'll never get the Squad wing of their party to go along - ever.

Posted by: Boswell at November 12, 2019 03:39 PM (32YRo)

118 100 SCROTUS has ruled in favor of gun grabbers today as well.


Details? Not seeing anything mentioned on SCOTUSblog but that might not mean anything.

Posted by: Bob the Bilderberg at November 12, 2019 03:37 PM (qc+VF)


The Court declined to take up a Writ of Certiorari on an interlocutory appeal in the case; they didn't make any ruling on the merits of the case because the case is still ongoing.

Posted by: Mikey NTH - Warm Yourself with Rages and Roars from the Outrage Outlet! at November 12, 2019 03:39 PM (hLRSq)

119 I hate trying to guess from oral arguments, though there was that case a few years back about civil asset forfeiture where I think it was Garland who told the solicitor general of Indiana that if he kept going down the road he was arguing he was going to lose worse.

That's a subtle hint that things are not going well for your position.

Posted by: alexthechick - Ragebunny. Hopping all around. at November 12, 2019 03:39 PM (mf5HN)

120 I just read a tweet claiming Jimmuh Carter had brain surgery without complications. The jokes write themselves!

Posted by: Concerned People's Front, Unbanned Chapter at November 12, 2019 03:40 PM (vGJY7)

121 39 25
SCOTUS allowed sandy hook lawsuits to proceed even though the law states
clearly they cannot. So much for a conservative court. Even when we win
we end up losing.



This is what the left is salivating at, bankrupting the gun industry
through lawsuits. Voila, gun control without any actual votes on it.
What scotus did today was disastrous.


This is a huge black eye for Trump.
Posted by: Galil at November 12, 2019 03:27 PM (Pzzpr)


Much worse.

What the Supreme Court did today was cement the foundation so there is now no turning back. The SC is letting the system destroy the 2nd Amendment through the back door.

This was possibly the last chance for a peaceful end to the charade of continuing a lawful society.

You figure out the meaning of my words.


Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at November 12, 2019 03:40 PM (sy5kK)

122 when

Posted by: JackStraw at November 12, 2019 03:40 PM (ZLI7S)

123 When will they rule on this?
Posted by: Lizzy at November 12, 2019 03:38 PM (bDqIh)
***************
I think June 2020

Posted by: redridinghood at November 12, 2019 03:40 PM (wiXsO)

124 Please rule against this to shut the blonde scarecrow up.

Posted by: Captain Hate at November 12, 2019 03:40 PM (y7DUB)

125 She's not in control of her caucus of her faculties any longer.

FTFY
She's has more Botox than human DNA now.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy does whatever his television tells him at November 12, 2019 03:40 PM (HaL55)

126 >> I hate trying to guess from oral


The stubble should mostly give it away.

Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2019 03:40 PM (AIGhm)

127 It isn't even that this executive can't cancel a prior executive's decision. It's the wholesale deference to the idea that Obama outranks Trump. This is just lawlessness.

Posted by: cpurick at November 12, 2019 03:40 PM (7NboP)

128 Not fucking kidding, Schiff is telling people not to say the words he himself published just a couple days ago and now pretends away.

https://tinyurl.com/yfpfl94s
Posted by: Huck Follywood at November 12, 2019 03:30 PM (NVYyb)
-------

So we've gone full Orwell.

Posted by: WisRich at November 12, 2019 03:40 PM (G0vdT)

129 To hell with the constitution... justice and the rule of law is dead in this country.

Posted by: Ugh at November 12, 2019 03:40 PM (bIfJ1)

130 Given the Gay Marriage decree I don't think the Constitution is much of a player in these decisions. The Consent of Governed has been reduced to a mere decorations hanging off a rear view mirror.

Posted by: Puddin Head at November 12, 2019 03:40 PM (yRAFu)

131 The Sandy Hook ruling only allows the suit to go forward. It in no way established a resolution to that suit. SCOTUS simply cleared the way for the plaintiffs to bear the burden of proof that an inanimate object is responsible for taking human life.

Posted by: Reformed NeverTrumper at November 12, 2019 03:40 PM (0jZvB)

132 >>I'm curious just how involved Ruthie was with the arguments. Or any
talking at all. Or even eyes blinking. Once for 'YES", twice for
"NO".


They could hear her breathing when she called in via WebEx?

Posted by: Lizzy at November 12, 2019 03:41 PM (bDqIh)

133 112 Prager yesterday was talking polling shows women are more likely to be for curtailing free speech, it seems mostly so as not to offend or hurt someone's feelings.
Personally I would throw every one of those mother's sons out of the country so fast your head would spin.

Posted by: Skip at November 12, 2019 03:38 PM (ZCEU2)

I don't see how that would solve the problem.

Posted by: Someguy at November 12, 2019 03:41 PM (O+iVW)

134 99. Much of her caucus does not represent Americans any longer (as we understand the term). She cannot bargain on this issue, as she does not have the votes to deliver.

Posted by: Nick in Tallahassee at November 12, 2019 03:41 PM (wGbBR)

135 To me a divided court means 4 or 5 liberals rule based on their feelings not on the text of the law.

Words mean things or they don't.

Posted by: nip at November 12, 2019 03:41 PM (Izot6)

136 Besides, she will only need a fraction of her caucus. Republicans will contribute a lot of votes on this.

Posted by: JackStraw

They'll burn Nancy down for it, too - she knows that - she's not in control - otherwise she never would have lit the match to this dumpster fire of an impeachment inquiry.

Posted by: Boswell at November 12, 2019 03:41 PM (32YRo)

137 100 Bob the SC refused to grant certiorari to the Sandy Hook families lawsuit against Remington. The lawsuit can continue no ruling as to the merits of the case.

Posted by: Jen the original at November 12, 2019 03:41 PM (96m0f)

138 Be careful what you wish for racists. Just as the election of trump discredited clintonism in the democratic party alowing the election of AOC to become the real thought leader of the democratic party. This will radicalize the democrat party even more, finally driving clinton/bidenism out of power in the democrat party. Even if democratic party radicalization helps trump in short term ( unlikey because of demographics even with biden crooks nominee ) In 2024 AOC will become president and you will be your way to the re-education camp!

Posted by: raimondo at November 12, 2019 03:42 PM (GE++x)

139 In a sane world it would be 9-0 on both the sandy hook and DACA bullshit.

Posted by: Hotgas VIP Member at November 12, 2019 03:42 PM (wneaL)

140 @3

I fully expect a constitutionally illiterate Rube Golbergian monstrosity along the lines of...


Well, Obama didn't have the constitutional or statutory authority to do what he did but he did it and created a "process" and you simply cannot short circuit or end a "process" without going through the existing statutory and rules based process regimes.

So DACA stands, you must start the rules process all over again because you didn't follow the process for getting rid of something that didn't go through the process.


You dig?


It's all bullshit.

Posted by: Huxley's Eye Glass Emporium at November 12, 2019 03:42 PM (JLrCS)

141 Are you thinking RBG will be animatronic at that point?
Posted by: Huck Follywood at November 12, 2019 03:35 PM


More machine than jurist...twisted and evil.

Posted by: Obi Wan at November 12, 2019 03:42 PM (ejd/p)

142 Any morons out there proficient at Big Commerce webstores?

I need some work done and I'm not opposed to riding an American like a rented mule like I would if I used a freelancer in India. You'll need to work cheap and be eternally grateful for whatever scraps you receive in payment.

This is one step above an unpaid internship.

If you prove to be remarkable in your work, fast and accurate, you may receive a written commendation - but definitely no more money.

Apply in Ace's comment section. This position will go fast.

Posted by: jwest at November 12, 2019 03:42 PM (U6f/q)

143
Willowed:

In the real world, not the Mueller world, charging people with crimes is hard. A good prosecutor isn't going to bring charges unless he has evidence and he believes he has enough evidence to prove a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. It's a very high bar as it should be.

--------

I get what you're saying.

And yes, Obama would be a tougher nut to crack, but I think it could be done.

But Hill-dawg? Hillary has swaying mountain of evidence against her. For many things, but just on the email server alone. Comey himself laid out a solid case for charging the boozey old sack of lipids, and then just said "nothing to see here, move along, no reasonable prosecutor would blah blah blah, have a nice day."

Just because a crooked, partisan, inveterate liar of a prosecutor with an unbroken record of corruption stretching back for decades says something, doesn't make it so.

She could easily be charged.

And she won't be.

And that is flatly unacceptable.

Posted by: Yudhishthira's Dice at November 12, 2019 03:43 PM (AzW6q)

144 She's not in control of her caucus any longer.
Posted by: joncelli, because somebody had to at November 12, 2019 03:37 PM (RD7QR)

For a fleeting moment I read that as caca, which is also true.
Posted by: DR.WTF at November 12, 2019 03:38 PM (aS1PU)
..........

I read it as "carcass" which is also true.

Posted by: wth at November 12, 2019 03:43 PM (v0R5T)

145 Be careful what you wish for racists. Just as the
election of trump discredited clintonism in the democratic party alowing
the election of AOC to become the real thought leader of the democratic
party. This will radicalize the democrat party even more, finally
driving clinton/bidenism out of power in the democrat party. Even if
democratic party radicalization helps trump in short term ( unlikey
because of demographics even with biden crooks nominee ) In 2024 AOC
will become president and you will be your way to the re-education camp!

Posted by: raimondo at November 12, 2019 03:42 PM (GE++x)

Your crazy rant really requires more exclamation points, raimondo

Posted by: redbanzai the Southerner at November 12, 2019 03:43 PM (nAiE/)

146 There is a law which has been in place since 2005 that says in plain English you cannot sue gun makers if someone uses the gun commit a crime. SCOTUS said today LOLGF to that law.

Posted by: Hotgas VIP Member at November 12, 2019 03:43 PM (wneaL)

147 The Sandy Hook ruling only allows the suit to go forward. It in no way established a resolution to that suit. SCOTUS simply cleared the way for the plaintiffs to bear the burden of proof that an inanimate object is responsible for taking human life.
Posted by: Reformed NeverTrumper at November 12, 2019 03:40 PM (0jZvB)


Again, now do alcohol.

In the age of everything revolving around "feewings," most manufacturers are now fucked. They're going to get sued by everyone for everything negative that happens to them forevermore.

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:43 PM (Zz0t1)

148 In a sane world it would be 9-0 on both the sandy hook and DACA bullshit.
Posted by: Hotgas VIP Member at November 12, 2019 03:42 PM


I think I've spotted the flaw there...

Posted by: RedMindBlueState at November 12, 2019 03:43 PM (ejd/p)

149 I fully expect a constitutionally illiterate Rube Golbergian monstrosity along the lines of...


Well, Obama didn't have the constitutional or statutory authority to do what he did but he did it and created a "process" and you simply cannot short circuit or end a "process" without going through the existing statutory and rules based process regimes.

So DACA stands, you must start the rules process all over again because you didn't follow the process for getting rid of something that didn't go through the process.


You dig?


It's all bullshit.
Posted by: Huxley's Eye Glass Emporium at November 12, 2019 03:42 PM (JLrCS)


It hurts how believable this is.

Posted by: joe, living dangerously at November 12, 2019 03:44 PM (KUaJL)

150 Well, so much for "...shall not be infringed," huh?

Sorry Ben, we couldn't keep this wonderful country you and your fellow genii gave us. We had a good run for a while, but we didn't deal with our domestic enemies when we had the chance.


Now they're all in power. #WASTF

Posted by: BackwardsBoy does whatever his television tells him at November 12, 2019 03:44 PM (HaL55)

151 128 Not fucking kidding, Schiff is telling people not to say the words he himself published just a couple days ago and now pretends away.

https://tinyurl.com/yfpfl94s
Posted by: Huck Follywood at November 12, 2019 03:30 PM (NVYyb)
-------

So we've gone full Orwell.
Posted by: WisRich at November 12, 2019 03:40 PM (G0vdT)

How the hell does that work with the Speech and Debate Clause?

Posted by: Don Q at November 12, 2019 03:44 PM (NgKpN)

152 138 Be careful what you wish for racists. Just as the election of trump discredited clintonism in the democratic party alowing the election of AOC to become the real thought leader of the democratic party. This will radicalize the democrat party even more, finally driving clinton/bidenism out of power in the democrat party. Even if democratic party radicalization helps trump in short term ( unlikey because of demographics even with biden crooks nominee ) In 2024 AOC will become president and you will be your way to the re-education camp!
-----------------
Shaping the battlefield is not a bad thing. I, for one, welcome our Puerto Rican overloards.

Posted by: Puddin Head at November 12, 2019 03:44 PM (yRAFu)

153 100 Bob the SC refused to grant certiorari to the Sandy Hook families lawsuit against Remington. The lawsuit can continue no ruling as to the merits of the case.

------------

I suspect what he is concerned with is the process is the punishment, so even if you prevail on the merits, having to defend a bunch of lawsuits will bankrupt you anyway.

I don't believe that is where this is going, but it is a valid concern.

I just don't know enough about this case or ruling to comment. The fact that I have not seen too much on it today, leads me to believe it isn't a big deal - yet.

Sounds like it isn't ripe yet. Unfortunately, those who typically care for the rule of law - like conservative justices - care more about ripeness than our leftists counterparts.

Posted by: SH at November 12, 2019 03:44 PM (sX1BW)

154 Not fucking kidding, Schiff is telling people not to say the words he himself published just a couple days ago and now pretends away.
..........

But can we say SPY?

Posted by: wth at November 12, 2019 03:44 PM (v0R5T)

155 Well, they did, until Roberts changed his opinion at
the last second. They were going to uproot the ACA completely until
that sudden last second change.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, Just All about the Billy Wilder movies at November 12, 2019 03:23 PM (q80AH)

That's why Epstein had to die.

Posted by: There is no conspiracy at November 12, 2019 03:44 PM (J70i0)

156 In the age of everything revolving around "feewings," most non-leftist manufacturers are now fucked. They're going to get sued by leftists for everything negative that happens to them forevermore.
Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:43 PM (Zz0t1)

FIFY.

Posted by: joe, living dangerously at November 12, 2019 03:45 PM (KUaJL)

157
I can easily imagine Kagan voting in favor of letting Trump end DACA. She's probably the most honest liberal on the court.
--------

Nah. Not if her vote means anything.

Posted by: ... at November 12, 2019 03:45 PM (uEbPt)

158 In 2024 AOC
will become president and you will be your way to the re-education camp!

Posted by: raimondo at November 12, 2019 03:42 PM (GE++x)


Are you really this stupid or do you just eat lead paint chips?

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:45 PM (Zz0t1)

159 142 Any morons out there proficient at Big Commerce webstores?

I need some work done and I'm not opposed to riding an American like a rented mule like I would if I used a freelancer in India. You'll need to work cheap and be eternally grateful for whatever scraps you receive in payment.

This is one step above an unpaid internship.

If you prove to be remarkable in your work, fast and accurate, you may receive a written commendation - but definitely no more money.

Apply in Ace's comment section. This position will go fast.
Posted by: jwest at November 12, 2019 03:42 PM (U6f/q)

Maybe you should throw in some whipping just to spice up the offer.

Posted by: joncelli, because somebody had to at November 12, 2019 03:45 PM (RD7QR)

160 "I bet she gets a bit of her control back with this impeachment farce blows up in Schiff's face."


How much does Jerry Nadler hate Corey Lewandowski? Nadler was set to be the impeachment star until Lewandowski made him look like a bumbling idiot when Nadler could not locate the Mueller Report language he cited in his question.

Hey Jerry, if you you reference a quote from a document in a question to a witness, you better damn well have the document handy.

Posted by: Benji Carver at November 12, 2019 03:45 PM (OD2ni)

161 raimondo, I will staple your tongue to your taint so you can watch me kick your ass!

Posted by: squirrelly dan at November 12, 2019 03:45 PM (gCAC6)

162 Don't they wait for most rulings to be released until June when they rush them all out the last week then run away not to be heard from until October?

Posted by: Skip at November 12, 2019 03:45 PM (ZCEU2)

163 So how quickly after the ruling is issued of it goes in our favor will they again find another bull shit reason for a Hawaiian judge to issue a new injunction.

Posted by: Buzzion at November 12, 2019 03:45 PM (qkXUc)

164 In a related story, Dick Morris has it on good authority that ObamaCare will die in the Senate.

Posted by: ... at November 12, 2019 03:45 PM (uEbPt)

165 By the way the fed law protecting gun manufacturers has loopholes in it to provide for exceptions. Those loopholes are what the lawyers for Sandy Hook are claiming eliminates the laws protection in this case.

Posted by: Jen the original at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (96m0f)

166 In the age of everything revolving around "feewings," most manufacturers are now fucked. They're going to get sued by everyone for everything negative that happens to them forevermore.
-------------
Tell me about it.

Posted by: Cigarette Manufacturers at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (yRAFu)

167 >>They'll burn Nancy down for it, too - she knows that - she's not in control - otherwise she never would have lit the match to this dumpster fire of an impeachment inquiry.

I wouldn't be so sure. If it looks like this decision will go for Trump then they have lost their leverage and they will be blamed for not saving the dreamers. But so will Trump. I think it would be a mistake to think public opinion wants these "kids" deported regardless of what we want. Hell, Trump was ready to make a deal a year ago when Nancy and Chuck walked.

In my experience deals get done when both parties have something to win and at the same time can minimize their losses.

Posted by: JackStraw at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (ZLI7S)

168 Maybe you should throw in some whipping just to spice up the offer.
Posted by: joncelli, because somebody had to at November 12, 2019 03:45 PM (RD7QR)

I thought people would take the whippings for granted...

Posted by: jwest at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (U6f/q)

169 160
Hey Jerry, if you you reference a quote from a document in a question to a witness, you better damn well have the document handy.
Posted by: Benji Carver at November 12, 2019 03:45 PM (OD2ni)

==========

Thankfully, Schiff is just as clueless but has less shame. Let's the circus continue for longer.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, Just All about the Billy Wilder movies at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (q80AH)

170
justice and the rule of law is dead in this country.
Posted by: Ugh at November 12, 2019 03:40 PM (bIfJ1)

Don't take this personally, because lots of people do this, but I've had enough of the daily doom (It's all over!!!!!) for the day.

Catch folks on another thread--maybe.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (WI7YS)

171 153

American outdoor brands is down 7% on the news. It is a pretty fucking big deal.

Posted by: Hotgas VIP Member at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (wneaL)

172 Posted by: raimondo at November 12, 2019 03:42 PM (GE++x)


Gabby Johnson, ladies and gentlemen!

Posted by: Mr. Peebles at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (oVJmc)

173 Ugh.

S/B: Just because a crooked, partisan, inveterate liar of a prosecutor cop with an unbroken record of corruption stretching back for decades says something, doesn't make it so.

Posted by: Yudhishthira's Dice at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (AzW6q)

174 Hillary has swaying mountain of evidence against her. For many things, but just on the email server alone. Comey himself laid out a solid case for charging the boozey old sack of lipids, and then just said "nothing to see here, move along, no reasonable prosecutor would blah blah blah, have a nice day."

Just because a crooked, partisan, inveterate liar of a prosecutor with an unbroken record of corruption stretching back for decades says something, doesn't make it so.

She could easily be charged.

And she won't be.

And that is flatly unacceptable.
Posted by: Yudhishthira's Dice


She won't be because the statute of limitations has been reached.

Posted by: rickb223 at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (s2OJe)

175 I can easily imagine Kagan voting in favor of letting Trump end DACA. She's probably the most honest liberal on the court.
--------

Nah. Not if her vote means anything.

Posted by: ... at November 12, 2019 03:45 PM (uEbPt)


Yep. If it comes down to her, conservatives are fucked.

Remember, she's an Owebama pick. She is a communist of the highest order or she's not on his list.

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (Zz0t1)

176 >>They'll burn Nancy down for it, too - she knows that - she's not in
control - otherwise she never would have lit the match to this dumpster
fire of an impeachment inquiry.

I still subscribe to the theory that Pelosi is letting Schiff hang himself with the failed impeachment attempt, rendering him and the squad wing of her party impotent and returning power to her.

Posted by: Reformed NeverTrumper at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (0jZvB)

177 Thus the Roman Republic died.

Posted by: Archer at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (VyDpG)

178 full moon tonight.

it's the November Full Beaver Moon.

Posted by: nurse ratched at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (d7Ww2)

179 163 So how quickly after the ruling is issued of it goes in our favor will they again find another bull shit reason for a Hawaiian judge to issue a new injunction.
------------------
Then we will have to bomb Pearl Harbor.

Posted by: Cigarette Manufacturers at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (yRAFu)

180 With regards to illehal immigrants in schools the Department of Education should take a page from the "raise the legal drinkong age to 21 or no federal dollars for you." DoE says "verify immigration status of your students or lolgf on federal dollars."

Hit them where it hurts. Grab the pussies by the wallet.

Posted by: Nevyan at November 12, 2019 03:47 PM (a7HML)

181 By the way the fed law protecting gun manufacturers has loopholes in it to provide for exceptions. Those loopholes are what the lawyers for Sandy Hook are claiming eliminates the laws protection in this case.

---------

Makes sense. There are a lot of laws that protect against negligence but not against gross negligence or will misconduct.

So all you are really doing is debating what is negligence v. gross negligence.

But it is a higher bar.

Posted by: SH at November 12, 2019 03:47 PM (sX1BW)

182 178
full moon tonight.



it's the November Full Beaver Moon.

Posted by: nurse ratched at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (d7Ww2)
That sounds better than the "No nut November" memes out there.

Posted by: Our Country is Screwed at November 12, 2019 03:47 PM (N39Ws)

183 I just read a tweet claiming Jimmuh Carter had brain surgery without complications. The jokes write themselves!

Posted by: Concerned People's Front, Unbanned Chapter at November 12, 2019 03:40 PM (vGJY7)
..........

I hope he got a nice steel plate installed like mine.

Posted by: Joe Biden at November 12, 2019 03:47 PM (v0R5T)

184 139 In a sane world it would be 9-0 on both the sandy hook and DACA bullshit.
Posted by: Hotgas VIP Member at November 12, 2019 03:42 PM (wneaL)


In a world that the Supreme Court cared about the future of the US, it would be 9-0 on both the sandy hook and DACA bullshit.

Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at November 12, 2019 03:47 PM (sy5kK)

185 full moon tonight.

it's the November Full Beaver Moon.
Posted by: nurse ratched at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (d7Ww2)


Now your just taunting us.

Posted by: DR.WTF at November 12, 2019 03:47 PM (aS1PU)

186 Are you really this stupid or do you just eat lead paint chips?

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:45 PM (Zz0t1)

Embrace the power of 'and'....

Posted by: Deplorable Ian Galt at November 12, 2019 03:47 PM (ufFY8)

187 "In a related story, Dick Morris has it on good authority that ObamaCare will die in the Senate.
Posted by: ... "


Also, subscribe to his newsletter and he will tell you how Christine O'Donnell can really win the general election.

Posted by: Benji Carver at November 12, 2019 03:48 PM (OD2ni)

188 Even Breyer was wondering how, exactly, the DEMS were attacking POTUS' ability to do this.

Posted by: Nick in Tallahassee at November 12, 2019 03:48 PM (wGbBR)

189 What a f'n day. So this morning it's raining and 50 degrees, the temps have been steadily dropping since then. I go out grocery shopping and gas the Baja up and on the way home the motor craps out. Sounds like the rod bearings took a shit on me. I call a tow truck and get it home and go to heat up some coffee in the microwave, drop the damn cup and get it all over the place.

I've started drinking early.

Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at November 12, 2019 03:48 PM (T8A10)

190 I still subscribe to the theory that Pelosi is letting Schiff hang himself with the failed impeachment attempt, rendering him and the squad wing of her party impotent and returning power to her.
------------------
That would require Warren as the nominee and a 40 state Trump Landslide. I think we can help Nancy here.

Posted by: Cigarette Manufacturers at November 12, 2019 03:48 PM (yRAFu)

191
And that is flatly unacceptable.
Posted by: Yudhishthira's Dice at November 12, 2019 03:43 PM (AzW6q)

-----

It's the "no reasonable prosecutor" defense of government corruption.

IOW a universal declaration of surrender to LAWFARE.

Posted by: MAGA at November 12, 2019 03:48 PM (ti+Fs)

192 Sen. Mazie Hirono: "Believe In Climate Change As Though It's A Religion And Not A Science"

-
"As though," Corny?

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Tyrannosaur Wrangler at November 12, 2019 03:48 PM (+y/Ru)

193 190 I still subscribe to the theory that Pelosi is letting Schiff hang himself with the failed impeachment attempt, rendering him and the squad wing of her party impotent and returning power to her.
------------------
That would require Warren as the nominee and a 40 state Trump Landslide. I think we can help Nancy here.
Posted by: Cigarette Manufacturers at November 12, 2019 03:48 PM (yRAFu)

=========

Better to reign in hell than serve in heaven.

She wants to lead the Democratic Party whether in power or out of it.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, Just All about the Billy Wilder movies at November 12, 2019 03:48 PM (q80AH)

194 >>it's the November Full Beaver Moon.


I think she means Otter.

Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2019 03:48 PM (AIGhm)

195 >>But Hill-dawg? Hillary has swaying mountain of evidence against her. For many things, but just on the email server alone. Comey himself laid out a solid case for charging the boozey old sack of lipids, and then just said "nothing to see here, move along, no reasonable prosecutor would blah blah blah, have a nice day."

>>Just because a crooked, partisan, inveterate liar of a prosecutor with an unbroken record of corruption stretching back for decades says something, doesn't make it so.

>>She could easily be charged.

>>And she won't be.

>>And that is flatly unacceptable.

Maybe.

Do you remember what Barr said back at the end of May?

Posted by: JackStraw at November 12, 2019 03:49 PM (ZLI7S)

196 Apply in Ace's comment section. This position will go fast.
Posted by: jwest

Bet you already got 10 resumes from former Dead Spin writers, right - see how easy it is to learn to code?

Posted by: Boswell at November 12, 2019 03:49 PM (32YRo)

197 In 2024 AOC
will become president and you will be your way to the re-education camp!

Posted by: raimondo at November 12, 2019 03:42 PM (GE++x)

Us and our 300 million guns?

Posted by: Dan Smoot's Apprentice at November 12, 2019 03:50 PM (H8QX8)

198 SCOTUS allowed sandy hook lawsuits to proceed even though the law states
clearly they cannot. So much for a conservative court. Even when we win
we end up losing.



This is what the left is salivating at, bankrupting the gun industry
through lawsuits. Voila, gun control without any actual votes on it.
What scotus did today was disastrous.


This is a huge black eye for Trump.
Posted by: Galil at November 12, 2019 03:27 PM (Pzzpr)


Much worse.

What the Supreme Court did today was cement the foundation so there is now no turning back. The SC is letting the system destroy the 2nd Amendment through the back door.

This was possibly the last chance for a peaceful end to the charade of continuing a lawful society.

You figure out the meaning of my words.


Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at November 12, 2019 03:40 PM (sy5kK)



Not what happened. At all. In the slightest.

If anyone cares about, I don't know, ACTUAL FUCKING FACTS, here's the link to the denial of cert on the interlocutory appeal in the Remington case.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/111219zor_db8e.pdf

For those going, umm,, where is the opinion, there is no opinion. it's not even a sentence. It's on page 2, certiorari denied - look for docket number 19-168.


That's it. That's all it was.

There was no ruling on the merits.

There was no determination as to rights.

There was a refusal to take up an interlocutory appeal.

That's it.

You know, it would be truly helpful if people knew even the least little bit about how the appellate process works because procedural posture matters.

Now, as to substance, I think SCOTUS was wrong to refuse cert and that this issue was right for appeal as there is clear preemption of state law in this area and if there was ever a time to take up an interlocutory appeal, this is it.

But for all those of you running around with your hair on fire? Yeah. You're not even wrong.

Posted by: alexthechick - Ragebunny. Hopping all around. at November 12, 2019 03:50 PM (mf5HN)

199 195 Maybe.

Do you remember what Barr said back at the end of May?
Posted by: JackStraw at November 12, 2019 03:49 PM (ZLI7S)

=========

Was it in code through his bagpipe?

My metal filings were singing while he was playing.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, Just All about the Billy Wilder movies at November 12, 2019 03:50 PM (q80AH)

200 Can Hawaiian judges overrule the Supreme Court?

Posted by: Benji Carver at November 12, 2019 03:50 PM (OD2ni)

201 Garland Gorsuch THEY BOTH HAVE Gs okay!

Posted by: alexthechick - Ragebunny. Hopping all around. at November 12, 2019 03:50 PM (mf5HN)

202 I still subscribe to the theory that Pelosi is letting Schiff hang himself with the failed impeachment attempt, rendering him and the squad wing of her party impotent and returning power to her.

-
Donkey Chompers has a sadz.

Ocasio-Cortez: Politicians Falling Short 'Makes You Feel Like You Never Want To Love Again'

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Tyrannosaur Wrangler at November 12, 2019 03:50 PM (+y/Ru)

203 With all his Vespa money is Ace going to go all Hollywood on us?

Posted by: Cigarette Manufacturers at November 12, 2019 03:50 PM (yRAFu)

204 178 full moon tonight.

it's the November Full Beaver Moon.
Posted by: nurse ratched at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (d7Ww2)

Well thank God it's not the full otter moon or...you know...

Posted by: joncelli, because somebody had to at November 12, 2019 03:51 PM (RD7QR)

205 SCROTUS has ruled in favor of gun grabbers today as well.

This.Is.Not.Winning.



Posted by: Galil at November 12, 2019 03:21 PM (Pzzpr)

---
they, AFAICT, ruled on the clear language of the law, which carves out exceptions to the protections if there is, among other things, a violation of state of federal law in how the firearms are advertised.

Posted by: redc1c4 at November 12, 2019 03:51 PM (P0DGT)

206 What they SHOULD'VE done is decide that the Sandy Hook lawsuit against gun manufacturers was baseless because without any show of negligence or hardware fault causing death or injury by the manufacturer, there IS no basis for a lawsuit.

You can sue Remington because some fuck used one to shoot up a school? Then I'm suing General Motors for building the car that allowed a drunk illegal alien to kill Americans AND suing the booze manufacturers for making the brew that got them drunk.

This is a ridiculously bad decision.

The price of EVERYTHING will go up accordingly.

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:51 PM (Zz0t1)

207 Maybe you should throw in some whipping just to spice up the offer.
Posted by: joncelli, because somebody had to at November 12, 2019 03:45 PM (RD7QR)

I thought people would take the whippings for granted...
Posted by: jwest at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM


I believe the deal should be rum, sodomy and the lash. Surely some Morons have to be up for two out of the three.

Posted by: RedMindBlueState at November 12, 2019 03:51 PM (ejd/p)

208 A closely divided Supreme Court

Of course it is. Tell me again how judges don't matter, NeverTrumpers with your smirking Muh Gorsuch shizzle.

Posted by: Guy Smiley at November 12, 2019 03:51 PM (1XNk8)

209 alcohol commercials are fairly responsible about always warning about ... don't drink and drive, and designated drivers, moderation.


I suppose a gun manufacturer that advertised glorious murder from their AK with the thing that goes up, or their new armor piercing bullets ... or some such ... that could face a lawsuit. But advertising about the safe use of a gun ... is different.


idk if they should never face such a lawsuit, but of course the danger is the ignorant public, swayed by any tragedy involving children. I'm just trying to see why they may have let the case proceed. The gun maker would have to be negligent in the extreme, at promoting murderous use of weapon that is essential to personal defense (as guaranteed in 2a)

Posted by: illiniwek at November 12, 2019 03:51 PM (Cus5s)

210 178
full moon tonight.



it's the November Full Beaver Moon.

Posted by: nurse ratched at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (d7Ww2)

When did we start naming moons? Beaver moon, strawberry moon, etc.

Posted by: josephistan at November 12, 2019 03:52 PM (7HtZB)

211 Justice Thomas will write the majority opinion on this one.

He'll flense the flesh off the bones of the lower courts for allowing nationwide injunctions and for ignoring the president's clear authority to terminate DACA by executive order, and for generally attempting to set policy for the political branches.

I think Thomas really has his blood up at the moment.

The forecast calls for pain.

Posted by: Sharkman at November 12, 2019 03:52 PM (Pk69y)

212 >>Was it in code through his bagpipe?

>>My metal filings were singing while he was playing.

No, it was in plain English.

https://tinyurl.com/y5j2gtld

Posted by: JackStraw at November 12, 2019 03:52 PM (ZLI7S)

213 Can Hawaiian judges overrule the Supreme Court?

-
Well, it is a living document.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Tyrannosaur Wrangler at November 12, 2019 03:52 PM (+y/Ru)

214 >>The Sandy Hook ruling only allows the suit to go forward. It in no
way established a resolution to that suit. SCOTUS simply cleared the way
for the plaintiffs to bear the burden of proof that an inanimate object
is responsible for taking human life.

Posted by: Reformed NeverTrumper at November 12, 2019 03:40 PM (0jZvB)



>>Again, now do alcohol.

Name one alcohol manufacturer/distributor that has been held responsible for a drunk driving fatality.
Done.

Posted by: Reformed NeverTrumper at November 12, 2019 03:52 PM (0jZvB)

215 I think Schiffty is doing what Sloppy Choppers wants, but is afraid it will turn south and doesn't want it on her head.

Posted by: Skip at November 12, 2019 03:52 PM (ZCEU2)

216 I hate trying to guess from oral arguments, though there was that case a few years back about civil asset forfeiture where I think it was Garland who told the solicitor general of Indiana that if he kept going down the road he was arguing he was going to lose worse.

That's a subtle hint that things are not going well for your position.
Posted by: alexthechick - Ragebunny. Hopping all around. at November 12, 2019 03:39 PM (mf5HN)


Did Clarence Thomas whisper to his pimp-hand, "Soon, baby. Soon" while the pro-DACA side was arguing their case?

Posted by: Colorado Alex In Exile at November 12, 2019 03:52 PM (wCmLp)

217 The entire fuc*king country is being sucked into the whirlpool of Woke.

Posted by: Dan Smoot's Apprentice at November 12, 2019 03:52 PM (H8QX8)

218 How long before court is replaced by Tarot cards, scatology and Magic Eight Ball?

They aren't all that far away from using Ouija.

Posted by: Craig From Oz at November 12, 2019 03:53 PM (lD3vL)

219 I think she means Otter.

I think she means Woodpecker. If there are any left within a 50-mile radius of her home, that is.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy does whatever his television tells him at November 12, 2019 03:53 PM (HaL55)

220 "Bet you already got 10 resumes from former Dead Spin writers, right - see how easy it is to learn to code?
Posted by: Boswell "


Dave Portnoy from Barstool Sports is really enjoying the demise of Deadspin. He offered the former writers 100k a year to be his butler.

Can't blame him though as Deadspin pretty churned the same anti-Barstool article at least once a month.

Posted by: Benji Carver at November 12, 2019 03:53 PM (OD2ni)

221 211 Justice Thomas will write the majority opinion on this one.

He'll flense the flesh off the bones of the lower courts for allowing nationwide injunctions and for ignoring the president's clear authority to terminate DACA by executive order, and for generally attempting to set policy for the political branches.

I think Thomas really has his blood up at the moment.

The forecast calls for pain.
Posted by: Sharkman at November 12, 2019 03:52 PM (Pk69y)

=========

This would be a great vehicle for that nationwide injunction stoppage.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, Just All about the Billy Wilder movies at November 12, 2019 03:53 PM (q80AH)

222 it's the November Full Beaver Moon.
Posted by: nurse ratched at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (d7Ww2)


Mmmmmmmm.......Beaver.......


https://youtu.be/wS3LWOTCW4A

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:53 PM (Zz0t1)

223 200 Can Hawaiian judges overrule the Supreme Court?

They'll certainly try.

Posted by: Guy Smiley at November 12, 2019 03:53 PM (1XNk8)

224 Commissioner Gordon, Cat Woman and Batgirl (by default, being commissioner Gordon's daughter) are all apparently POCs now.

How bad this is depends on what kind of POC we're talking about. If Catwoman and Batgirl are Sabado Gigante models with large chests, then I'm not seeing the problem.

Posted by: Ian S. at November 12, 2019 03:53 PM (ZGrMX)

225 198

Tell that to Wall St. gun related stocks be it gun manufacturers or related companies are all down bigly. Just a few lawsuit wins and it could bankrupt the entire industry. And this is what the left has been pushing for. They know they will never ban guns legislatively so they will do the next best thing and destroy the industry.

Posted by: Hotgas VIP Member at November 12, 2019 03:54 PM (wneaL)

226 >>Dave Portnoy from Barstool Sports is really enjoying the demise of Deadspin. He offered the former writers 100k a year to be his butler.


I think even Ace would take that offer.

Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2019 03:54 PM (AIGhm)

227 154 Not fucking kidding, Schiff is telling people not to say the words he himself published just a couple days ago and now pretends away.
..........

But can we say SPY?
Posted by: wth at November 12, 2019 03:44 PM (v0R5T)
--------

I read his memo again and it appears more saber rattling then anything. He references the whistle blower protection act but doesn't say the whistle blower is entitled to anonymity. Just implies it.

Posted by: WisRich at November 12, 2019 03:54 PM (G0vdT)

228 Name one alcohol manufacturer/distributor that has been held responsible for a drunk driving fatality.
Done.

Posted by: Reformed NeverTrumper at November 12, 2019 03:52 PM (0jZvB)


Yet.

Wait and see now that the SC said it's OK.

Why do you fail to see this?

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:54 PM (Zz0t1)

229 Maybe you should throw in some whipping just to spice up the offer.
Posted by: joncelli, because somebody had to at November 12, 2019 03:45 PM (RD7QR)

I thought people would take the whippings for granted...
Posted by: jwest

Ah, well, in that case I'd recommend throwing in some surprise otter anal. That out to seal the deal.

Posted by: Howard Johnson at November 12, 2019 03:54 PM (z1DPh)

230 Rainmonda has a bit of an unhealthy obsession with AOC Donkey Chompers. Like, maybe she needs to beware of stalkers.

Posted by: Lady in Black - Death to the Man Bun at November 12, 2019 03:54 PM (JoUsr)

231 I believe the deal should be rum, sodomy and the lash. Surely some Morons have to be up for two out of the three.
Posted by: RedMindBlueState at November 12, 2019 03:51 PM (ejd/p)


Fringe benefits, eh?

Yeah, that might work.

Posted by: jwest at November 12, 2019 03:55 PM (U6f/q)

232 Maybe the gun makers will be compelled to include disclaimers in their advertisements:
"Surgeon General's Warning: Bullets administered at high velocity are known to the State of California to cause fatality."
"Please rampage responsibly."

Posted by: Reformed NeverTrumper at November 12, 2019 03:55 PM (0jZvB)

233 Justice Thomas will write the majority opinion on this one.

"He'll flense the flesh off the bones of the lower courts for allowing nationwide injunctions and for ignoring the president's clear authority to terminate DACA by executive order, and for generally attempting to set policy for the political branches.

I think Thomas really has his blood up at the moment.

The forecast calls for pain.
Posted by: Sharkman"


Good observation and I agree with you. He has been sending signals that he is fed up with these nationwide injunctions handed down by district courts.

Posted by: Benji Carver at November 12, 2019 03:55 PM (OD2ni)

234 224 Commissioner Gordon, Cat Woman and Batgirl (by default, being commissioner Gordon's daughter) are all apparently POCs now.

How bad this is depends on what kind of POC we're talking about. If Catwoman and Batgirl are Sabado Gigante models with large chests, then I'm not seeing the problem.
Posted by: Ian S. at November 12, 2019 03:53 PM (ZGrMX)

==========

Nah, I have little fear around this. They don't feel like stunt castings like turning Ariel black in The Little Mermaid.

Hell, Man of Steel made Perry White black and no one cared. It wasn't some big racial comment. It was because Laurence Fishburne is kinda awesome.

Matt Reeves is a quality director, and I have about as much confidence in him delivering a good Batman movie as I would from anyone else. His two Planet of the Apes movies are some of the smartest big budget action movies of the last couple of decades.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, Just All about the Billy Wilder movies at November 12, 2019 03:55 PM (q80AH)

235 Wonder how RBG's feeling these days?

Posted by: DOGGFISH at November 12, 2019 03:55 PM (lMn1U)

236 full moon tonight.



it's the November Full Beaver Moon.

Posted by: nurse ratched at November 12, 2019 03:46 PM (d7Ww2)

When did we start naming moons? Beaver moon, strawberry moon, etc.
Posted by: josephistan


Mamas Not Happy Might As Well Go Fishing Moon

Posted by: rickb223 at November 12, 2019 03:55 PM (s2OJe)

237 You know, it would be truly helpful if people knew even the least little bit about how the appellate process works because procedural posture matters.

Now, as to substance, I think SCOTUS was wrong to refuse cert and that this issue was right for appeal as there is clear preemption of state law in this area and if there was ever a time to take up an interlocutory appeal, this is it.

But for all those of you running around with your hair on fire? Yeah. You're not even wrong.
Posted by: alexthechick - Ragebunny. Hopping all around. at November 12, 2019 03:50 PM (mf5HN)

I'm glad you went to the trouble to say that. It could still come back to the Court down the road, after a trial. They just decided not to decide, today. It's disappointing, but the SCOTUS turns down at least 99.5% of the appeals that are sent their way.

Posted by: Tom Servo at November 12, 2019 03:56 PM (Kpl3J)

238 Is "Hotgas VIP Member" Lurking Lurker under a ban-evading name? Because he sure sounds like Lurking Lunkhead under a ban-evading name.

Posted by: Ian S. at November 12, 2019 03:56 PM (ZGrMX)

239 When did we start naming moons? Beaver moon, strawberry moon, etc.
Posted by: josephistan at November 12, 2019 03:52 PM (7HtZB)



The Harvest Moon has been called that for a LONG time.

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:56 PM (Zz0t1)

240 >>Name one alcohol manufacturer/distributor that has been held responsible for a drunk driving fatality.

Done.



Posted by: Reformed NeverTrumper at November 12, 2019 03:52 PM (0jZvB)



Yet.



Wait and see now that the SC said it's OK.



>>Why do you fail to see this?
Keyword: "Yet"...means it hasn't happened.

Posted by: Reformed NeverTrumper at November 12, 2019 03:56 PM (0jZvB)

241 If you want DACA pass a law. This is not in the court's jurisdiction. And it's beyond ridiculous to think that an EO is permanent.

Besides that the SC ruled to continue to allow Remington to be sued for mass shootings. WTF.

Posted by: Easy Andy at November 12, 2019 03:56 PM (Q5ALd)

242 >>Justice Thomas will write the majority opinion on this one.



He'll flense the flesh off the bones of the lower courts for
allowing nationwide injunctions and for ignoring the president's clear
authority to terminate DACA by executive order, and for generally
attempting to set policy for the political branches.
- - - -


Please please please let this happen!Thomas is da bomb

Posted by: Lizzy at November 12, 2019 03:56 PM (bDqIh)

243 >>Wonder how RBG's feeling these days?



Swole.

Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2019 03:57 PM (AIGhm)

244 Can someone link the ad where Remington encouraged people to go shot up a school? Cuz other than that, I see no reasoning for letting this lawsuit go forward.

Posted by: Hotgas VIP Member at November 12, 2019 03:57 PM (wneaL)

245 "Commissioner Gordon, Cat Woman and Batgirl (by default, being commissioner Gordon's daughter) are all apparently POCs now.

How bad this is depends on what kind of POC we're talking about. If Catwoman and Batgirl are Sabado Gigante models with large chests, then I'm not seeing the problem.
Posted by: Ian S."


Yup. Batgirl in the 60's show had a mighty impressive rack.

Posted by: Benji Carver at November 12, 2019 03:57 PM (OD2ni)

246
You can sue Remington because some fuck used one to shoot up a school? Then I'm suing General Motors for building the car that allowed a drunk illegal alien to kill Americans AND suing the booze manufacturers for making the brew that got them drunk.

This is a ridiculously bad decision.

The price of EVERYTHING will go up accordingly.
Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:51 PM (Zz0t1)

The only winners? The Lawyers.

And who sits on the Supreme Court?

9 Lawyers.

Posted by: Don Q at November 12, 2019 03:57 PM (NgKpN)

247 Giving the left a reason to cheer gun lawsuits may not be such a winner come November.

Posted by: Cigarette Manufacturers at November 12, 2019 03:57 PM (yRAFu)

248 226
>>Dave Portnoy from Barstool Sports is really enjoying the demise
of Deadspin. He offered the former writers 100k a year to be his butler.





I think even Ace would take that offer.

Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2019 03:54 PM (AIGhm)
I'd offer them 100k to be my Groom of the Stool.

Posted by: Our Country is Screwed at November 12, 2019 03:58 PM (N39Ws)

249 Sen. Mazie Hirono: "Believe In Climate Change As Though It's A Religion And Not A Science"



-

"As though," Corny?


Sorry, you Prog cvnt. NFW will I ever believe in something I know to be false.


"Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

Posted by: BackwardsBoy does whatever his television tells him at November 12, 2019 03:58 PM (HaL55)

250 You know, it would be truly helpful if people knew even the least little bit about how the appellate process works because procedural posture matters.

Now, as to substance, I think SCOTUS was wrong to refuse cert and that this issue was right for appeal as there is clear preemption of state law in this area and if there was ever a time to take up an interlocutory appeal, this is it.

But for all those of you running around with your hair on fire? Yeah. You're not even wrong.
Posted by: alexthechick - Ragebunny. Hopping all around. at November 12, 2019 03:50 PM (mf5HN)

I'm glad you went to the trouble to say that. It could still come back to the Court down the road, after a trial. They just decided not to decide, today. It's disappointing, but the SCOTUS turns down at least 99.5% of the appeals that are sent their way.

--------------

There is obviously a middle ground for outrage on this.

I do suspect we will see a lot of litigation on this - the left will mobilize to sue them to death. It is a good strategy. It worked for gay marriage. At some point, you will need the Court to hand over a clear and convincing victory in a phase or in a case where the Court would traditionally take the easier path.

Posted by: SH at November 12, 2019 03:58 PM (sX1BW)

251 The Harvest Moon has been called that for a LONG time.

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:56 PM (Zz0t1)

This place has a history:

https://tinyurl.com/y7v7dnwg
BOC Harvest Moon



Posted by: Deplorable Ian Galt at November 12, 2019 03:58 PM (ufFY8)

252 Tell that to Wall St. gun related stocks be it gun manufacturers or related companies are all down bigly. Just a few lawsuit wins and it could bankrupt the entire industry.

And this is what the left has been pushing for. They know they will never ban guns legislatively so they will do the next best thing and destroy the industry.
Posted by: Hotgas VIP Member


Because the cops. Nd military can buy their guns from the cartels or Russia.

Posted by: rickb223 at November 12, 2019 03:58 PM (s2OJe)

253 Maybe the gun makers will be compelled to include disclaimers in their advertisements:
"Surgeon General's Warning: Bullets administered at high velocity are known to the State of California to cause fatality."
"Please rampage responsibly."
Posted by: Reformed NeverTrumper at November 12, 2019 03:55 PM (0jZvB)


You jest, but this will come soon.

"This well built firearm is for personal protection/hunting only. DO NOT USE FOR MASS SHOOTING OF HUMANS."

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:59 PM (Zz0t1)

254 The Harvest Moon has been called that for a LONG time.


The Hunters Moon is another.

Posted by: Grump928(C) at November 12, 2019 03:59 PM (QQ+il)

255 "Thou shalt have no other gods before me."
-------------
Is that an Obama quote?

Posted by: Cigarette Manufacturers at November 12, 2019 03:59 PM (yRAFu)

256 Wait and see now that the SC said it's OK.

Why do you fail to see this?
Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:54 PM (Zz0t1)"

What the SC said was "go have the trial, then get back with us and we'll look at it."

Posted by: Tom Servo at November 12, 2019 03:59 PM (Kpl3J)

257 230 Rainmonda has a bit of an unhealthy obsession with AOC Donkey Chompers. Like, maybe she needs to beware of stalkers.
Posted by: Lady in Black - Death to the Man Bun at November 12, 2019 03:54 PM (JoUsr)

Like, he's sniffing my used tampons? And it's creepy and he won't stay 100 yards away like the courrrrrrrt said? Yanno?

Posted by: AOC Hearts Raimando at November 12, 2019 03:59 PM (RD7QR)

258 When was the last proof-of-life we saw on RBG anyway?

Posted by: Guy Smiley at November 12, 2019 03:59 PM (1XNk8)

259 249 Sen. Mazie Hirono: "Believe In Climate Change As Though It's A Religion And Not A Science"



-

"As though," Corny?

Sorry, you Prog cvnt. NFW will I ever believe in something I know to be false.


"Thou shalt have no other gods before me."
Posted by: BackwardsBoy does whatever his television tells him at November 12, 2019 03:58 PM (HaL55)
-----------

Old & Busted: Follow the science.

New Hotness: Climate Change, Don't stop believin.

Posted by: WisRich at November 12, 2019 04:00 PM (G0vdT)

260 and the Blood Moon.

Posted by: Grump928(C) at November 12, 2019 04:00 PM (QQ+il)

261 This place has a history:

https://tinyurl.com/y7v7dnwg
BOC Harvest Moon



Posted by: Deplorable Ian Galt at November 12, 2019 03:58 PM (ufFY8


Well played, sir. Well played.

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 04:00 PM (Zz0t1)

262 Off sock

Posted by: Puddin Head at November 12, 2019 04:00 PM (yRAFu)

263 That's why Epstein had to die.
Posted by: There is no conspiracy at November 12, 2019 03:44 PM (J70i0)

Epstein is dead!?!? How'd that happen?

He sure as heck didn't kill himself.

Posted by: Just Lily at November 12, 2019 04:00 PM (SuGPw)

264 But for all those of you running around with your hair on fire? Yeah. You're not even wrong.
Posted by: alexthechick - Ragebunny. Hopping all around. at November 12, 2019 03:50 PM (mf5HN)



Now, gun-hating groups and billionaires, can use their fucking money-grubbing lawyers to sue them out of existence by making wild-assed claims they have to fight in court, until they are bankrupt.

Michael Bloomberg has more eff you money than all the gun manufacturers profits for many years. He personally can now tie up every gun manufacturer, and while he is at it, every ammunition manufacturer. And they have to pay to fight it. Profit margins are not high in gun and ammo manufacturing.

This is such an obvious tactic that the state passed a law against it. The SC said "Eff You, gummakers, take away their protections and let them go bankrupt."

Where am I wrong?



Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at November 12, 2019 04:00 PM (sy5kK)

265 The Killing Moon

Echo & the Bunnymen

Posted by: Guy Smiley at November 12, 2019 04:01 PM (1XNk8)

266 Suing a gun manufacturer for manufacturing guns is not a state issue but rather goes to the heart of the 2nd Amendment.

Posted by: Easy Andy at November 12, 2019 04:01 PM (Q5ALd)

267 Yup. Batgirl in the 60's show had a mighty impressive rack.
Posted by: Benji Carver at November 12, 2019 03:57 PM (OD2ni)



RIP to Yvonne Craig, who sadly died of breast cancer. How ironic.

Posted by: Curmudgeon at November 12, 2019 04:01 PM (ujg0T)

268 it's the November Wynona's Big Brown Full Beaver Moon.

Posted by: nurse ratched


Oblig.:

https://tinyurl.com/Primus-WBBB


Still one of the weirdest music vids ever. I love Primus.

Posted by: Sharkman at November 12, 2019 04:01 PM (Pk69y)

269 Still I see no reason not to use this gun case to start getting the voters worried. Guns move voters to the conservative side better than any issue. Might as well use this to remind voters on why you always need more justices.

Posted by: SH at November 12, 2019 04:01 PM (sX1BW)

270 Read any oped on guns in the NYT or WaPo and they are telling you what they want. Two pronged approach. First get financial companies to stop doing business with gun companies and then sure the shit out of them. Theyve been telling you this for years. Now it is happening on both fronts.

Posted by: Hotgas VIP Member at November 12, 2019 04:01 PM (wneaL)

271 Rainmonda has a bit of an unhealthy obsession with AOC Donkey Chompers. Like, maybe she needs to beware of stalkers.
Posted by: Lady in Black - Death to the Man Bun at November 12, 2019 03:54 PM (JoUsr)
........

She would just bite him.

Posted by: wth at November 12, 2019 04:02 PM (v0R5T)

272 The President is NOT above the law!

Posted by: And Other Random Things Libs Say at November 12, 2019 04:02 PM (YOhRS)

273 The Harvest Moon has been called that for a LONG time.
Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:56 PM (Zz0t1)

And then of course there's the Three Wolf Moon, immortalized on fine T-Shirts and Chevy Vans.

Posted by: Tom Servo at November 12, 2019 04:02 PM (Kpl3J)

274 The only winners? The Lawyers.

And who sits on the Supreme Court?

9 Lawyers.
Posted by: Don Q at November 12, 2019 03:57 PM (NgKpN)


Exactly.

Common man is fucked. Hard.

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 04:02 PM (Zz0t1)

275 When did we start naming moons? Beaver moon, strawberry moon, etc.

Posted by: josephistan at November 12, 2019 03:52 PM (7HtZB)


Sailor Moon?

Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at November 12, 2019 04:02 PM (T8A10)

276 >> I see no reason not to use this gun case to start getting the voters worried. Guns move voters to the conservative side better than any issue. Might as well use this to remind voters on why you always need more ammunition.

Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2019 04:02 PM (AIGhm)

277 232 Maybe the gun makers will be compelled to include disclaimers in their advertisements:
"Surgeon General's Warning: Bullets administered at high velocity are known to the State of California to cause fatality."
"Please rampage responsibly."
Posted by: Reformed NeverTrumper at November 12, 2019 03:55 PM (0jZvB)

Lead Is Known By The State of California to Be A Cancer-Causing Substance

Posted by: joncelli, bludgeoning with a pouncing seize at November 12, 2019 04:02 PM (RD7QR)

278 272 The President is NOT above the law!

Diversity is our strength!

Posted by: Guy Smiley at November 12, 2019 04:02 PM (1XNk8)

279 206 What they SHOULD'VE done is decide that the Sandy Hook lawsuit against gun manufacturers was baseless because without any show of negligence or hardware fault causing death or injury by the manufacturer, there IS no basis for a lawsuit.

You can sue Remington because some fuck used one to shoot up a school? Then I'm suing General Motors for building the car that allowed a drunk illegal alien to kill Americans AND suing the booze manufacturers for making the brew that got them drunk.

This is a ridiculously bad decision.

The price of EVERYTHING will go up accordingly.
Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:51 PM (Zz0t1)


this.

Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at November 12, 2019 04:03 PM (sy5kK)

280 I'm okay with financial companies deciding not to do business with other industries, but I also have no problem cutting them off from the Treasury Window cuz Constitutional reasons.

Posted by: Puddin Head at November 12, 2019 04:03 PM (yRAFu)

281 278 272 The President is NOT above the law!

Diversity is our strength!

No Human is Illegal!

Posted by: Guy Smiley at November 12, 2019 04:03 PM (1XNk8)

282 SCOTUS to let the Sandy Hook lawsuit go forward against Remington.
"The high court decision also opens the door for other victims of gun crimes to file suit against gunmakers.

https://tinyurl.com/vba7u5o

Posted by: FloridaMan at November 12, 2019 04:03 PM (W+sQP)

283 Yup. Batgirl in the 60's show had a mighty impressive rack.

Posted by: Benji Carver at November 12, 2019 03:57 PM (OD2ni)

Rack, hips, booty, the whole package. Caused a young Count to have feverish dreams on many a Tuesday and Wednesday nights.

Posted by: Count de Monet at November 12, 2019 04:03 PM (q1Pj5)

284 2A being crushed and Ivanka DJT willing to 'deal' on DACA? PredictionL His poll numbers will suffer bigly.

Posted by: Galil at November 12, 2019 04:03 PM (Pzzpr)

285

#PatienceWinning

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at November 12, 2019 04:04 PM (vEIlU)

286 RIP to Yvonne Craig, who sadly died of breast cancer. How ironic.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at November 12, 2019 04:01 PM (ujg0T)


According to DDG, there's some nudes of her. Puffers.

VERY nice rack. Such a sad loss. Should I get the chance to ask, of all the cancers, WHY THE BOOBS??!!??

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 04:05 PM (Zz0t1)

287 >>2A being crushed and Ivanka DJT willing to 'deal' on DACA? PredictionL His poll numbers will suffer bigly.


Take it to Hot Air. I hear if you have a soft enough mouth, Allah P will let you into the VIP Stall.

Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2019 04:05 PM (AIGhm)

288 Saw Jo Jo Rabbit. Don't think you need to spend money on this one. It will be on cable within a year.

Posted by: Puddin Head at November 12, 2019 04:05 PM (yRAFu)

289 The SC said "Eff You, gummakers, take away their protections and let them go bankrupt."

Where am I wrong?

-------------

Because they didn't take away any protections. They just didn't grant them any extra protections. At this point.

They decided the case was not ripe yet to hear.

I believe your concern to be valid. In the end, they will prevail. But yes, this may possibly increase costs in the process.

Posted by: SH at November 12, 2019 04:05 PM (sX1BW)

290 But MUH illegals sucking off the taxpayer!!!

What about the chil'rn.

This is where I part company with everyone I know. I DO NOT CARE if you grew up here. Sucks to suck.

Posted by: dagny, first of her name at November 12, 2019 04:05 PM (nRWPy)

291 269 Still I see no reason not to use this gun case to start getting the voters worried. Guns move voters to the conservative side better than any issue. Might as well use this to remind voters on why you always need more justices.
Posted by: SH at November 12, 2019 04:01 PM (sX1BW)


That assumes a non-corrupt voting roll for each state.

The Blue State Motor Voter laws have been in force for a generation now, and the rolls have large numbers of non-citizens voting regularly.

So that horse left the barn a long time ago.

Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at November 12, 2019 04:05 PM (sy5kK)

292 Might as well use this to remind voters on why you always need more ammunition.

Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2019 04:02 PM (AIGhm)


That reminds me...need to go buy 6.8 SPC. I have a new bangstick. My first AR-15.

Posted by: GGE of the Moron Horde, NC Chapter at November 12, 2019 04:05 PM (T8A10)

293 "This well built firearm is for personal protection/hunting only. DO NOT USE FOR MASS SHOOTING OF HUMANS."

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:59 PM


"Manufacturer Not Liable If This Product Is Used In A Manner Inconsistent With Local, State, and Federal Law and Regulations."

Posted by: Bert G at November 12, 2019 04:06 PM (tOP4K)

294 288 Saw Jo Jo Rabbit. Don't think you need to spend money on this one. It will be on cable within a year.
Posted by: Puddin Head at November 12, 2019 04:05 PM (yRAFu)



Was there even any darkly Camp humor to it, or is it as bad as it seems?

Posted by: Curmudgeon at November 12, 2019 04:06 PM (ujg0T)

295 Beaver Moon

--------

This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we'll be lucky to live through it.

http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=374846

Posted by: Yudhishthira's Dice at November 12, 2019 04:06 PM (AzW6q)

296 You can sue Remington because some fuck used one to shoot up a school? Then I'm suing General Motors for building the car that allowed a drunk illegal alien to kill Americans AND suing the booze manufacturers for making the brew that got them drunk.

-
And the furniture manufacturer who built the barstool he sat on. It's the And the Horse You Rode In On theory of jurisprudence.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Tyrannosaur Wrangler at November 12, 2019 04:07 PM (+y/Ru)

297 You think Allahpundit will be attracted enough to Galil or is it all about performance?

Posted by: dagny, first of her name at November 12, 2019 04:07 PM (nRWPy)

298 Suing a gun manufacturer for manufacturing guns is not a state issue but rather goes to the heart of the 2nd Amendment.

Now why, do you wonder, SCOTUS didn't point towards the 2nd Amendment and just say, "Sorry, but this document explicitly states that the right to keep and bear arms will not be infringed. Don't ever waste our time like this again or we'll throw your Communist ass in jail."

I suppose the ABA and all their lawyers must be paid. That's far more fucking important than just doing the right thing and slapping down an attempt to outlaw guns once and for all so we can start living with just a bit of legal certainty in our lives.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy does whatever his television tells him at November 12, 2019 04:07 PM (HaL55)

299 2A being crushed and Ivanka DJT willing to 'deal' on DACA? PredictionL His poll numbers will suffer bigly.
Posted by: Galil at November 12, 2019 04:03 PM (Pzzpr)


Your concern is noted.

Posted by: DR.WTF at November 12, 2019 04:07 PM (aS1PU)

300 Tell that to Wall St. gun related stocks be it gun manufacturers or related companies are all down bigly. Just a few lawsuit wins and it could bankrupt the entire industry. And this is what the left has been pushing for. They know they will never ban guns legislatively so they will do the next best thing and destroy the industry.

Posted by: Hotgas VIP Member


So now is a good time to buy gun manufacturer stock, and then wait until the jury decides that, no, it wasn't the gun's fault that Adam Lanza killed all those kids, it was Adam Lanza's fault.

Posted by: Sharkman at November 12, 2019 04:07 PM (Pk69y)

301 This is more akin to allowing someone to sue Ford because their car was used in a bank robbery where 10 people were killed. The biggest difference is that Ford is not protected by the 2nd Amendment. The SC is ignoring that crucial point.

Posted by: Easy Andy at November 12, 2019 04:07 PM (Q5ALd)

302 No Standing!

Posted by: The one who always says No Standing! at November 12, 2019 04:08 PM (r+sAi)

303 294 288 Saw Jo Jo Rabbit. Don't think you need to spend money on this one. It will be on cable within a year.
Posted by: Puddin Head at November 12, 2019 04:05 PM (yRAFu)


Was there even any darkly Camp humor to it, or is it as bad as it seems?
--------------
I laughed twice. Both times Hitler has the funny bones. Not a bad concept but there is no suspense, no irony, and the kid's voice was impossible to follow. I will say Hitler is guaranteed box office. The guy is money.

Posted by: Puddin Head at November 12, 2019 04:08 PM (yRAFu)

304 What supreme court does will not matter when AOC bans bullets in 2025! Despite your wet dreams to the contrary bullets are not protected by 2nd amendment.

Posted by: raimondo at November 12, 2019 04:08 PM (GE++x)

305 Piss off racist foreign retard.

Posted by: Grump928(C) at November 12, 2019 04:09 PM (QQ+il)

306 >>>Meanwhile, Mark Sanford is dropping out of the presidential race in order to spend more quality time with his mistress.
Posted by: Reformed NeverTrumper at November 12, 2019 03:33 PM (0jZvB)

Who the fuck is Mark Sanford?

Posted by: Max POwer at November 12, 2019 04:09 PM (q177U)

307 It was actually Adam Lanza's mother's fault and she already got the death penalty for it (in effect).

Posted by: dagny, first of her name at November 12, 2019 04:09 PM (nRWPy)

308 "This is what the left is salivating at, bankrupting the gun industry
through lawsuits. Voila, gun control without any actual votes on it.
What scotus did today was disastrous.


This is a huge black eye for Trump."



Meh, so an obvious bs case goes to trial.

A long way to the commies actually succeeding.


Should scotus have tossed it ? obviously yes.

black eye for PDT ?

Puh - leeze.

Posted by: sock_rat_eez, we are being gaslighted 24/365 at November 12, 2019 04:09 PM (JwHjN)

309 The full moon in November is the Beaver moon, it signifies the setting of beaver traps by colonists and Algonquin Indians because, according to the old Farmers' Almanac "this was the time to set traps before the swamps froze, to ensure a supply of warm winter furs. " This is the time of year when beavers get ready to hibernate before the winter, they have built their dams and prepared for the coming cold season, which also makes it a prime time to trap them.

Posted by: nurse ratched at November 12, 2019 04:09 PM (d7Ww2)

310 You can't ban bullets moron any more than you could ban crack.

Posted by: sniffybigtoe at November 12, 2019 04:10 PM (1ISKN)

311 "Manufacturer Not Liable If This Product Is Used In A Manner Inconsistent With Local, State, and Federal Law and Regulations."
Posted by: Bert G at November 12, 2019 04:06 PM (tOP4K)


They'd be sued for using language that's not simple enough for the stupid to understand.

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 04:10 PM (Zz0t1)

312 Posted by: raimondo at November 12, 2019 04:08 PM (GE+

You are fucking retarded.

Posted by: Easy Andy at November 12, 2019 04:10 PM (Q5ALd)

313 SCOTUS is gonna shove this right up the Circuit's ASS..

Posted by: Tex Lovera at November 12, 2019 04:10 PM (wtvvX)

314
Because they didn't take away any protections. They just didn't grant them any extra protections. At this point.

They decided the case was not ripe yet to hear.

I believe your concern to be valid. In the end, they will prevail. But yes, this may possibly increase costs in the process.
Posted by: SH at November 12, 2019 04:05 PM (sX1BW)


Ok, fair enough. But it won't end with simply increasing costs. It will end by bankrupting the entire industry. That is the strategy, and they have powerful monied forces, enough to make it happen.

And what stops this from spreading to the other industries mentioned above, the auto and the liquor industry?

Nothing.

Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at November 12, 2019 04:10 PM (sy5kK)

315 Despite your wet dreams to the contrary bullets are not protected by 2nd amendment.

Posted by: raimondo

Maybe so.

Guess it's time to go buy that reloading rig I've had my eye on, and about 100K rounds worth of powder, casings and bullets.

Posted by: Sharkman at November 12, 2019 04:11 PM (Pk69y)

316 black eye for PDT ?

Puh - leeze.
---------------
Umm, more like a vote prodder for Trump with spurs. Big nasty Mexican spurs.

Posted by: Puddin Head at November 12, 2019 04:11 PM (yRAFu)

317 307 It was actually Adam Lanza's mother's fault and she already got the death penalty for it (in effect).

Posted by: dagny, first of her name at November 12, 2019 04:09 PM (nRWPy)

We could always exhume her corpse and send it to the Russian front.

Posted by: Someguy at November 12, 2019 04:11 PM (O+iVW)

318 Can Hawaiian judges overrule the Supreme Court?

Posted by: Benji Carver at November 12, 2019 03:50 PM (OD2ni)



Judge Don Ho: Of course we have supreme power in the county. It's says so right there in the constipation...errr. constitution

Posted by: TheQuietMan at November 12, 2019 04:11 PM (od504)

319 Beavers: Freeze came early. Suck it, trappers.

Posted by: dagny, first of her name at November 12, 2019 04:11 PM (nRWPy)

320 https://tinyurl.com/vba7u5o

That is a remarkably badly written article - the SCOTUS said none of the things that the article claims they did. What happened was that Remington filed an interlocutory appeal, trying to stop the process before trial, and the SCOTUS said just one word: "Denied."

I think it should have been taken up and dropped, but it looks like it's going to hinge on whether Remington marketed it's Bushmaster rifle with video game placement.

Posted by: Tom Servo at November 12, 2019 04:11 PM (Kpl3J)

321 Matt Reeves is a quality director, and I have about as much confidence in him delivering a good Batman movie as I would from anyone else. His two Planet of the Apes movies are some of the smartest big budget action movies of the last couple of decades.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison, Just All about the Billy Wilder movies at November 12, 2019 03:55 PM (q80AH)


Oh, I totally forgot he directed those.

Posted by: Max Power at November 12, 2019 04:12 PM (q177U)

322 Lead Is Known By The State of California to Be A Cancer-Causing Substance

Sooo, just like Fender Stratocasters, eh?

Yes Virginia, the Fender website has a People's Glorious Republic of Kalifornia warning for cancer on it on the guitar pages.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy does whatever his television tells him at November 12, 2019 04:12 PM (HaL55)

323 I am sure RBG has a ring made by elves controlled by Sauron

Posted by: Skip at November 12, 2019 04:13 PM (ZCEU2)

324 It was actually Adam Lanza's mother's fault and she already got the death penalty for it (in effect).

Posted by: dagny, first of her name at November 12, 2019 04:09 PM (nRWPy)

We could always exhume her corpse and send it to the Russian front.

Posted by: Someguy


Nah, too much work.

Just shoot the bitch in the face (again).

Posted by: Sharkman at November 12, 2019 04:13 PM (Pk69y)

325 Because they didn't take away any protections. They just didn't grant them any extra protections. At this point.

They decided the case was not ripe yet to hear.

I believe your concern to be valid. In the end, they will prevail. But yes, this may possibly increase costs in the process.
Posted by: SH at November 12, 2019 04:05 PM (sX1BW)

But because this is an obvious Constitutional issue, Constitutional protection should have been granted.

Posted by: Easy Andy at November 12, 2019 04:13 PM (Q5ALd)

326 323 I am sure RBG has a ring made by elves controlled by Sauron
------------
She is a goblin. They never die.

Posted by: Puddin Head at November 12, 2019 04:13 PM (yRAFu)

327 Despite your wet dreams to the contrary bullets are not protected by 2nd amendment.

===========================

900 millikohns of pure stupid

Posted by: Guzalot at November 12, 2019 04:14 PM (prSvo)

328 This is such an obvious tactic that the state passed a law against it. The SC said "Eff You, gummakers, take away their protections and let them go bankrupt."

Where am I wrong?



Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at November 12, 2019 04:00 PM (sy5kK)


Name where the Supreme Court said that.

Do it.

I provided you a helpful link to the original source material from the Supreme Court on the denial of cert.

State for me, from original source materials, where the Supreme Court made a ruling as to substance.

Also, and I shouldn't do this because I've already covered myself with not glory in this here thread, but you mean there is a Federal law that was passed, not a state law.

Is this an invitation to lawfare? Possibly. But everyone here seems to be ignoring the numerous cases that have been dismissed in courts across the country against gun manufacturers. Oh and legal fees have been awarded to the ammo and gun manufacturers for those suit but, nah, none of that matters.

Do you even know what the denial of cert in this case means for the procedural posture of the Sandy Hook suit?

Posted by: alexthechick - Ragebunny. Hopping all around. at November 12, 2019 04:14 PM (mf5HN)

329 There have been a lot of bad SCOTUS decisions in this country since the time of its founding, but this mostly unknown Remington decision could ultimately be the worst. OTOH, bad decisions sometimes get changed.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at November 12, 2019 04:14 PM (r+sAi)

330 And what stops this from spreading to the other industries mentioned above, the auto and the liquor industry?

Nothing.
Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at November 12, 2019 04:10 PM (sy5kK)

The fight is centered on marketing. If someone marketed liquor to children by advertising it on kid's channels and kids video games, I imagine they'd face some heat for that. Now I don't think Remington did that, but that's what they're being accused of doing.

Posted by: Tom Servo at November 12, 2019 04:14 PM (Kpl3J)

331 How long before court is replaced by Tarot cards, scatology and Magic Eight Ball?

They aren't all that far away from using Ouija.



********

Sotomayor, The Ouija Latina - a limerick

The Tarot-reading activists meddled
And Ouija board predictions were peddled
They ridiculed us all
Gazed into their crystal ball
And said, "Nonsense, the seance is settled!"

Posted by: Muldoon at November 12, 2019 04:14 PM (m45I2)

332 Also, all y'all know that Remington already went through bankruptcy, right?

Posted by: alexthechick - Ragebunny. Hopping all around. at November 12, 2019 04:15 PM (mf5HN)

333 I am sure RBG has a ring made by elves controlled by Sauron
------------
She is a goblin. They never die.

-
Just needs the blood of virgins. That's why she and Planned Parenthood are hand in hand.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Tyrannosaur Wrangler at November 12, 2019 04:15 PM (+y/Ru)

334 The full moon in November is the Beaver moon, it signifies the setting of beaver traps by colonists and Algonquin Indians because, according to the old Farmers' Almanac "this was the time to set traps before the swamps froze, to ensure a supply of warm winter furs. " This is the time of year when beavers get ready to hibernate before the winter, they have built their dams and prepared for the coming cold season, which also makes it a prime time to trap them.
Posted by: nurse ratched at November 12, 2019 04:09 PM (d7Ww2)


Wait.....there are beaver TRAPS?

Is it a wad of cash on a string you can pull along leading them to your bedroom?

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 04:16 PM (Zz0t1)

335 There have been a lot of bad SCOTUS decisions in this country since the time of its founding, but this mostly unknown Remington decision could ultimately be the worst. OTOH, bad decisions sometimes get changed.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at November 12, 2019 04:14 PM (r+sAi)



THERE WAS NO DECISION OMFG I AM GOING TO HAVE A STROKE

DENIAL OF CERT IS NOT A DECISION ARRRRGGGHHHHH

Posted by: alexthechick - Ragebunny. Hopping all around. at November 12, 2019 04:16 PM (mf5HN)

336 Just needs the blood of virgins. That's why she and Planned Parenthood are hand in hand.
Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Tyrannosaur Wrangler at November 12, 2019 04:15 PM (+y/Ru)


Ahem. Those aren't virgins.

Posted by: DR.WTF at November 12, 2019 04:16 PM (aS1PU)

337 The Harvest Moon has been called that for a LONG time.
Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:56 PM (Zz0t1)

And then of course there's the Three Wolf Moon, immortalized on fine T-Shirts and Chevy Vans.
Posted by: Tom Servo


Bomber's Moon

Posted by: rickb223 at November 12, 2019 04:16 PM (s2OJe)

338 "According to DDG, there's some nudes of her. Puffers.

VERY nice rack. Such a sad loss. Should I get the chance to ask, of all the cancers, WHY THE BOOBS??!!??
Posted by: Sponge"


One of the first pics to come up when you turn the safe settings off on Bing. Good lord.

Posted by: Benji Carver at November 12, 2019 04:16 PM (OD2ni)

339 Just needs the blood of virgins. That's why she and Planned Parenthood are hand in hand.
Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks

"Johnny, are we done for the day? I have an appointment at the Elizabeth Bathory Day Spa."

Posted by: Notorious RBG at November 12, 2019 04:17 PM (QzkSJ)

340 Ok Alex, no decision. wrong word.


However, as stated it is the lawfare to kill the firearm industry that is the point.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at November 12, 2019 04:17 PM (r+sAi)

341 THERE WAS NO DECISION OMFG I AM GOING TO HAVE A STROKE

DENIAL OF CERT IS NOT A DECISION ARRRRGGGHHHHH
Posted by: alexthechick - Ragebunny. Hopping all around. at November 12, 2019 04:16 PM (mf5HN)

The decision was to let the lawsuits continue.

Posted by: Easy Andy at November 12, 2019 04:17 PM (Q5ALd)

342
THERE WAS NO DECISION OMFG I AM GOING TO HAVE A STROKE

DENIAL OF CERT IS NOT A DECISION ARRRRGGGHHHHH
Posted by: alexthechick - Ragebunny. Hopping all around. at November 12, 2019 04:16 PM (mf5HN)


*shoves a cookie through USB*

Also, have some happiness.

https://youtu.be/LAyIUpYhI24

Posted by: Colorado Alex In Exile at November 12, 2019 04:18 PM (wCmLp)

343 Overruled for the use of all-caps.

Posted by: sniffybigtoe at November 12, 2019 04:18 PM (xfb67)

344 Former Republican Congressman Mark Sanford drops bid to challenge Trump



Well there goes Cuck Kristol's $1,000 down the crapper

Posted by: TheQuietMan at November 12, 2019 04:18 PM (od504)

345 Something that I think aggravates people more than anything else about Judges, and the Legal System in general, is that Judges and the system do not care about Time, and they do not care about Cost. It's built into the system, no one can change it, it just is.

So it is completely logical and in fact expected when a Court says "tell you what, why don't you go off and spend $20 or $30 million fighting this for the next 6 or 7 years, and then get back with me." Because that's what courts do.

Posted by: Tom Servo at November 12, 2019 04:18 PM (Kpl3J)

346 Trump offered this to the democrats did he not in return for a wall?

I hope it gets enforced good and hard, and I hope trump reminds "the children" who sold them out.

Posted by: Reality Man at November 12, 2019 04:18 PM (//Byp)

347 The fight is centered on marketing. If someone marketed liquor to children by advertising it on kid's channels and kids video games, I imagine they'd face some heat for that. Now I don't think Remington did that, but that's what they're being accused of doing.

Posted by: Tom Servo


I get it.

But then as a defense attorney I just keep saying to the Jury: "Adam Lanza didn't buy the gun he saw advertised on his episodes of Spongebob Squarepants (or whatever). So perhaps it was bad form for Remington to advertise on a kid's show, but the PURCHASE of the weapon and its later use had nothing to do with that advertisement. His mother bought the gun as a result of walking by the gun counter at Target."

Posted by: Sharkman at November 12, 2019 04:19 PM (Pk69y)

348 It was actually Adam Lanza's mother's fault and she already got the death penalty for it (in effect).
----------------------------

I would include Adam Lanza's father in there as deserving of fault as well. He decided his first wife and his crazy-eyed son were cramping his style, so he walked out on them, found a nice young wife, and started a new family.

It's a given that mothers cannot replace a father nor a father's role in the family. I don't have any answers as to what she should have/could have done, obviously in hindsight she should never have brought guns into their home. Her love for her severely defective son blinded her to his murderous rage.

Posted by: Boots at November 12, 2019 04:19 PM (oGBso)

349
So now is a good time to buy gun manufacturer stock, and then wait until the jury decides that, no, it wasn't the gun's fault that Adam Lanza killed all those kids, it was Adam Lanza's fault.
Posted by: Sharkman at November 12, 2019 04:07 PM (Pk69y)

No it is not, because of the many thousands of additional lawsuits from gun grabbers and their moneypeople against the manufacturers.


Gun makers are going the way of the RoundUp manufacturer.

There will be thousands of TV ads begging for anyone to call their 800 number and join the latest lawsuit against gun manufacturers if you were ever shot by a gun.

"Sign here against big, bad guns, and eventually get some money. Let us do the work."

Very effective.

Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at November 12, 2019 04:20 PM (sy5kK)

350 All this gun talk just makes me want to download the Redneck Rampage trilogy and start shooting jackalopes.

Posted by: Sharkman at November 12, 2019 04:20 PM (Pk69y)

351 The right to bear arms shall not be infringed.

An arm being the thing that can be used in its intended design and function to prevent a tyrannical takeover.

That includes the bullets........

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 04:20 PM (Zz0t1)

352 I also believe that RBG is now just a head in a jar like they had on Futurama. She's there for life.

Posted by: Reality Man at November 12, 2019 04:20 PM (//Byp)

353 I thought SCOTUS said that bullets were also covered by the 2nd Amendment?

Posted by: joncelli, bludgeoning with a pouncing seize at November 12, 2019 04:20 PM (RD7QR)

354 Also, all y'all know that Remington already went through bankruptcy, right?

Posted by: alexthechick


Restructuring bankruptcy.
Not a "fuck it, we're out of money" bankruptcy.

Posted by: rickb223 at November 12, 2019 04:21 PM (s2OJe)

355 A few gun nuts making their own bullets isn't and won't be the problem.

Posted by: raimondo at November 12, 2019 04:21 PM (GE++x)

356 Ffs, raimondo, shut up about bullets. You look retarded.

Posted by: sniffybigtoe at November 12, 2019 04:22 PM (xfb67)

357
Restructuring bankruptcy.
Not a "fuck it, we're out of money" bankruptcy.
Posted by: rickb223 at November 12, 2019 04:21 PM (s2OJe)


However, it's still largely irrelevant in this case.

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 04:22 PM (Zz0t1)

358 The decision was to let the lawsuits continue.

And those lawsuits can eventually be appealed up to SCOTUS if the lower courts don't do their job. That's all that's actually happening here.

Posted by: Ian S. at November 12, 2019 04:22 PM (ZGrMX)

359 347 The fight is centered on marketing. If someone marketed liquor to children by advertising it on kid's channels and kids video games, I imagine they'd face some heat for that. Now I don't think Remington did that, but that's what they're being accused of doing.

Posted by: Tom Servo


I get it.

But then as a defense attorney I just keep saying to the Jury: "Adam Lanza didn't buy the gun he saw advertised on his episodes of Spongebob Squarepants (or whatever). So perhaps it was bad form for Remington to advertise on a kid's show, but the PURCHASE of the weapon and its later use had nothing to do with that advertisement. His mother bought the gun as a result of walking by the gun counter at Target."

Posted by: Sharkman at November 12, 2019 04:19 PM (Pk69y)


And the legal bill continues at thousands per day for that gun manufacturer, while this nonsense plays out in court.

Until one day the CFO calls and says, "oops! We're out of money!"

That is exactly the plan from the beginning.

Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at November 12, 2019 04:23 PM (sy5kK)

360 A few gun nuts making their own bullets isn't and won't be the problem.
Posted by: raimondo at November 12, 2019 04:21 PM (GE++x)


You're the problem. You're the poster child for a failed public school system and prove it overwhelmingly with every post.

Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 04:23 PM (Zz0t1)

361 A few gun nuts making their own bullets isn't and won't be the problem.

Posted by: raimondo


That's why the government has already tried to take our guns by force, right?

Posted by: Sharkman at November 12, 2019 04:23 PM (Pk69y)

362 However, as stated it is the lawfare to kill the firearm industry that is the point.

Heaven fucking forfend SCOTUS actually do their goddamned jobs and protect and defend the Constitution and our freedoms.

We're totally fucked. And it's their spinelessness that allows it to happen. Notice all the gauziness around the law these days. How many times do we hear the words, "...that may be illegal?" What happened to "No, that's illegal and you can't do that?" Haven't heard that phrase in decades.


The Progs just have to start injecting doubt into what should be very clear ideas of legal and illegal. That way, the Legal Ephors must always be consulted and paid.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy does whatever his television tells him at November 12, 2019 04:23 PM (HaL55)

363 That's why the government has already tried to take our guns by force, right?
--------------------------
All my guns were lost in a terrible canoe accident. Ammo too.

Posted by: Puddin Head at November 12, 2019 04:24 PM (yRAFu)

364 NOOD buckets of hot shit

Posted by: AZ Hi Desert (Gringo fuertemente armado) at November 12, 2019 04:24 PM (GvT9q)

365 Gun makers are going the way of the RoundUp manufacturer.

There will be thousands of TV ads begging for anyone to call their 800 number and join the latest lawsuit against gun manufacturers if you were ever shot by a gun.

"Sign here against big, bad guns, and eventually get some money. Let us do the work."

Very effective.
Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at November 12, 2019 04:20 PM (sy5kK)

Remember that it's only the State of Connecticut that has allowed this so far.

Posted by: Tom Servo at November 12, 2019 04:24 PM (Kpl3J)

366 353 I thought SCOTUS said that bullets were also covered by the 2nd Amendment?
Posted by: joncelli, bludgeoning with a pouncing seize at November 12, 2019 04:20 PM (RD7QR)


where/when?

I don't recall anything like that, but would cheerfully be wrong.

Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at November 12, 2019 04:24 PM (sy5kK)

367 The SC should take up any case that specifically involves one of the amendments of the Bill of Rights. That's why they're there for fucks sake.

Posted by: Easy Andy at November 12, 2019 04:24 PM (Q5ALd)

368 @360 Then I am no longer from russia?

Posted by: raimondo at November 12, 2019 04:25 PM (GE++x)

369 There were higher quality trolls on NR. They drew pixel penises and scared David French into being a communist.

Posted by: dagny, first of her name at November 12, 2019 04:25 PM (nRWPy)

370 And the legal bill continues at thousands per day for that gun manufacturer, while this nonsense plays out in court.

Until one day the CFO calls and says, "oops! We're out of money!"

That is exactly the plan from the beginning.

Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg


I understand that.

I also understand that any gun manufacturer that hasn't already set aside a percentage of its yearly operating budget to pay legal fees doesn't really deserve to stay in business. Attorney fees, as irritating as they are to pay, are simply a cost of doing business. Unfortunate. But no different that a lot of industries. At least the gun industry does have SOME protection under the 2nd amendment.

Perhaps when this case is over and all appeals are done, we'll know who was right. As AtC says it is a little bit early on a denial of cert of an interlocatory appeal before trial to fill our drawers and hand all our guns over to Retardo.

Posted by: Sharkman at November 12, 2019 04:27 PM (Pk69y)

371
The Harvest Moon has been called that for a LONG time.
Posted by: Sponge at November 12, 2019 03:56 PM (Zz0t1)


It made me a lot of money by just recognizing it.

Posted by: Neil Young at November 12, 2019 04:28 PM (sy5kK)

372 365

CT today, CA tomorrow. It only takes one or two $500m judgements to destroy the industry. And once the precedent is set you will have every gang banger lining up to sue and plenty of lawyers to represent them.

Posted by: Hotgas VIP Member at November 12, 2019 04:28 PM (wneaL)

373 The decision was to let the lawsuits continue.

And those lawsuits can eventually be appealed up to SCOTUS if the lower courts don't do their job. That's all that's actually happening here.
Posted by: Ian S. at November 12, 2019 04:22 PM (ZGrMX)

That's well understood. Why can't they address it now?

Posted by: Easy Andy at November 12, 2019 04:29 PM (Q5ALd)

374
I also understand that any gun manufacturer that hasn't already set aside a percentage of its yearly operating budget to pay legal fees doesn't really deserve to stay in business. Attorney fees, as irritating as they are to pay, are simply a cost of doing business. Unfortunate. But no different that a lot of industries. At least the gun industry does have SOME protection under the 2nd amendment.

Perhaps when this case is over and all appeals are done, we'll know who was right. As AtC says it is a little bit early on a denial of cert of an interlocatory appeal before trial to fill our drawers and hand all our guns over to Retardo.
Posted by: Sharkman at November 12, 2019 04:27 PM (Pk69y)


We are basically agreeing on the issue, but not the degree how close this decision has taken us to the precipice of something very ugly and irreversible.

A few points of profit set aside for professional services is normal. Your entire annual profit margin for legal fees, to fight a crazed political move, is not normal.



an obtuse, but illustrated example of our different views:

We both agree Pearl Harbor is a nice place and those Japanese seem unfriendly.

One view is that it is late fall. My view is that it is early December.

And because of our time tunnel of history we both know what happens around 8am on December 7.



Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at November 12, 2019 04:38 PM (sy5kK)

375 I'll wager that Adam Lanza never saw a single ad for the weapons he used.

Unless there's some marketing strategy that entails killing your mother and stealing it.

Posted by: Mr. Peebles at November 12, 2019 04:39 PM (oVJmc)

376 284 2A being crushed and Ivanka DJT willing to 'deal' on DACA? PredictionL His poll numbers will suffer bigly.
Posted by: Galil at November 12, 2019 04:03 PM (Pzzpr)

There is another way to look at this. Trump has always stated he is sympathetic to the DACA "kids," (and knowing a few myself I have sympathy for many of them) and has has long implied DACA could be tied to a big picture negotiation. IF he can leverage something like legislatively blocking birthright citizenship, etc., than that would IMO be a good trade.

BUT, let's look at the reality. The Dems will not negotiate anything with Trump. He can go into the election being seen as looking to get some positive things done for Hispanics and "common sense" immigration reform if only those Democrats were't in the way showing that they care more for politics than the Hispanic voting base.

Posted by: Keith at November 12, 2019 04:40 PM (jdGlx)

377 373 The decision was to let the lawsuits continue.

And those lawsuits can eventually be appealed up to SCOTUS if the lower courts don't do their job. That's all that's actually happening here.
Posted by: Ian S. at November 12, 2019 04:22 PM (ZGrMX)

That's well understood. Why can't they address it now?
Posted by: Easy Andy at November 12, 2019 04:29 PM (Q5ALd)

Because lawyers have to feast, and the Supreme Court protects their own.

Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at November 12, 2019 04:41 PM (sy5kK)

378
Remember that it's only the State of Connecticut that has allowed this so far.
Posted by: Tom Servo at November 12, 2019 04:24 PM (Kpl3J)


Tom, it's a camel's nose in the tent thing.

Been watching my state, WA, corrupt the state and US Constitutions the last few years to obliterate gun owner civil rights. It is a systematic campaign full of lies, big money campaigns, and controlling their message by owning the airwave messages.

It has really turned my head on how driven the anti-gun people are against what those Constitutions actually say.

They are so effing corrupt, it makes me sick.

Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at November 12, 2019 04:48 PM (sy5kK)

379 Question on DACA.

If it turns out that a DACA recipient was able to obtain citizenship eventually, could they then sponsor their parents to stay in the country illegally?

Posted by: Darrell Harris at November 12, 2019 04:50 PM (iuFgi)

380 *legally

Posted by: Darrell Harris at November 12, 2019 04:52 PM (iuFgi)

381 In fairness, he thought he was in San Francisco.

Posted by: The Gipper Lives at November 12, 2019 06:15 PM (Ndje9)

382 DACA is both a One- Man cancellation of laws Congress already passed and the One-Man enactment of laws Congress never passed. The policy is irrelevant to the tyranny.

Posted by: The Gipper Lives at November 12, 2019 06:35 PM (Ndje9)

383 It has really turned my head on how driven the anti-gun people are against what those Constitutions actually say. They are so effing corrupt, it makes me sick. Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg

If you planned to go into the exciting Permanent Coup business, what would be your Number One policy goal be?

Posted by: The Gipper Lives at November 12, 2019 06:39 PM (Ndje9)

384 Your children get to be American citizens IF you are here and "subject to the jurisdiction of the states". If you are here illegally, you are doing everything you can to not be so subject, and as such, your children, even if born here, are not American citizens.

If that is so, or the child was born outside the US not to American citizens, than why should we take the money away from our children and give it to yours? Our children are dreamers to, we owe it to them, not to you. You did not build this country, nor did your ancestors, so we owe you nothing. The only way we would consider it is if you want to join us as an American citizen, that is, follow the legal path to that.

Posted by: SanityClause at November 12, 2019 07:00 PM (5gz4z)

385 Both stupid and insane to predict how SCOTUS will decide.

Posted by: alan stern at November 12, 2019 08:37 PM (nAcNw)

(Jump to top of page)






Processing 0.05, elapsed 0.048 seconds.
14 queries taking 0.0087 seconds, 393 records returned.
Page size 213 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.



MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat