<i><font color="red">BY A 6-3 VOTE. THE SUPREME COURT INVALIDATES PRACTICE OF LOWLY DISTRICT COURT JUSTICES CONTROLLING THE NATIONALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT VIA UNIVERSAL INJUNCTIONS</i></font>

BY A 6-3 VOTE. THE SUPREME COURT INVALIDATES PRACTICE OF LOWLY DISTRICT COURT JUSTICES CONTROLLING THE NATIONALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT VIA UNIVERSAL INJUNCTIONS

This case is about two issues:

First, about Trump's EO declaring that "birthright citizenship" is not supported by the Constitution and should not be recognized by the executive or courts. The Court did not reach this issue, as they "disposed of it," as they say, by its other ruling.

Which was about lowly district court hacks presuming to not just rule on the parties before them in the specific, defined jurisdiction they sit in, but to issue universal injunctions of national reach in order to dictate their Liliputian wills to the nationally-elected constitutional chief executive officer.

Amy Coney Barret wrote the opinion declaring that lowly district court judges have never in all of American history had the power they routinely assert to essentially invent national policy as they see fit.

The Supreme Court delivered a significant win for the Trump admin on Friday, limiting the power of lower courts to issue nationwide injunctions. In a 6-3 ruling, the justices said such injunctions likely go beyond what the Constitution allows, especially in cases targeting executive actions.
Key Details:
The Court ruled that federal judges overstep their constitutional authority when they issue nationwide injunctions, particularly when only a handful of plaintiffs are involved.
Writing for the majority, Justice Amy Coney Barrett stated that "[f]ederal courts do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch," emphasizing that their role is to resolve specific legal disputes, not to dictate national policy.
While the Court did not weigh in on the legality of Trump's effort to end birthright citizenship, it granted the government's request to limit injunctions to apply only to plaintiffs with standing.
Diving Deeper:
On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration in a case that challenged the use of sweeping nationwide injunctions to block federal policy. The ruling significantly curtails the ability of lower courts to issue broad orders that halt executive actions across the country, reinforcing the constitutional limits of judicial power.
The case stemmed from multiple injunctions that had been issued to stop President Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship--a policy announced on his first day back in office. Though the justices did not rule on the constitutionality of the order itself, they took aim at the overreach of lower courts in issuing expansive blocks on executive policy.
Writing for the majority, Justice Amy Coney Barrett emphasized that "[f]ederal courts do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch; they resolve cases and controversies consistent with the authority Congress has given them." She added, "When a court concludes that the Executive Branch has acted unlawfully, the answer is not for the court to exceed its power, too."
The Court ultimately agreed to grant the government's request to scale back the injunctions. "The Government's applications to partially stay the preliminary injunctions are granted," Barrett wrote, "but only to the extent that the injunctions are broader than necessary to provide complete relief to each plaintiff with standing to sue."

Unfortunately, the unreliable ditz Coney Barret left open the possibility that lowly district court justices can issue nationwide injunctions in cases where a state is suing the federal government:

The CASA ruling leaves room for judges to order relief akin to a nationwide injunction when a state sues the federal government. But the justices provided little guidance, which indicates that different judges could reach different conclusions on whether and how states can get universal injunctions -- until SCOTUS resolves that question too.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett writes, "We decline to take up these arguments in the first instance. The lower courts should determine whether a narrower injunction is appropriate; we therefore leave it to them to consider these and any related arguments."

The opinion states that Congress never granted lowly district court justices the power to grant "equitable relief" (injunctions) to anyone except the exact parties in court in front of them. They cannot simply just say that their rulings apply across the country to anyone else who might make a similar complaint.

Katanji Brown-Jackson wrote an illiterate dissent in which she railed against "legalese" and "dry technical arguments" to assert that yes, lowly district court judges can overrule the nationally elected constitutional chief executive officer whenever they feel that liberals really need a win.

Coney Barret blasted her, accusing her simply ignoring 250 years of constitutional practice in order to create an "imperial judiciary."

i/o
@avidseries
"We will not dwell on Justice Jackson's argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries' worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself. We observe only this: Justice Jackson decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary."
-- SCOTUS majority opinion today

The full passage is worth the read. Amy Coney Barret calls Ketanji Jackson-Brown dumb, in so many words, incapable of reading, understanding, and applying the law, simply acting like a panelist on The View popping off about what she thinks the law should be while complaining about the "legalese" in the law.

She doesn't seem to grasp that "legalese" is what makes up the law. She seems to dismiss it because she can't follow it.

Now, for a layman, this is understandable. Laymen don't understand legalese and are impatient with it.

But this is, allegedly, a Supreme Court Justice. Shouldn't the "legalese" and "dry technical arguments" (as she dismisses all legal reasoning) be of some concern to her?

I think that I am correct in noting that Justice Jumanji is the first Appellate judge to be reversed 9-0 by the Supreme Court who then got elevated to it.
The woman wouldn't recognize the Constitution if it bit her on the ass.
Posted by: toby928 at June 27, 2025 12:12 PM

Breaking! The Supreme Court has ruled favorably towards the Trump administration

They rule that nationwide universal injunctions by district judges exceed their authority granted by Congress pic.twitter.com/pl6lPadaXq
— Media Research Center (@theMRC) June 27, 2025

RIP to the 47th President of the United States pic.twitter.com/d4FlXf7t6L
— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) June 27, 2025

There are other Supreme Court rulings today. I'll post about them later.

I'll also post again about Jackson-Brown's frequent complaint that there is too much boring law stuff in the law. She actually makes this argument all the time. She doesn't like the dry, boring law getting in the way of her social justice activism. She wants to be free to just pop off like Whoopie Goldberg on The View, but with the force of law behind her ignorant mumblings.

Posted by: Ace at 12:10 PM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 sponge

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:10 PM (GBKbO)

2 First, about Trump's EO declaring that "birthright citizenship" is not supported by the Constitution and should not be recognized by the executive or courts. The Court did not reach this issue, as they "disposed of it," as they say, by its other ruling.

======

It goes in effect in 30 days, so pump out those babies...illegals already being deported by ICE.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:11 PM (GBKbO)

3 Hola

Posted by: Thanatopsis at June 27, 2025 12:11 PM (GYt5+)

4 The full passage is worth the read. Amy Coney Barret calls Ketanji Jackson-Brown dumb, in so many words, incapable of reading, understanding, and applying the law, simply acting like a panelist on The View popping off about what she thinks the law should be while complaining about the "legalese" in the law.
=======

And she's on SCOTUS for 40 more years.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:11 PM (GBKbO)

5 Hi Ace
C'mon. I predicted a flaming skull!
What a day!

Posted by: Sharon(willow's apprentice) at June 27, 2025 12:12 PM (t/2Uw)

6 You know the fed judges are gonna use the loopholes, still, a win is a win....

Posted by: It's me donna at June 27, 2025 12:12 PM (VE6XX)

7 The smackdown heard 'round the world.

ACB vs. Jackson

Posted by: Martini Farmer at June 27, 2025 12:13 PM (Q4IgG)

8 Coney Barret blasted her, accusing her simply ignoring 250 years of constitutional practice in order to create an "imperial judiciary."

======

When Sotomayor dies and Kagan retires, Jackson is going to be the senior progressive on the Court.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:13 PM (GBKbO)

9 I think that I am correct in noting that Justice Jumanji is the first Appellate judge to be reversed 9-0 by the Supreme Court who then got elevated to it.

The woman wouldn't recognize the Constitution if it bit her on the ass.

Posted by: toby928 at June 27, 2025 12:12 PM

Posted by: toby928 repeats himself at June 27, 2025 12:13 PM (jc0TO)

10 I don't know why this ruling made me think of these lyrics:

Ticket to ride, white line highway
Tell all your friends, they can go my way
Pay your toll, sell your soul
Pound-for-pound, costs more than gold
The longer you stay, the more you pay
My white lines go a long way
Either up your nose or through your vein
With nothing to gain except killing your brain

Posted by: kallisto at June 27, 2025 12:13 PM (dCxaZ)

11 Amy Coney Barret wrote the opinion declaring that lowly district court judges have never in all of American history had the power they routinely assert to essentially invent national policy as they see fit.

But it's Trump, so it's okay.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at June 27, 2025 12:13 PM (CqOiB)

12
HEH, jackstraw.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 27, 2025 12:14 PM (HuRzZ)

13 Blind squirrel. Respect level now at 13.4%.

Posted by: Mongo at June 27, 2025 12:14 PM (Ef4Ak)

14 I have new respect for ACB.. Let's see if it remains....

Posted by: It's me donna at June 27, 2025 12:14 PM (VE6XX)

15 Maybe Ketanji Brown and Kagan are doing a littly bumpity-bump to assist in the Cope??

ROCK

FREEZE

Posted by: kallisto at June 27, 2025 12:15 PM (dCxaZ)

16 Seems like a good way to start the day.

Posted by: "Perfessor" Squirrel at June 27, 2025 12:15 PM (7fElN)

17 The epidemic of district court priapism has been deflated.

Posted by: I used to have a different nic at June 27, 2025 12:15 PM (ExV1e)

18 All three decisions, denying PP funding,Universal Injunctions and Parental rights were all 6-3 decisions. You would think that Kagan would realize she is siding with the dummies. Of course I read an article recently that some of the had to opt out a case because they had humongous deals from a book publisher who was part of the suit so there is that.

Posted by: Sharon(willow's apprentice) at June 27, 2025 12:15 PM (t/2Uw)

19 ACB still owes for her previous liberal adventures, but this helps her standing.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at June 27, 2025 12:15 PM (CqOiB)

20 We even get a FLAMING SKULL for this.

Posted by: "Perfessor" Squirrel at June 27, 2025 12:15 PM (7fElN)

21 Posted by: TheJamesMadison

Why did you have to go and piss off Chief Justice Marshall?

Posted by: Bulg at June 27, 2025 12:16 PM (77rzZ)

22 Judge Boarsack of DC needs to preside over Alligator Alcatraz.

As for the ruling, these idiots in black robes kept double daring. Now they found out. Hope the consequences are terrifying.

Posted by: Anna Puma at June 27, 2025 12:16 PM (c/KMW)

23 SUPREME COURT INVALIDATES PRACTICE OF LOWLY DISTRICT COURT JUSTICES CONTROLLING THE NATIONALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT VIA UNIVERSAL INJUNCTIONS, BY A 6-3 VOTE
++++
Whatever. We've starting ignoring SCOTUS, so who cares.

Posted by: District Court at June 27, 2025 12:16 PM (6bTRc)

24 Thanks Ace. I am vindicated.😁❤️

Posted by: Sharon(willow's apprentice) at June 27, 2025 12:16 PM (t/2Uw)

25 AFT, baby.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at June 27, 2025 12:17 PM (CqOiB)

26 Brown Jacksonnis so dumb I wouldn't let her rule on getting peanut-butter in chocolate.

Posted by: Darth Randall at June 27, 2025 12:17 PM (f1kZG)

27 Gee, I'm so sorry that Trump appointed that traitorish squish c**t ACB.

Posted by: Bulg at June 27, 2025 12:17 PM (77rzZ)

28 Good afternoon Ace and everyone

Posted by: Skip at June 27, 2025 12:17 PM (+qU29)

29 Imagine how Scalia's opinion would have read.

Posted by: Frasier Crane at June 27, 2025 12:17 PM (bNf8H)

30 >>...incapable of reading, understanding, and applying the law, simply acting like a panelist on The View popping off about what she thinks the law should be while complaining about the "legalese" in the law.

As foretold by "Idiocracy"

Posted by: Her shits retarded at June 27, 2025 12:17 PM (m5cDg)

31 Needs to be a Boasberg flaming skull, but I'll certainly take this one. Good win, finally. Until the blue state lawsuits start flying?

Posted by: Lady in Black at June 27, 2025 12:17 PM (qBdHI)

32
Unfortunately, the unreliable ditz Coney Barret left open the possibility that lowly district court justices can issue nationwide injunctions in cases where a state is suing the federal government:

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

Ugh. Okay, how frequent/rare are lawsuits by a state against the federal government? (I have the feeling there's gonna be a slew of lawsuits from blue states soon.)

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 27, 2025 12:17 PM (HuRzZ)

33 Justice Jackson decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary."

==

NO MORE COURT COMITY!!

Posted by: runner at June 27, 2025 12:17 PM (g47mK)

34 I wonder if the Left will now be angry at these district court judges who pushed the envelope to ridiculous levels and ruined it for everyone else.

Posted by: toby928 at June 27, 2025 12:17 PM (jc0TO)

35 I'm pretty sure "We will not dwell on Justice Jackson's argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries worth of precedent" is the equivalent to:

"Ketanji, you ignorant slut."

Fierce stuff for a justice. Love it.

Posted by: LizLem at June 27, 2025 12:17 PM (gWBY1)

36 Brown Jacksonnis so dumb I wouldn't let her rule on getting peanut-butter in chocolate.
Posted by: Darth Randall

She's too dumb to find it disgusting.

Posted by: Bulg at June 27, 2025 12:17 PM (77rzZ)

37
31, 32

Horde mind!

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 27, 2025 12:17 PM (HuRzZ)

38 Amy Coney Barret wrote the opinion declaring that lowly district court judges have never in all of American history had the power they routinely assert to essentially invent national policy as they see fit.
++++
Then why did SCOTUS permit it for so long? Why did they do nothing for decades?

And, importantly, why did they finally do something *now*? Nothing has really changed. The lower courts are still "working toward the Fuhrer" as they always have.

This isn't new. This particular case isn't even particularly egregious when one considers the long, unbroken line of this crap.

So why now?

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (6bTRc)

39 We all realize that these 'decisions' are just going to be the backstop justifications for rejecting all gun ban challenges, yes?

Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (mlg/3)

40 Jackson Brown did have a few good tunes.

Posted by: Deplorable Ian Galt at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (ufFY8)

41 The CASA ruling leaves room for judges to order relief akin to a nationwide injunction when a state sues the federal government.
---
'member when the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that there is no standing when one state sues another state?

Posted by: People's Hippo Voice at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (GnVQ5)

42 Today: "ACB is THE GREATEST SUPREME COURT JUSTICE EVER!!! She is one of the greatest legal minds of ALL time and will be a tough act to follow when she finally steps down from the bench in 2070! Hold her name high aloft in praise!!!"

Next week: "ACB IS THE WORST EVER SUPREME COURT JUSTICE EVER!!!! She makes me regret voting for Trump! What was he thinking appointing that bint to the Court??? I'd take Elena Kagan over ACB!!!"

Posted by: Cow Demon at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (vm8sq)

43 ACB on KBJ: Her shit's all retarded.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (2UnvF)

44 These are great days we're living in, bros!

Posted by: Don Black at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (AOsQT)

45 Dry arguments > wet disputes > pissing matches

Posted by: gp Steps On Cusp Barefooted at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (IqBEX)

46 21 Posted by: TheJamesMadison

Why did you have to go and piss off Chief Justice Marshall?
Posted by: Bulg at June 27, 2025 12:16 PM (77rzZ)

=====

He smelled funny. And he was just looking for an excuse because he was an English judiciary loving fuckup.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (GBKbO)

47 Posted by: Sharon(willow's apprentice) at June 27, 2025 12:16 PM (t/2Uw)

Hey, Sharon. How was the MoMe?

Posted by: Bulg at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (77rzZ)

48 There will be some awkward moments between AOC and KBJ at the Supreme Court water cooler from now on.

Posted by: Frasier Crane at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (bNf8H)

49 Not yet tired of all the winning

Posted by: LinusVanPelt at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (ZiaCc)

50 Can't wait to read the meltdowns on DU from our resident trawler.

Posted by: Lady in Black at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (qBdHI)

51 ACB's opinion includes some wishy-washy bullshit that leaves daylight for assholic lower-hack judges to continue to fuck with national injunctions. Her conclusion opens a potentially yuge door:

"The Government’s applications to partially stay the [national injunctions] are granted, but only to the extent that the injunctions are broader than necessary to provide complete relief to each plaintiff with standing to sue."

I assume this was the price of her and Robert's signing on to the decision. Alito has the same worries I do. He writes in his concurrence:

"I join the opinion of the Court but write separately to note two related issues that are left unresolved and potentially threaten the practical significance of today’s decision: the availability of third-party standing and class certification."

Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (iFTx/)

52 So great they waited til the last possible day and a Friday to issue these opinions.

Posted by: Sharon(willow's apprentice) at June 27, 2025 12:19 PM (t/2Uw)

53 Should have used Boasbergs head for the flaming skull.. Though it does like like a skeleton already

Posted by: It's me donna at June 27, 2025 12:19 PM (VE6XX)

54 >>> AFT, baby.
Posted by: AlaBAMA at June 27, 2025 12:17 PM (CqOiB)

STERN

Posted by: banana Dream at June 27, 2025 12:19 PM (cduTK)

55 Coney Barret blasted her, accusing her simply ignoring 250 years of constitutional practice in order to create an "imperial judiciary."

======

When Sotomayor dies and Kagan retires, Jackson is going to be the senior progressive on the Court.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:13 PM (GBKbO)

Well, she's already the senior imbecile on the court. She'll have to wait for the additional titles.

Posted by: Hour of the Wolf at June 27, 2025 12:19 PM (S/Y4j)

56 Jumanji Beown Jackson...
The soft bigotry of low expectations

Posted by: Life of Wryly at June 27, 2025 12:19 PM (ycs3a)

57 What makes me think this won't stop the Commissar Judges?
Yeah, the Supreme Court ruled on that, but what about this?
The bastards love splitting hairs

Posted by: Skip at June 27, 2025 12:19 PM (+qU29)

58 >>>Fierce stuff for a justice. Love i

she deserves it. I have an upcoming post about her routinely attacking the conservative justices as being too obsessed with looking at the actual text of the Constitution and the law.

Posted by: ace at June 27, 2025 12:19 PM (KRtlO)

59 It took long enough for Barret to recognize a fraud.

Posted by: Thomas Paine at June 27, 2025 12:20 PM (Vfq+S)

60 I have new respect for ACB.. Let's see if it remains....
Posted by: It's me donna at June 27, 2025 12:14 PM (VE6XX)

It's a tiny respect... the runt of the litter. We have hopes but it may not survive.

Posted by: I used to have a different nic at June 27, 2025 12:20 PM (ExV1e)

61 Facism (sic), pure facism.

That's prejudice against ugly people, and it shall not stand.

Posted by: Judge Pakalolo Mahu in Whakatangihangaipukakapiki at June 27, 2025 12:20 PM (qpyNK)

62 The opinion states that Congress never granted lowly district court justices the power to grant "equitable relief" (injunctions) to anyone except the exact parties in court in front of them. They cannot simply just say that their rulings apply across the country to anyone else who might make a similar complaint.
++++
Which some courts do, when they are really unhappy about having to do something.

The judge in the Sixth Circuit ruled that employers couldn't arbitrarily enforce COVID vaccination requirements, it applied *only* to the Sixth Circuit, and so provided an "out" for any firm domiciled somewhere else to just fuck around anyway.

It could have been a nationwide injunction, but it wasn't because the ruling went the wrong way and the judge knew it.

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:20 PM (6bTRc)

63 51 ACB's opinion includes some wishy-washy bullshit that leaves daylight for assholic lower-hack judges to continue to fuck with national injunctions. Her conclusion opens a potentially yuge door:

And you can bet they will exploit it...

Posted by: It's me donna at June 27, 2025 12:20 PM (VE6XX)

64 32 Ugh. Okay, how frequent/rare are lawsuits by a state against the federal government? (I have the feeling there's gonna be a slew of lawsuits from blue states soon.)
Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 27, 2025 12:17 PM (HuRzZ)

======

Pretty rare. CA suing on the NG rollout a few weeks ago is an example. It's a fight over state/federal power with state owned resources. It fits.

But the leftist legal effort is going to change so that, like, IL sues on the part of its citizens because Trump said boogie or something. Which will fall apart pretty quickly (legally speaking).

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:20 PM (GBKbO)

65 The bitch be running on empty.

Posted by: anchorbabe fashion cop at June 27, 2025 12:20 PM (ufFY8)

66 "OVERRULED!"

-- US District Clown Judge Bozoberg

Posted by: ShainS at June 27, 2025 12:20 PM (arzIt)

67 there is another win ..but we will leave it for another thread..yes ?

Posted by: runner at June 27, 2025 12:20 PM (g47mK)

68 38 And, importantly, why did they finally do something *now*? Nothing has really changed. The lower courts are still "working toward the Fuhrer" as they always have.

This isn't new. This particular case isn't even particularly egregious when one considers the long, unbroken line of this crap.

So why now?
Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (6bTRc)

=======

Because the abuse has gotten so bad that they can't ignore it anymore.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:20 PM (GBKbO)

69 And see how the 3 Cultural Marxists ruled.Its political feelings, not law.

Posted by: Skip at June 27, 2025 12:20 PM (+qU29)

70 This is great but I want the SC to also address the idiocy of allowing partisan state courts to file charges against a former President arising out of his Presidency or candidate for the Presidency whether they are from presidential actions or not.

Posted by: polynikes at June 27, 2025 12:21 PM (VofaG)

71 In Jackson's defense, she pretty much openly told the world she was an idiot during her confirmation hearing, but Democrats didn't care they just wanted their black female justice.

This really must piss off Sotomayor though, as she was trying so hard to go down in history as the dumbest supreme court justice, hell maybe dumbest judge period, then Jackson just comes and snatches that title with ease.

Posted by: Rbastid at June 27, 2025 12:21 PM (cnrLY)

72 The full passage is worth the read. Amy Coney Barret calls Ketanji Jackson-Brown dumb, in so many words, incapable of reading, understanding, and applying the law, simply acting like a panelist on The View popping off about what she thinks the law should be while complaining about the "legalese" in the law.
++++
I am not a SCOTUS researcher, but is this kind of "sit down and shut up for once, you dumbass" thing in an opinion rare? It seems like it would be.

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:21 PM (6bTRc)

73 Justice Jackson-Brown is running on empty.

Posted by: Mark1971 at June 27, 2025 12:21 PM (CNl8/)

74 Ketanji was always my least favorite Jackson. She really didn't have the stage presence and vocal range that Janet and Andrew had.

Posted by: Kindltot at June 27, 2025 12:21 PM (D7oie)

75 Maybe Barrett just got tired of all of the incoherent ramblings from the far bench, and decided a smack down was in order.

Posted by: Thomas Paine at June 27, 2025 12:21 PM (Vfq+S)

76 40 Jackson Browne did have a few good tunes.
Posted by: Deplorable Ian Galt at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (ufFY

That hypocrite. The day I might respect him is when he takes his money and announces he is going to evenly redistribute it among the American people until he is left with nothing but the clothes on his back.

At which point he is violently beaten to death by the police for being a rich POS.

Fuck him and his music.

Posted by: Cow Demon at June 27, 2025 12:21 PM (vm8sq)

77 >>ACB's opinion includes some wishy-washy bullshit that leaves daylight for assholic lower-hack judges to continue to fuck with national injunctions. Her conclusion opens a potentially yuge door:

agreed, she's Sandy Day O'Connor 2.0. She leaves the law more unsettled every time she pretends to settle it.

I hate to say this, but... she's not doing women any favors. Both of these female justices seem to find it impossible to make clear decisions. They always leave things in a "maybe this, maybe that" muddle.

Posted by: ace at June 27, 2025 12:21 PM (KRtlO)

78 KJB and Jeff Bezos both graduated from Miami Palmetto High School.

Posted by: mr tmz at June 27, 2025 12:21 PM (rJ48h)

79 I'll also post again about Jackson-Brown's frequent complaint that there is too much boring law stuff in the law. She actually makes this argument all the time. She doesn't like the dry, boring law getting in the way of her social justice activism. She wants to be free to just pop off like Whoopie Goldberg on The View, but with the force of law behind her ignorant mumblings.
++++
She should endeavor to be as silent as Clarence Thomas.

Even if she were, though, she'd probably make just as many piss poor activist rulings.

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (6bTRc)

80 The full passage is worth the read. Amy Coney Barret calls Ketanji Jackson-Brown dumb, in so many words,

lol

this is what must have driven KJB to the rang ding-a dang-a dang-a dang

Posted by: kallisto at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (dCxaZ)

81 Kagan and Sotomayor are repugnant, but at least they can count to twenty with their shoes on.

Posted by: Judge Pakalolo Mahu in Whakatangihangaipukakapiki at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (qpyNK)

82 Whatever. We've starting ignoring SCOTUS, so who cares.
Posted by: District Court

This. If Roberts doesn't immediately drop a legal MOP on that court, then he might as well put on a gimp suit instead of a robe.

Posted by: Oddbob at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (/y8xj)

83 73 Justice Jackson-Brown is running on empty.
Posted by: Mark1971 at June 27, 2025 12:21 PM (CNl8/)

So she was born in 1948?

In '65 she was 17?

In '69 she was 21?

Posted by: Cow Demon at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (vm8sq)

84 Did ACB call KBJ an indirect n word?

Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (63Dwl)

85 51
"The Government’s applications to partially stay the [national injunctions] are granted, but only to the extent that the injunctions are broader than necessary to provide complete relief to each plaintiff with standing to sue."

I assume this was the price of her and Robert's signing on to the decision. Alito has the same worries I do. He writes in his concurrence:

"I join the opinion of the Court but write separately to note two related issues that are left unresolved and potentially threaten the practical significance of today’s decision: the availability of third-party standing and class certification."
Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (iFTx/)

========

I don't think that's wishywashy at all. That seems pretty ironclad. It fits with the earlier discussion about what relief actually means. It felt like one of the stronger parts of the decision.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (GBKbO)

86 Because the abuse has gotten so bad that they can't ignore it anymore.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:20 PM (GBKbO)
++++
Has it? It's a tad more frequent, but the abuse isn't really much worse than it ever was.

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (6bTRc)

87 I am not a SCOTUS researcher, but is this kind of "sit down and shut up for once, you dumbass" thing in an opinion rare? It seems like it would be.
Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:21 PM (6bTRc)

Having someone so ridiculously ignorant on the SC is rare.

Posted by: polynikes at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (VofaG)

88 About time. The problem being the Thing morphs and in the end Kurt Russell is left unsure of its ultimate destruction.

Posted by: 13times at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (OhltJ)

89 Amy Coney Barret calls Ketanji Jackson-Brown dumb, in so many words, incapable of reading, understanding, and applying the law

What does one expect from someone who requires a degree in biology to know what a woman is?

Posted by: Halfhand at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (fLQ2m)

90 Hi Bulg
It was a bit smaller than last couple of ones but lots of good conversation and met some lurkers who may want to shoot with the DMVMGC. It was hot but a breeze so not too bad.
How was your trip?

Posted by: Sharon(willow's apprentice) at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (t/2Uw)

91 "I'm sick of all this math and physics mumbo jumbo. I'm trying to land on Mars here."

- Elon Musk

"Blah blah Bible blah who cares that stuff is from like forever ago."

- Pope John Paul II

"It's all just tubes, man, don't get bogged down in details."

- Galen

Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (BjH5D)

92 Stepped on my response to TMJ last post, but nevermind.

So, with the revelation that Justice Jackson is a functional illiterate with no understanding of the the Constitution, I assume Mike Johnson is filing impeachment charges against the dumb clown and preparing her removal from the Court.

Posted by: OrangeEnt at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (0eaVi)

93 A BURNING SKULL!

For once Amy came through... a nice change!

The entire anchor baby idea has messed up this country for what seems to be decades. Thanks, too, to DACA by Barky, to exceed the issue. Some mothers would enter our country almost dilated and hatch a kid out. Some would then return to Mexico and raise the kid Mexican. Then the kid, some in a gang,would arrive over our border, not speaking a word of English, and do their thing...until President Trump.

Most are paid under the table, so no taxes or social security.Free healthcare and education with our taxes. Yet they apply for Medicare if here long enough. Somehow, without documents, or fake ones, get on whatever we will give them. Just because they squatted illegally.

The brat DACA kids figured, "I am legal as well as, by the color of my skin, I am better than whites. I get scholarships! I get DEI jobs! I rule, baby!"

Get to the back of the damn line, DACAs. You ain't legal,anymore than your parents who overstayed their visas or did not bother and crossed illegally.

Round 'em up!

Posted by: ChristyBlinkyTheGreat at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (6PCLE)

94 58 >>>Fierce stuff for a justice. Love i

she deserves it. I have an upcoming post about her routinely attacking the conservative justices as being too obsessed with looking at the actual text of the Constitution and the law.
Posted by: ace at June 27, 2025 12:19 PM (KRtlO)

======

Imagine what she's like behind closed doors and in inter-office memos.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:23 PM (GBKbO)

95 I hate to say this, but... she's not doing women any favors. Both of these female justices seem to find it impossible to make clear decisions. They always leave things in a "maybe this, maybe that" muddle.

Posted by: ace at June 27, 2025 12:21 PM (KRtlO

Probably sucks at parallel parking too.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at June 27, 2025 12:23 PM (CqOiB)

96 ACB on KBJ: Her shit's all retarded.
Posted by: Duke Lowell

And he talks like a fag.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 27, 2025 12:23 PM (mlg/3)

97 This. If Roberts doesn't immediately drop a legal MOP on that court, then he might as well put on a gimp suit instead of a robe.
Posted by: Oddbob at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (/y8xj)

"But that means I won't be liked in DC and won't get invited to cocktail parties with the cool kids."

Posted by: Cow Demon at June 27, 2025 12:23 PM (vm8sq)

98 88 About time. The problem being the Thing morphs and in the end Kurt Russell is left unsure of its ultimate destruction.
Posted by: 13times at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (OhltJ)

Are we talking about movies or the Supreme Court?

Posted by: Mark Andrew Edwards, buy ammo at June 27, 2025 12:23 PM (xcxpd)

99 > Jackson-Brown

I never much liked him, even before he got the race change and "transitioned". His music was always insipid.

Posted by: Judge Pakalolo Mahu in Whakatangihangaipukakapiki at June 27, 2025 12:23 PM (qpyNK)

100 >>I am not a SCOTUS researcher, but is this kind of "sit down and shut up for once, you dumbass" thing in an opinion rare? It seems like it would be.

it is but as you'll read in a later post, KBJ keeps attacking the conservatives for caring about what the law actually SAYS. She sniffs that this is just "strict textualism."

She does not want to be constrained by what the Constitution and law actually says, and she insults the other justices for thinking that these things should matter.

Posted by: ace at June 27, 2025 12:23 PM (KRtlO)

101 >There will be some awkward moments between AOC and KBJ at the Supreme Court water cooler from now on.

Posted by: Frasier Crane
---

yeah, they're not gonna be holding hands in the shower anytime soon

Posted by: Don Black at June 27, 2025 12:23 PM (AOsQT)

102 Oh by the way Trump helped negotiate a peace treat between Congo and Rawanda.

Posted by: JackStraw at June 27, 2025 12:23 PM (viF8m)

103 86 Because the abuse has gotten so bad that they can't ignore it anymore.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:20 PM (GBKbO)
++++
Has it? It's a tad more frequent, but the abuse isn't really much worse than it ever was.
Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (6bTRc)

======

No, it's significantly more frequent.

12 injunctions in all of Biden's presidency vs. about 60 in the first 4 months of Trump's second term.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:24 PM (GBKbO)

104 Fierce stuff for a justice. Love i

she deserves it. I have an upcoming post about her routinely attacking the conservative justices as being too obsessed with looking at the actual text of the Constitution and the law.
Posted by: ace at June 27, 2025 12:19 PM (KRtlO)
________

Ace, she's not alone in that. Ignoring the actual text -- and inventing new text -- is the entire basis of modern liberal judicial philosophy. Penumbras and emanations and all that. Hacktion Jackson is merely following standard leftwing jurisprudence.

Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:24 PM (iFTx/)

105 Is she a smart Latina or just smart for a Latina?

Posted by: AlaBAMA at June 27, 2025 12:24 PM (CqOiB)

106 Then why did SCOTUS permit it for so long? Why did they do nothing for decades?

And, importantly, why did they finally do something *now*? Nothing has really changed. The lower courts are still "working toward the Fuhrer" as they always have.

This isn't new. This particular case isn't even particularly egregious when one considers the long, unbroken line of this crap.

So why now?

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!)

Because Trump and the Dems made it an issue impossible to ignore. Trump, because he kept doing things he knew they'd judge shop to stop, and the Dems, because they lack the wit to know a losing hand when they see one, and fold.

Posted by: Archimedes at June 27, 2025 12:24 PM (Riz8t)

107 "The legalese ain't legalesin' here."

-- Ketanji Brown Jackson on Supreme Court precedent, cribbin' Jasmine Crockett's legal expertise in deciding if Melania Trump's "Einstein" Visa was legal

Posted by: LizLem at June 27, 2025 12:24 PM (gWBY1)

108 Did ACB call KBJ an indirect n word?
Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (63Dwl)

That's what the Left will claim.

Posted by: polynikes at June 27, 2025 12:24 PM (VofaG)

109 it is but as you'll read in a later post, KBJ keeps attacking the conservatives for caring about what the law actually SAYS. She sniffs that this is just "strict textualism."

She does not want to be constrained by what the Constitution and law actually says, and she insults the other justices for thinking that these things should matter.
Posted by: ace at June 27, 2025 12:23 PM (KRtlO)
++++
Pretty typical for an activist.

But strict construction is what I want. Very, very strict. 90% of the FedGov is probably unconstitutional, strictly interpreted.

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:24 PM (6bTRc)

110 Do you think VDH would let ACB into Ace's Cruel Club?

Posted by: banana Dream at June 27, 2025 12:24 PM (cduTK)

111 >>> 98

Yes.

Posted by: 13times at June 27, 2025 12:25 PM (OhltJ)

112 Having someone so ridiculously ignorant on the SC is rare.
Posted by: polynikes at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (VofaG)

Doesn't she have the most spoken words in oral argument of the nine by some huuuuge luxurious margin?

Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 27, 2025 12:25 PM (BjH5D)

113 Who's the gimp in the last picture?

Posted by: Commissar of plenty and festive little hats at June 27, 2025 12:25 PM (7udRx)

114 I'm smelling a romcom starring Jumangi and ACB. The begin by hating each other but soon loves blooms. Look for it on the Hallmark Channel!

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Well, This Is Another Fine Mess You've Gotten Me Into at June 27, 2025 12:25 PM (L/fGl)

115 So this puts a dent in the Chinese birthing in America industry? I remember reading a while ago it was the thing to do for the wealthy. They all wanted that golden American ticket.

Posted by: Lady in Black at June 27, 2025 12:25 PM (qBdHI)

116 This isn't new. This particular case isn't even particularly egregious when one considers the long, unbroken line of this crap.

So why now?
Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!)

The straw that broke the camel's back.

Posted by: FeatherBlade at June 27, 2025 12:25 PM (hB7mE)

117 >>Probably sucks at parallel parking too.

Has no idea where she wants to go to dinner. But she really does.

Posted by: JackStraw at June 27, 2025 12:25 PM (viF8m)

118 Does this reduce the class to the district, the state, or the individual who filed suit?

Posted by: bob (moron incognitus) at June 27, 2025 12:25 PM (m5cDg)

119 The fact that 5 other justices signed off on the smackdown of Jackson likely means they're sick of her bullshit.

Posted by: Duke Lowell at June 27, 2025 12:25 PM (2UnvF)

120 King Solomon proposed cutting a baby in half to settle a case brought before him.

Even when they come to a correct decision, SCOTUS runs the baby through a Cuisinart trying to appease the Left.

Posted by: Stu Podaso at June 27, 2025 12:25 PM (M0V4/)

121 Congress needs to start eliminating lower courts.

Posted by: Anna Puma at June 27, 2025 12:25 PM (c/KMW)

122 A wise Wheatina.

Posted by: Boss Moss at June 27, 2025 12:25 PM (VAINm)

123 KBJ: The Velveeta Jones of SCOTUS.

"Blah, blah, blah. You gotta apply the law. That part of the argument sucked!"

Posted by: Halfhand at June 27, 2025 12:26 PM (fLQ2m)

124 And, importantly, why did they finally do something *now*?

If I were to guess, SCOTUS was concerned that Trump was approaching the Jackson Line and that the public might side with him. That would be the first step in shattering the power that the courts have accumulated and might start an irreversible trend.

Posted by: I used to have a different nic at June 27, 2025 12:26 PM (ExV1e)

125 >>> She should endeavor to be as silent as Clarence Thomas.

If you thinks that's possible, you don't know women...

...a sexist would say!

Posted by: LizLem at June 27, 2025 12:26 PM (gWBY1)

126 Incredible how such an idiot can become one of the Black-Robed Nine.

Posted by: Deplorable Ian Galt at June 27, 2025 12:26 PM (ufFY8)

127 BREAKING!!!
DC District judge declares Supreme Court to be unconstitutional.

Hawaiian Judge declares the US Constitution to be unconstitutional

Probably already done. sarc//

Posted by: Winston AKA Pops at June 27, 2025 12:26 PM (FJMtP)

128 Then why did SCOTUS permit it for so long? Why did they do nothing for decades?

It was used sparingly when the Uni-Party was in power. Perhaps, even, as a means to establish its 'legitimacy'.

If I correctly remember a graph I saw this morning, it's already been used 40 times against Trump this spring, whereas it was invoked 14 times against Obama during his eight years.

Posted by: t-bird at June 27, 2025 12:26 PM (6pVrF)

129 "The Government’s applications to partially stay the [national injunctions] are granted, but only to the extent that the injunctions are broader than necessary to provide complete relief to each plaintiff with standing to sue."

I assume this was the price of her and Robert's signing on to the decision. Alito has the same worries I do. He writes in his concurrence:

"I join the opinion of the Court but write separately to note two related issues that are left unresolved and potentially threaten the practical significance of today’s decision: the availability of third-party standing and class certification."
Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (iFTx/)

========

I don't think that's wishywashy at all. That seems pretty ironclad. It fits with the earlier discussion about what relief actually means. It felt like one of the stronger parts of the decision.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:22 PM (GBKbO)
______

Did you read Alito's concurrence? He spells out in detail why I think its wishy-washy. The "standing" point opens up a YUGE door.

Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:26 PM (iFTx/)

130
OK, that's nice. But I'd prefer if the Supreme Court ordered Boasberg to report to Conor McGregor to have his dimestore Christopher Lloyd face punched through the back side of his fuckin' head.

Posted by: Yudhishthira's Dice at June 27, 2025 12:26 PM (BI5O2)

131 agreed, she's Sandy Day O'Connor 2.0. She leaves the law more unsettled every time she pretends to settle it.

I hate to say this, but... she's not doing women any favors. Both of these female justices seem to find it impossible to make clear decisions. They always leave things in a "maybe this, maybe that" muddle.

On the bright side, we'll only have to wait 25 years to find out what the law is.

Posted by: Archimedes at June 27, 2025 12:26 PM (Riz8t)

132 It's going to be fun when a district judge ignores this opinion and issues a nationwide injunction against, say, having zero trannies on the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

I mean, I know Trump can ignore it, but I don't think the woke judiciary is finished beclowning itself.

Posted by: Jack Squat Bupkis at June 27, 2025 12:27 PM (jYRYu)

133
So why now?
Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!)

=============

First time they've been challenged?

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 27, 2025 12:27 PM (HuRzZ)

134 No, it's significantly more frequent.

12 injunctions in all of Biden's presidency vs. about 60 in the first 4 months of Trump's second term.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:24 PM (GBKbO)
++++
Fair enough on frequency. But it still makes me wonder. This is *so* not new that I want to know what has the bench spooked.

I *suspect* it is fear of a legitimacy crisis. The lower courts running roughshod and now even just ignoring SCOTUS is a serial problem for America's black-robed imperium. If it keeps up, people might just start ignoring them wholesale because victory is impossible.

If that is the case, I also suspect that the fix is already in and the judiciary is going to maintain at least much power as it has now, through some new contrivance.

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:27 PM (6bTRc)

135 Chinese tourist births are small potatoes compared to the southern border invaders.

Posted by: Anna Puma at June 27, 2025 12:27 PM (c/KMW)

136 It goes in effect in 30 days, so pump out those babies...illegals already being deported by ICE.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison
=====

I bet lefties are now wishing they were on record as saying life begins at conception.

Posted by: haffhowershower at June 27, 2025 12:27 PM (1U8ba)

137 District judges were intruding into SCOTUS's territory.

SCOTUS slaps them down, "Know your place, bitches."

Posted by: davidt at June 27, 2025 12:27 PM (i0F8b)

138 I'll take the win and enjoy the Left's meltdown

Posted by: Zeera , Damn Right I voted for all of this! at June 27, 2025 12:27 PM (viPPY)

139 They always leave things in a "maybe this, maybe that" muddle.

Posted by: ace at June 27, 2025 12:21 PM (KRtlO

"I might need that dick later"

Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 27, 2025 12:27 PM (BjH5D)

140 She wants to be free to just pop off like Whoopie Goldberg on The View, but with the force of law behind her ignorant mumblings.

Posted by: Ace at 12:10 PM\
============================
I really object to this characterization! I don't mumble at all.

Posted by: Justice Whoopie Brown-Jackson at June 27, 2025 12:27 PM (Z9R/r)

141 I bet lefties are now wishing they were on record as saying life begins at conception.
Posted by: haffhowershower at June 27, 2025 12:27 PM (1U8ba

I chortled

Posted by: AlaBAMA at June 27, 2025 12:28 PM (RUMEY)

142 Not a lawyer, but I like to argue, sooo

You know who knew this outcome was inevitable? Every single judge issuing one of these universal rulings. Not one of them had the nuts to find Trump in contempt. Doing that would have elevated the case and accelerated this ruling. If they thought they were right, they'd want Trump slapped down ASAP, but not one of them did it.

Posted by: Bilwis Devourer of Innocent Souls, I'm starvin' over here at June 27, 2025 12:28 PM (pIfcn)

143 I mean, I know Trump can ignore it, but I don't think the woke judiciary is finished beclowning itself.
Posted by: Jack Squat Bupkis at June 27, 2025 12:27 PM (jYRYu)

I agree, but let's take this win until they do...

Posted by: It's me donna at June 27, 2025 12:28 PM (VE6XX)

144 KBJ keeps attacking the conservatives for caring about what the law actually SAYS. She sniffs that this is just "strict textualism."

She does not want to be constrained by what the Constitution and law actually says, and she insults the other justices for thinking that these things should matter.

I wonder if she does the finger and head wag thing, while going mmm mmm mmm mmm mmm when someone calls her on her nonsense.

Posted by: Archimedes at June 27, 2025 12:28 PM (Riz8t)

145 Another momentous outcome, like the last Presidential election: thank Heaven did not go the other way

Posted by: JM in Illinois at June 27, 2025 12:28 PM (LPgB/)

146 I love Barrett's jab at Jackson who is an embarrassment to women generally and all Americans. All I could think was:
CAT FIGHT!!

I should make some popcorn to enjoy this kind of entertainment.

Posted by: JTB at June 27, 2025 12:28 PM (yTvNw)

147 129 Did you read Alito's concurrence? He spells out in detail why I think its wishy-washy. The "standing" point opens up a YUGE door.
Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:26 PM (iFTx/)

========

I guess there's more to it than I thought, but I read it as, "Complete relief is about the relief of those who sued, not the nation as a whole. Here's a history of how the nation dealt with this, even under laws SCOTUS later did deem to be unconstitutional where only those suing received relief."

And, since the judiciary regularly dismissing things because of lack of standing already...I think too much is being made of this and it's actually a fairly strong element to the decision.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:28 PM (GBKbO)

148 Who's the gimp in the last picture?
Posted by: Commissar of plenty and festive little hats

It's either Judge Boasberg or Herman Munster. I'm not sure.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Well, This Is Another Fine Mess You've Gotten Me Into at June 27, 2025 12:28 PM (L/fGl)

149 Put this decision, the recent decisions permitting deportations and the tranny decision together.

Yeah, the tea leaves are clear:
The line, we decide the constitutionality of laws, not policy, is going to be the same line repeated when the full BRC decision comes down.

Posted by: People's Hippo Voice at June 27, 2025 12:28 PM (GnVQ5)

150 Ugh. Okay, how frequent/rare are lawsuits by a state against the federal government? (I have the feeling there's gonna be a slew of lawsuits from blue states soon.)
Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 27, 2025 12:17 PM (HuRzZ)
__________________________

I dislike George Soros with vigor, but you have to sit back and admire his understanding of the process and how it was more important to stuff states with Soros aligned State Attorney(s) General. It's going to pay off on this issue.

Posted by: Orson at June 27, 2025 12:28 PM (dIske)

151 NO MORE COURT COMITY!!
Posted by: runner

=====

Fine, we’ll pivot to a Rom-Com

Posted by: haffhowershower at June 27, 2025 12:28 PM (1U8ba)

152 Joe Mannix, that's great stuff. Especially "working towards the Fuhrer". Exactly on point, with the added merit of baffling most who don't understand what that meant/means.

So yeah it's nice that 6 out of 9 made a partial concession to actual constitutional reality. Better than the alternative? Maybe.

The ruins of the constitutional system limp along, with a judiciary that is 75% too powerful and lives almost entirely outside their lane (while refusing to engage issues actually in their lane).

Posted by: rhomboid at June 27, 2025 12:29 PM (1m82a)

153 Here's another good one

https://tinyurl.com/mpja4mdf

Posted by: Sharon(willow's apprentice) at June 27, 2025 12:29 PM (t/2Uw)

154 This isn't new. This particular case isn't even particularly egregious when one considers the long, unbroken line of this crap.

So why now?
Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (6bTRc)

The progressives and the "loyal opposition" loved it because a case could be ginned up in a friendly area, a nationwide injunction issued from a carefully selected court, and then everyone got to say, "oops then I guess that is the law" with the benefit of not actually having to go through the legislative process and any electoral kick back from having made laws that the electorate despised.

It is a cheat code for "making shit up, making it stick, and keeping the stink off of everyone involved" because you know, Conservatives and corporatists always obey judges.

The judges have come to the opinion that are like Ephors

Posted by: Kindltot at June 27, 2025 12:29 PM (D7oie)

155 Any truth to the rumor Judge Brian Murphy is going to self-immolate in protest?

Posted by: Huck Follywood at June 27, 2025 12:29 PM (Z9R/r)

156 >>>"It's all just tubes, man, don't get bogged down in details."
- Galen

what's that from?

Posted by: ace at June 27, 2025 12:29 PM (KRtlO)

157 121 Congress needs to start eliminating lower courts.
Posted by: Anna Puma at June 27, 2025 12:25 PM (c/KMW)

Or: pass a law reorganizing them (districts, even locations, etc) and stipulate that as a result all the judicial posts are vacant. Aw shucks, we have to start over...

Posted by: Cow Demon at June 27, 2025 12:29 PM (vm8sq)

158 KBJ is probably too stupid to even realize that ACB called her stupid.

Posted by: PAgirlinNC at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (/2Cnr)

159 Higher IQ

[ ] KJB

[ ] Jasmine Crockett

Posted by: mr tmz at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (rJ48h)

160
I'm still confused on how these district federal courts work anyway. Federal law does not apply in our state/district because reasons, but we allow that it does in all the others?

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (HuRzZ)

161 I often get Ketangi and LaTeefa (a Rep)'s mixed up.

I don't know why. Both seem to be a boil on the butt of justice and government. Apparently ignorant as well.

Posted by: ChristyBlinkyTheGreat at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (6PCLE)

162 Incredible how such an idiot can become one of the Black-Robed Nine.

--

Completely commensurate with the idiot who nominated her and put her on the court.

Posted by: Lady in Black at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (qBdHI)

163 She [Affirmative Action Jackson] doesn't seem to grasp that "legalese" is what makes up the law. She seems to dismiss it because she can't follow it.

Now, for a layman, this is understandable. Laymen don't understand legalese and are impatient with it.

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

Well, TBF, she's not a biologist -- so is still confused about the difference between a layman and a laywoman.

Posted by: ShainS at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (arzIt)

164 BREAKING!!!
DC District judge declares Supreme Court to be unconstitutional.

Hawaiian Judge declares the US Constitution to be unconstitutional

Probably already done. sarc//
Posted by: Winston AKA Pops at June 27, 2025 12:26 PM (FJMtP)

California passed a Constitutional amendment that they ruled was Unconstitutional ( State constitution)

Posted by: polynikes at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (VofaG)

165 So, is it possible for district judges to file TRO's or injunctions via a coordinated effort from multiple state/districts?

Posted by: Martini Farmer at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (Q4IgG)

166 Jackson Brown did have a few good tunes.
Posted by: Deplorable Ian Galt

Jackson Browne>>>Browne Jackson

Posted by: haffhowershower at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (1U8ba)

167 Good afternoon Ace. The smack back by ACB against Jackson that is cited above is the harshest rebuttal of a fellow judge since Scalia, maybe even ever. Jackson bitching about having to deal with "legalese" shows she's not an judge but a social justice warrior

Posted by: Smell the Glove at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (pwtJC)

168 Did ACB call KBJ an indirect n word?
Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr.

Yes. ACB just gave KBJ cancer and diabetes.

Posted by: Jamaal Bowman at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (M0V4/)

169 I had a feeling that eventually the justices would slap down the district judges, if only for one reason: ego. They HATE disrespect in their courtroom. And all of the US judicial system, on federal legal matters, is their courtroom.

So they can't have these annoying mosquitos of district judges keep sucking away at their authority and their prestige. At some point the district judges were going to get swatted. I just wasn't sure how bad the swatting would be.

Posted by: LizLem at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (gWBY1)

170 38 Amy Coney Barret wrote the opinion declaring that lowly district court judges have never in all of American history had the power they routinely assert to essentially invent national policy as they see fit.
++++
Then why did SCOTUS permit it for so long? Why did they do nothing for decades?

And, importantly, why did they finally do something *now*? Nothing has really changed. The lower courts are still "working toward the Fuhrer" as they always have.

This isn't new. This particular case isn't even particularly egregious when one considers the long, unbroken line of this crap.

So why now?

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (6bTRc)

The Supreme Court can't just make decrees, they can only rule on cases brought before them. And then add the fact that they routinely refuse to see certain types of cases and it gets annoying.

Posted by: Farquad at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (YkGND)

171 "Who's the gimp in the last picture?"

Bat Boy. Long time no see.

Posted by: gp Steps On Cusp Barefooted at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (IqBEX)

172 The woman wouldn't recognize the Constitution if it bit her on the ass.

Posted by: toby928 at June 27, 2025 12:12 PM

Actually she would probably say, "See?? It IS a living document!!!"

Posted by: ... at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (rCia8)

173 Yeah the zombie gimp is Boarberg I think.

Or they are remaking the Star Trek episode "What are little girls made of."

Posted by: Anna Puma at June 27, 2025 12:31 PM (c/KMW)

174 170 The Supreme Court can't just make decrees, they can only rule on cases brought before them. And then add the fact that they routinely refuse to see certain types of cases and it gets annoying.
Posted by: Farquad at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (YkGND)

=======

Which is true.

The judiciary is reactive. It cannot be proactive.

The idea that it should have great power over the branches that are active, that do report directly to the people, is so ludicrous based on this simple fact.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:31 PM (GBKbO)

175 "Who's the gimp in the last picture?"

Boasberg

Posted by: It's me donna at June 27, 2025 12:31 PM (VE6XX)

176 Kudos to Justice Majel Barrett, but I liked her better on Star Trek.

Posted by: Open Channel D at June 27, 2025 12:31 PM (gYnrv)

177 But Justice LaQuanisha Is exactly what Biden promised -- black, female.

Did you expect more?

Posted by: bob (moron incognitus) at June 27, 2025 12:31 PM (m5cDg)

178 This. If Roberts doesn't immediately drop a legal MOP on that court, then he might as well put on a gimp suit instead of a robe.
-----
"But that means I won't be liked in DC and won't get invited to cocktail parties with the cool kids."

True, gimps are popular among their chosen subset of society.

Posted by: Oddbob at June 27, 2025 12:32 PM (/y8xj)

179
I dislike George Soros with vigor, but you have to sit back and admire his understanding of the process and how it was more important to stuff states with Soros aligned State Attorney(s) General. It's going to pay off on this issue.
Posted by: Orson

==============

That and the Secretaries of State project (State as in the 50). Those are the people who count the votes.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 27, 2025 12:32 PM (HuRzZ)

180 How was your trip?
Posted by: Sharon(willow's apprentice)

Nice. I reconnected with my sister-in-law, two nieces, and a nephew. And my niece's daughters are wonderful young lady. The oldest one, the one who's graduation we were celebrating, is heading to the U. of Michigan to study biology, with the eventual goal of attending medical school.

The only snag was that, on the way back, my rental car got a flat tire in eastern Pennsylvania. AAA came out and put on the spare, and then I had to drive reeeeaaal slow to the next exit on the PA Turnpike, where a garage affiliated with the rental company (Enterprise) patched and re-installed the original tire at no cost to me.

So, a fun and eventful trip.

Posted by: Bulg at June 27, 2025 12:32 PM (77rzZ)

181 Well I guess this is good news, even if SCOTUS probably just wants to concentrate all the power to be spineless sellouts in their own hands. But I guess we'll see.

Rather pissed the RINOs are going along with the parliamentarian throwing out the NFA revisions for "not being a revenue thing" after 90 years of "oh, it's constitutional because it's a revenue thing". Someone looking way into the future might argue that what can be un-NFA'ed via reconciliation, could be added back and then some; but that's largely irrelevant because the Dems are going to plunge us into civil war at some point anyways. Best to let our people arm up while they can.

Of my acquaintances that are close enough to tell me how they'd vote, the majority are indicating that if the GOP does this, they're never pulling the lever for them again. It was basically one of the only parts of the bill that wasn't shit, on account of the lack of real cuts.

Posted by: heya at June 27, 2025 12:32 PM (bUBn/)

182 Just shows that Trump was right to not defy these lowly Courts. Adults back in charge ar every level

Posted by: JM in Illinois at June 27, 2025 12:32 PM (Fju+s)

183 "We will not dwell on Justice Jackson's argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries' worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself. We observe only this: Justice Jackson decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary."

Familiar. The left decries a (air quotes) fascist while embracing fascism.

This line of thinking isn't new. Total projection. We don't mind a fascist. We just mind that he's of a different party.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at June 27, 2025 12:32 PM (RUMEY)

184 Higher IQ

[ ] KJB

[ ] Jasmine Crockett
Posted by: mr tmz at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (rJ48h)

[X] None of the above

Posted by: ... at June 27, 2025 12:33 PM (rCia8)

185 Did you read Alito's concurrence? He spells out in detail why I think its wishy-washy. The "standing" point opens up a YUGE door.
Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:26 PM (iFTx/)

========

I guess there's more to it than I thought, but I read it as, "Complete relief is about the relief of those who sued, not the nation as a whole. Here's a history of how the nation dealt with this, even under laws SCOTUS later did deem to be unconstitutional where only those suing received relief."

And, since the judiciary regularly dismissing things because of lack of standing already...I think too much is being made of this and it's actually a fairly strong element to the decision.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:28 PM (GBKbO)
______

The "standing" point opens up the possibility that injunctions would reach anyone with standing to sue -- which could be litigants not party to the lawsuit. That's why Alito spends so much time talking about third-party standing. He sees what The Blade sees.

But don't get me wrong, this is a YUGE win for Trump.

Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:33 PM (iFTx/)

186 Justice Sotomayor dissenting on birthright citizenship case: "The gamesmanship in this request is apparent and the Government makes no attempt to hide it. Yet, shamefully, this Court plays along. Because I will not be complicit in so grave an attack on our system of law, I dissent...

With the stroke of a pen, the President has made a “solemn mockery” of our Constitution. Rather than stand firm, the Court gives way. Because such complicity should know no place in our system of law, I dissent."

So the constitution and its protection are valid in only some appellate jurisdiction. Birthright citizenship valid only where the appeals court says yep. Only a clown would say that citizenship by birth right is invalid.

Biden's SAVE student loan repayment plan was blocked for the entire nation due to an injunction from just the very rightwing Eighth Circuit. They picked the absolute worst case to grant trump these powers.

with the snails pace of the courts, people's birthright citizenship could be taken away and even deported until this supreme court decides to finally rule on it

Posted by: Intercepted DU Transmissions brought by the Intrepid AoS Liaison at June 27, 2025 12:33 PM (ycI94)

187
Trump (taking more questions beyond the scheduled time): "This is the opposite of Biden! You tell me when it gets boring."

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 27, 2025 12:33 PM (HuRzZ)

188 Another momentous outcome, like the last Presidential election: thank Heaven did not go the other way

We still have to get to the point that the Supreme Court also doesn't have any power over the Executive.

Posted by: t-bird at June 27, 2025 12:33 PM (pvvko)

189 She [Affirmative Action Jackson] doesn't like the dry, boring law getting in the way of her social justice activism. She wants to be free to just pop off like Whoopie Goldberg on The View, but with the force of law behind her ignorant mumblings.

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

Yeah, she's no Dog-Eating Community-Activist Constitutional Scholar.

Posted by: ShainS at June 27, 2025 12:33 PM (arzIt)

190 Justice Jackson is dumber than a bag of grass clippings.

Just imagine being that stupid or biased as to be called out for your ignorance by another Justice.

Posted by: Marcus T at June 27, 2025 12:33 PM (sdi9Z)

191 180 AAA is great.

Posted by: gp Steps On Cusp Barefooted at June 27, 2025 12:34 PM (IqBEX)

192 Note also ACB's line with Marbury:

The Court is scared shitless--because they know Trump is right--that Marbury is not Constitutional:
They do not have the unlimited right to decide the Constitutionality of laws.

The Retard Wing of the Court keeps forcing the issue though, and the other 6 are realizing that to their horror.

I think also that the Court is also seeing that these injunctions are actually illegal writs of mandamus.

Posted by: People's Hippo Voice at June 27, 2025 12:34 PM (GnVQ5)

193 LOL, fucking Trump:

"This is the opposite of Biden. He would take one question and half answer it."

(Referring to extending time to answer more questions.)

Posted by: Deplorable Ian Galt at June 27, 2025 12:34 PM (ufFY8)

194 So many goodies in this ruling, but it was closed out in a way a moron can truly relish, by specifically citing a Hawaiian judgement.

Well done ACB, very well done.

Posted by: Huck Follywood at June 27, 2025 12:34 PM (Z9R/r)

195 KBJ knows what she's doing and will continue to do it for the next lifetime.

Posted by: 13times at June 27, 2025 12:34 PM (OhltJ)

196 185 The "standing" point opens up the possibility that injunctions would reach anyone with standing to sue -- which could be litigants not party to the lawsuit. That's why Alito spends so much time talking about third-party standing. He sees what The Blade sees.

But don't get me wrong, this is a YUGE win for Trump.
Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:33 PM (iFTx/)

=======

Wouldn't that be the whole class action element?

Which becomes a real problem when members of the class (like, say, the people of IL when the state tries to sue) object to the lawsuit?

"This can't be a class. The people of IL are not in agreement with this decision."

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:34 PM (GBKbO)

197 The Legal Cult is such a perfect replication of the fake ideology of Marxist-Leninism that it's a shame few will enjoy the parallels.

Soviet ideological writings were of course crap, but the central feature was making sure to box-check all the made-up crap from Lenin, and then others, as one spun new levels of nonsense out of thin air. A self-sustaining self-referential fake universe.

Like much of "jurisprudence" and precedent here.

"Doctrines" (my favorite being the one where the courts can decide how much to vitiate clear constitutionally imposed limits on state power, but only by using their own confected little system - "rational scrutiny"). All a giant coral reef of court-made law and make-believe. But society lets the Legal Cult usurp like this, so there we are.

Posted by: rhomboid at June 27, 2025 12:34 PM (1m82a)

198 OK, that's nice. But I'd prefer if the Supreme Court ordered Boasberg to report to Conor McGregor to have his dimestore Christopher Lloyd face punched through the back side of his fuckin' head.
Posted by: Yudhishthira's Dice at June 27, 2025 12:26 PM (BI5O2)

Let's get Doc Brown to take Boasberg back about 3000 years, and drop him off in what will become DC. For anyone as active as he is, it shouldn't kill him outright.

Posted by: Hour of the Wolf at June 27, 2025 12:34 PM (S/Y4j)

199 what's that from?
Posted by: ace

Seinfeld?

George micturition in the gym showers - It's all pipes!

Posted by: bob (moron incognitus) at June 27, 2025 12:34 PM (m5cDg)

200 Trying to nail down the various Justices' judicial philosophy

Thomas- the law is the law as written
Alito- what Clarence said!
Roberts- leave me out of this
Katanga Jackson- on no you di' int!
Kagan- what are we doing for lunch?
Kavanaugh- whatever you guys think, I guess
Sotomayor- I'm with Katanga whatsername
Barrett - this is my Magic 8-Ball
Gorsuch- what

Posted by: Don Black at June 27, 2025 12:34 PM (AOsQT)

201 So Amy Baloney Claret got one right, or did she

Posted by: ... at June 27, 2025 12:34 PM (rCia8)

202 This busty, freckled brunette in her underwear is practicing her smile because she secretly fears that SCOTUS pettiness and cattyness will work against her when she goes to argue a case before them later this summer:
http://tiny.cc/le4o001

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:34 PM (6bTRc)

203 Judge Boasberg, sitting in a wing back leather chair and petting his cat, looks at the end table. A pistol, a glass, and a bottle of brandy tempt him to take the coward's way out. The phone rings, and it's the producers from MSNBC with an offer he can't refuse. He goes back to petting the cat, smiles, and says to himself "Life is good".

Posted by: bill in arkansas, not gonna comply with nuttin, waiting for the 0300 knock on the door at June 27, 2025 12:35 PM (gm9Sb)

204 The law subject to the whims of whoever is in charge is pretty much a sacrament to the left. They will not take this well.

Posted by: sniffybigtoe at June 27, 2025 12:35 PM (hfg0k)

205 The Flaming Skull

I don't think you know about your future yet
I don't think you're gonna like the one you're gonna get
Ghost rider in the sky
Burner

Posted by: Hatari somewhere on Ventura Highway at June 27, 2025 12:35 PM (NtVYv)

206 Higher IQ

[ ] KJB

[ ] Jasmine Crockett

I would go with KJB. At least she can wite a syntactically correct -- if semantically inane -- sentence. I don't think Rep. Eyelash can do that much.

Posted by: Oddbob at June 27, 2025 12:35 PM (/y8xj)

207 "Shipwreckedcrew" on X:

"The FACT that six Justices were OK with signing onto an opinion where Justice Barrett took a personal shot at Justice Jackson is a VERY STRONG indication that Jackson has alienated her colleagues and there is a growing lack of respect for her work."

https://tinyurl.com/2x6uc7f4

Posted by: Meade Lux Lewis, Domestic Terrorist at June 27, 2025 12:35 PM (paSBy)

208 Serious question.

How does this limit the class, to the district, state, or only to named parties?

Posted by: bob (moron incognitus) at June 27, 2025 12:36 PM (m5cDg)

209 Judge Brown's clerks must hate her to let her publish such a dissent. But they've let her do it before...so...

Posted by: actually inside the beltway at June 27, 2025 12:36 PM (naiw2)

210 Amy Coney Barret wrote the opinion declaring that lowly district court judges have never in all of American history had the power they routinely assert to essentially invent national policy as they see fit.
++++
Then why did SCOTUS permit it for so long? Why did they do nothing for decades?

And, importantly, why did they finally do something *now*? Nothing has really changed. The lower courts are still "working toward the Fuhrer" as they always have.

This isn't new. This particular case isn't even particularly egregious when one considers the long, unbroken line of this crap.

So why now?
Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (6bTRc)

Not a lawyer, but it's probably two things:

1) This is an SC, because of Roberts, more ruled by "public opinion" than the law. Public opinion is against the rogue district judges blocking Trump and the SC doing nothing.

2) Probably the "No Kings", Palestinian, illegal alien, anti-semetic riots, violence, nonsense, plus the blocking of deportation of murders, rapist, child molesters by district judges and the SC by their inaction is giving Trump a pretty good whip hand to ignore those little wormy judges.

Posted by: naturalfake at June 27, 2025 12:36 PM (iJfKG)

211
Mud pit fight between ACB and KJB! On PPV!

Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at June 27, 2025 12:36 PM (/HVsR)

212 http://tiny.cc/le4o001
Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:34 PM (6bTRc)

Good choice

Posted by: Hatari somewhere on Ventura Highway at June 27, 2025 12:36 PM (NtVYv)

213 Yes. ACB just gave KBJ cancer and diabetes.
Posted by: Jamaal Bowman at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (M0V4/)

If so, maybe Jackson will die of the sugarfoot, cancer, and heart disease combined due to racism before Sotamayor dies of the sugarfoot due to diet.

(Seriously though... that politician declaring blacks have higher cancer rates due to the use of hearing the N word daily, was the best most ridiculous thing I've heard lately. And with Jasmine Crockett around ("the math ain't mathin,"), there is stiff competition.

Posted by: LizLem at June 27, 2025 12:36 PM (gWBY1)

214 I can't recall an official SCOTUS statement that slammed one of its own the way ACB did to Jackson.

I'm here for it.

Posted by: Shenanigans at June 27, 2025 12:36 PM (qKI0i)

215 Higher IQ

[ ] KJB

[ ] Jasmine Crockett
Posted by: mr tmz at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (rJ48h)

[X] None of the above
Posted by: ... at June 27, 2025 12:33 PM (rCia

____

Jasmine Crockashit is not dumb. She's quite smart and articulate. Her dumb ghetto-rat ranting is an act. There are videos of her before she adopted this persona where she talks intelligently about issues.

Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:36 PM (iFTx/)

216 Boasberg looks like the tall Dutch actor who played Mr Hom L waxana's valet on ST:TNG.

Posted by: Smell the Glove at June 27, 2025 12:36 PM (pwtJC)

217 Ignoring the actual text -- and inventing new text -- is the entire basis of modern liberal judicial philosophy. Penumbras and emanations and all that. Hacktion Jackson is merely following standard leftwing jurisprudence.

Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade

It is actually worse than that. The result is the only thing that matters to the left, and the law is to be ignored.

Look at the Kenosha trial of Kyle Rittenhouse. They are perfectly willing to put mobs around the courthouse to scare a jury into giving them the 'justice' that they want.

Posted by: Thomas Paine at June 27, 2025 12:37 PM (Vfq+S)

218 The election is confirmed!

Posted by: Eromero at June 27, 2025 12:37 PM (jgmnb)

219 The Stock Market is loving all this. Quickest recovery in history. Those of us who trusted Trump and his tariff policies and hung in there when the going got tough are reaping the rewards.

Posted by: Sharon(willow's apprentice) at June 27, 2025 12:37 PM (t/2Uw)

220 The gamesmanship in this request is apparent and the Government makes no attempt to hide it. Yet, shamefully, this Court plays along. Because I will not be complicit in so grave an attack on our system of law, I dissent...

With the stroke of a pen, the President has made a “solemn mockery” of our Constitution. Rather than stand firm, the Court gives way. Because such complicity should know no place in our system of law, I dissent.
--------

It should be noted this is not a legal opinion. It cites no law, it's sort of just... if feelings were masquerading as a SC Justice.

Posted by: ... at June 27, 2025 12:37 PM (rCia8)

221
"This decision is not recognized." - Boasberg, J

Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at June 27, 2025 12:37 PM (/HVsR)

222 This busty, freckled brunette in her underwear is practicing her smile because she secretly fears that SCOTUS pettiness and cattyness will work against her when she goes to argue a case before them later this summer:
http://tiny.cc/le4o001
Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!)

I would say she's ginger-adjacent.

Posted by: Bulg at June 27, 2025 12:38 PM (77rzZ)

223 This busty, freckled brunette in her underwear...

Painting over a natural stone fireplace is an abomination. Wait, what were we talking about....?

Posted by: Oddbob at June 27, 2025 12:38 PM (/y8xj)

224 204 The law subject to the whims of whoever is in charge is pretty much a sacrament to the left. They will not take this well.
Posted by: sniffybigtoe at June 27, 2025 12:35 PM (hfg0k)

ALL of you are wrong! OUR word is The Law! And we CAN and WILL do as we will damn well please because WE ARE THE GOOD GUYS!!!

(And we are infinitely better than the disgusting assholes who pay our salaries and pensions. Fuck them in particular.)

Posted by: Cops at June 27, 2025 12:38 PM (vm8sq)

225 Higher IQ

[ ] KJB

[ ] Jasmine Crockett
Posted by: mr tmz at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (rJ48h)

[X] None of the above
Posted by: ... at June 27, 2025 12:33 PM (rCia

[X] Sloth

Posted by: ShainS at June 27, 2025 12:38 PM (arzIt)

226 The DUmmies never disappoint, they always miss the mark.

Posted by: Anna Puma at June 27, 2025 12:38 PM (c/KMW)

227 In other news:

Garcia's lawyers are asking the criminal court to keep Garcia in jail now.

Because ICE's gonna deport his ass to South Sudan the second the criminal court lets him out.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:38 PM (GBKbO)

228 The "standing" point opens up the possibility that injunctions would reach anyone with standing to sue -- which could be litigants not party to the lawsuit. That's why Alito spends so much time talking about third-party standing. He sees what The Blade sees.

But don't get me wrong, this is a YUGE win for Trump.
Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:33 PM (iFTx/)

=======

Wouldn't that be the whole class action element?

Which becomes a real problem when members of the class (like, say, the people of IL when the state tries to sue) object to the lawsuit?

"This can't be a class. The people of IL are not in agreement with this decision."
Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:34 PM (GBKbO)
______

Class action status is a separate but also worrying issue. Hack judges could just certify a national class of plaintiffs (which can be done) and issue an injunction in favor of the class. That's what I expect these hacktivist judges to do.

Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:39 PM (iFTx/)

229 >This busty, freckled brunette in her underwear is...
----

dude that's Nancy Mace (R- SC)

Posted by: Don Black at June 27, 2025 12:39 PM (AOsQT)

230 I'm shocked, and delighted.

Posted by: Ordinary Amerian at June 27, 2025 12:39 PM (w6syA)

231 Crockett is a crafty operator. She's playing a part, playing the game.

Jackson is an actual cretin who probably needed extensive training and continuing education just to put her robe on the right way around.

Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 27, 2025 12:39 PM (BjH5D)

232 So the Supreme Court is righteously pissing all over the congressional selection process that brought them this complete waste of space.

I could not believe people just folded on this and let it happen.

She is the best congress could do considering the circumstances. How more unserious can Congress get and we have a functioning government.

This is another reason to despise Biden and whoever was running him.

Posted by: pawn at June 27, 2025 12:39 PM (QB+5g)

233 "Such a big day, such a big day". Trump is really enjoying this decision and the press conference.

Posted by: Smell the Glove at June 27, 2025 12:39 PM (pwtJC)

234 Congress could have removed the judges that pull this shit, but no, there to busy getting handjobs from lobbyists to do their f’ing jobs.

Posted by: sniffybigtoe at June 27, 2025 12:40 PM (hfg0k)

235 228 Class action status is a separate but also worrying issue. Hack judges could just certify a national class of plaintiffs (which can be done) and issue an injunction in favor of the class. That's what I expect these hacktivist judges to do.
Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:39 PM (iFTx/)

======

As we saw from the habeus attempts at creating classes, it's...not easy and can fall apart pretty quickly.

There are definite loopholes, but most that get talked about seem like small beans to me.

It's the APA exception that raises the most questions for me.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:40 PM (GBKbO)

236 Leftist judges always have made their decisions before a case is argued before the court. They work backwards when writing their decision whether concurrence or dissent. They write most ridiculous and illogical things to try and make it fit their position.

Posted by: polynikes at June 27, 2025 12:40 PM (VofaG)

237 So why now?

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!)

Because Daddy's Home, he's had it up to here with their shit and they know it.

Posted by: Stu Podaso at June 27, 2025 12:40 PM (M0V4/)

238 Jasmine Crockashit is not dumb. She's quite smart and articulate. Her dumb ghetto-rat ranting is an act. There are videos of her before she adopted this persona where she talks intelligently about issues.
Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:36 PM (iFTx/)

As I have pointed out over the years to certain trolls, at some point being dumb is no longer an act.

It's like my buddy who started using the word "like" as an ironic joke, and then a few weeks later realized he was using it for real.

More succinctly - as Malone queried in The Untouchables, "Who would claim to be that, who was not?"

Posted by: ... at June 27, 2025 12:40 PM (rCia8)

239 "Such a big day, such a big day". Trump is really enjoying this decision and the press conference.
Posted by: Smell the Glove at June 27, 2025 12:39 PM (pwtJC)
++++
He's a decent week or so.

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:40 PM (6bTRc)

240 Black-robed catfight!

Posted by: Gref at June 27, 2025 12:40 PM (aBgBM)

241 Is this a turning point?

ThePersistence
@ScottPresler
·
2m
Imagine What It Must Feel Like to Be a Democrat

▪️USAID is defunded
▪️DOW is skyrocketing
▪️Rogue judges’ power limited
▪️Iran nuclear capability stifled
▪️Zohran is the leader of their party
▪️RNC has 5 times more cash on hand than DNC
▪️Criminal illegal aliens are being deported
▪️President Trump is brokering peace deals
▪️States will begin defunding Planned Parenthood
▪️128 democrats voted AGAINST impeaching President Trump
▪️White males, like David Hogg, are being kicked out of leadership positions

Posted by: Sharon(willow's apprentice) at June 27, 2025 12:40 PM (t/2Uw)

242
Jasmine Crockashit is not dumb. She's quite smart and articulate. Her dumb ghetto-rat ranting is an act. There are videos of her before she adopted this persona where she talks intelligently about issues.
Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:36 PM (iFTx/)
----
Exactly right lol. She was born into an upper-middle to upper-class family of professionals and spent her childhood attending prestigious private schools.

Someone convinced her that putting on the Hoodrat Barbie act is the best path for her to get more attention, more press, and therefore advance her political career. She's basically a black woman doing blackface, somehow.

Posted by: ballistic at June 27, 2025 12:40 PM (3BwY8)

243 Funny how nobody in the country had standing to sue over election fraud in 2020, but rulings in a single district apply to everybody in the frickin' world.

Posted by: Tinfoil Dispenser at June 27, 2025 12:40 PM (ERYKL)

244 232 So the Supreme Court is righteously pissing all over the congressional selection process that brought them this complete waste of space.

I could not believe people just folded on this and let it happen.

She is the best congress could do considering the circumstances. How more unserious can Congress get and we have a functioning government.

This is another reason to despise Biden and whoever was running him.
Posted by: pawn at June 27, 2025 12:39 PM (QB+5g)

========

Not even Graham voted for Jackson.

Murkowski and Collins did, though. (So did Mitt.)

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:40 PM (GBKbO)

245 I'm of the opinion that Trump was right to wait for the Supes to decide. Eventually he could have started ignoring the lower courts but we hadn't reached that point yet IMHO.

Posted by: Max Power at June 27, 2025 12:40 PM (q177U)

246
Katanji Brown-Jackson wrote an illiterate dissent in which she railed against "legalese"
--------------

Doctor rails against complicated, difficult-to-predict human body.

Aerospace engineer rails against atmosphere and gravity.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 27, 2025 12:41 PM (HuRzZ)

247 Then why did SCOTUS permit it for so long? Why did they do nothing for decades?
---
Consider the gay marriage decision started as a district court ruling in CA that only applied to the CA law.
It had to work it's way up to SCOTUS.

Now? That judge would have also issued a nationwide injunction against denying gays marriage licenses, not just in CA.
That's how much things have changed.

Posted by: People's Hippo Voice at June 27, 2025 12:41 PM (GnVQ5)

248 Black dress cat fight?

PPV or OnlyFans?

Posted by: Anna Puma at June 27, 2025 12:41 PM (c/KMW)

249 I can't recall an official SCOTUS statement that slammed one of its own the way ACB did to Jackson.

I'm here for it.
Posted by: Shenanigans at June 27, 2025 12:36 PM (qKI0i)

Yeah, that was pretty harsh, rightfully so. They are probably all tired of her ignorance

Posted by: Hatari somewhere on Ventura Highway at June 27, 2025 12:41 PM (NtVYv)

250 Class action status is a separate but also worrying issue. Hack judges could just certify a national class of plaintiffs (which can be done) and issue an injunction in favor of the class. That's what I expect these hacktivist judges to do.
Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade

And then back to the Supremes we go!

Posted by: rickb223 at June 27, 2025 12:42 PM (flKEw)

251 Galen was the leading voice in medicine and anatomy during classical Rome and was the authority though the middle ages.

Posted by: Kindltot at June 27, 2025 12:42 PM (D7oie)

252 So does this ruling help or hurt us when a commie scumbag assumes the Executive once more...?

I guess on balance it helps since the commies were ignoring the injunctions anyway?

Posted by: ... at June 27, 2025 12:42 PM (rCia8)

253 Because Daddy's Home, he's had it up to here with their shit and they know it.
Posted by: Stu Podaso at June 27, 2025 12:40 PM (M0V4/)
++++
Possible, but what of it? The only risk associated with that is for Trump to ignore them and *both* the federal agencies and cops to go along with it, and for the people to back it to the point of intervention. I don't think we're all that close to those thresholds.

But the Court may be trying to front-run a legitimacy crisis. It won't work for me because they've been in the thick of one for as long as I've been paying attention, but it might work on a larger scale.

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:42 PM (6bTRc)

254 But strict construction is what I want. Very, very strict. 90% of the FedGov is probably unconstitutional, strictly interpreted.
Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:24 PM (6bTRc)

I want construction so strict it rules making Christmas a federal holiday was in violation of the first amendment.

Posted by: Madamemayhem (uppity wench) at June 27, 2025 12:42 PM (2J/Lj)

255 Posted by: Sharon(willow's apprentice) at June 27, 2025 12:40 PM (t/2Uw)

Scott forgot to mention the kick to the nuts of the Old School NYC demorats when their idol Mario's son went down to ignominious defeat

Posted by: kallisto at June 27, 2025 12:42 PM (dCxaZ)

256
This is another reason to despise Biden and whoever was running him.
Posted by: pawn at June 27, 2025 12:39 PM (QB+5g)

Did Joe know he nominated her ?... Maybe the Auto-pen thing will stick and we can call her null and void..

Posted by: It's me donna at June 27, 2025 12:42 PM (VE6XX)

257 asmine Crockashit is not dumb. She's quite smart and articulate. Her dumb ghetto-rat ranting is an act. There are videos of her before she adopted this persona where she talks intelligently about issues.

==

is she as smart and articulate as obama...?? because, we've been there before

Posted by: runner at June 27, 2025 12:42 PM (g47mK)

258 The Supreme Court can't just make decrees, they can only rule on cases brought before them. And then add the fact that they routinely refuse to see certain types of cases and it gets annoying.
Posted by: Farquad at June 27, 2025 12:30 PM (YkGND)

=======

Which is true.

The judiciary is reactive. It cannot be proactive.

The idea that it should have great power over the branches that are active, that do report directly to the people, is so ludicrous based on this simple fact.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:31 PM (GBKbO)

-----------

This is a brilliant point.

Posted by: ShainS at June 27, 2025 12:42 PM (arzIt)

259
"Habeas corpus mandamus pro hac vice!" - Ketanji Brown Jackson

Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at June 27, 2025 12:42 PM (/HVsR)

260 Where's Melania? This thing could but glass!

Posted by: The Donald at June 27, 2025 12:43 PM (m5cDg)

261 So if you caught Crockett off guard would she sound educated and intelligent? And how is she not offensive to black people?

Posted by: Northernlurker , Maple Syrup MAGA at June 27, 2025 12:43 PM (SXxzC)

262 > Crockett is a crafty operator. She's playing a part, playing the game.
----------
Stage managed. Despite her purported pedigree I think she's a mouthy guttersnipe following a script provided to her daily.

Same with AOC and most every other politician.

It's all scripted. By people we don't vote for. Imagine their anger and frustration with the likes of Trump who has no script.

Posted by: Martini Farmer at June 27, 2025 12:43 PM (Q4IgG)

263 I guess on balance it helps since the commies were ignoring the injunctions anyway?
Posted by: ... at June 27, 2025 12:42 PM (rCia

++++
Almost all nationwide injunctions were pro-commie, and non-pro-commie ones were extremely rare.

They all know their jobs.

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 12:43 PM (6bTRc)

264 228 Class action status is a separate but also worrying issue. Hack judges could just certify a national class of plaintiffs (which can be done) and issue an injunction in favor of the class. That's what I expect these hacktivist judges to do.
---
Thomas and Alito recognized this and basically said, "Don't you try it."

Posted by: Meade Lux Lewis, Domestic Terrorist at June 27, 2025 12:43 PM (paSBy)

265 Been saying all along, those damned judges needed to stay in their lane. Forcing judicial fiats on the Administration and by extension, the American public would not end well.
It didn't.

Posted by: Diogenes at June 27, 2025 12:43 PM (W/lyH)

266 Yay!

Happy Flaming Skull Friday Everyone!

Posted by: Anonymous Rogue in Kalifornistan (ARiK) at June 27, 2025 12:43 PM (QGaXH)

267 Mud pit fight between ACB and KJB! On PPV!

I rarely read SCOTUS rulings, but this one made my to-do list due to the Blackrobe-Catfight spiciness

Posted by: kallisto at June 27, 2025 12:44 PM (dCxaZ)

268 Habeas corpus mandamus pro hac vice!" - Ketanji Brown Jackson
Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at June 27, 2025 12:42 PM (/HVsR)

Lay 'em down and hac-em yac-em.

Posted by: Warai-otoko speaks jive at June 27, 2025 12:44 PM (BjH5D)

269 I want construction so strict it rules making Christmas a federal holiday was in violation of the first amendment.
Posted by: Madamemayhem (uppity wench) at June 27, 2025 12:42 PM (2J/Lj)

It definitely could be a State holiday under a constructionist view.

Posted by: polynikes at June 27, 2025 12:44 PM (VofaG)

270 Yay!

Happy Flaming Skull Friday Everyone!
Posted by: Anonymous Rogue in Kalifornistan (ARiK) at June 27, 2025 12:43 PM (QGaXH)

We're expecting more to come? Wunderbar!

Posted by: Hour of the Wolf at June 27, 2025 12:44 PM (S/Y4j)

271 Suspend Habeas penumbras!

Posted by: runner at June 27, 2025 12:44 PM (g47mK)

272
"I have a pen and a phone" - Bronco Bama

Thanks for the tip - Donald J Trump

Posted by: Hatari somewhere on Ventura Highway at June 27, 2025 12:45 PM (NtVYv)

273 Jasmine Crockashit is not dumb. She's quite smart and articulate. Her dumb ghetto-rat ranting is an act. There are videos of her before she adopted this persona where she talks intelligently about issues.
Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:36 PM (iFTx/)
----
Exactly right lol. She was born into an upper-middle to upper-class family of professionals and spent her childhood attending prestigious private schools.

Someone convinced her that putting on the Hoodrat Barbie act is the best path for her to get more attention, more press, and therefore advance her political career. She's basically a black woman doing blackface, somehow.
Posted by: ballistic

I tried to tell everyone that the last time we were talking about her and everyone said I didn't know what I was talking about. That she only went to private schools as a DEI student.

Posted by: rickb223 at June 27, 2025 12:45 PM (flKEw)

274 I thought a few of the idiotic Fuhrerbefehlen from the district courts already *did* simply create ("certify") classes ex nihilo to enable their decrees?

Posted by: rhomboid at June 27, 2025 12:45 PM (1m82a)

275 Katanji Brown-Jackson wrote an illiterate dissent in which she railed against "legalese"

Um, what? "Legalese" is a word used by non-lawyers to bitch about and to minimize the importance of contract terms or legal opinions. Her very use of the this term shows how shockingly unserious and unsuited she is for the role.

Posted by: Plus she's an imbecile at June 27, 2025 12:45 PM (TbWk/)

276 WE WUZ KANGZ!!!!

Posted by: Justice Brown-Jackson at June 27, 2025 12:45 PM (fXFFd)

277 I remember as a young kid not understanding what "Saturate before using" meant. I knew it meant something....

Posted by: bob (moron incognitus) at June 27, 2025 12:45 PM (m5cDg)

278 What stupid fuckin name.. kantanji blap dap a dap..
Sick of these woke Twitter personalities making it to meaningful and powerful positions. Go to hell

Posted by: melodicmetal1 at June 27, 2025 12:45 PM (pWcbU)

279 A very perceptive man told me long ago that eventually, a pimp will be on the Supreme court. Now I can see why he said it

Posted by: JM in Illinois at June 27, 2025 12:45 PM (MyqLb)

280 Too much legalese, cries judge, whose job it is to speak legalese.

What a maroon.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at June 27, 2025 12:46 PM (RUMEY)

281 I want construction so strict it rules making Christmas a federal holiday was in violation of the first amendment.
Posted by: Madamemayhem (uppity wench) at June 27, 2025 12:42 PM (2J/Lj)

It definitely could be a State holiday under a constructionist view.
Posted by: polynikes

*Juneteenth has entered the chat

Posted by: rickb223 at June 27, 2025 12:46 PM (flKEw)

282 I was told there would be no law on this blog.

Posted by: eleven at June 27, 2025 12:46 PM (fV+MH)

283 Jumanji Action Jackson Brown is dumber than Sotomayor. I didn't think that was possible.

Posted by: Frank Barone at June 27, 2025 12:47 PM (IifOV)

284 I loved the line:

"We will not dwell on Justice Jackson's argument"

In non-legalese Amy basically said, we won't even try to read this as it is so stupid and wastes our time. Brown simply comes to court to hang out, playing solitare on her phone, texting to The View, while we argue legal facts. So disregard this retard.

Ketanji, who half the time can't spell her name, either, is outraged that anyone, much less a lone white woman, would diss her! She runs, weeping, into the Wise Latina's office (is she the one with the diabeetus?). There is a conclave of the wimmen in robes, missing the wisdom, lace collars, and halitosis of RBG. All decide to not allow Amy to sit at their table at lunch anymore.

Amy is now left hanging out with the white dudes and Thomas. There is a lot of tension in the court.

Nelly Bly, SCOTUS reporter, filed this day 6/27/2025

Posted by: ChristyBlinkyTheGreat at June 27, 2025 12:47 PM (6PCLE)

285 Jasmine Crockashit is not dumb. She's quite smart and articulate. Her dumb ghetto-rat ranting is an act. There are videos of her before she adopted this persona where she talks intelligently about issues.
Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:36 PM (iFTx/)
----
Exactly right lol. She was born into an upper-middle to upper-class family of professionals and spent her childhood attending prestigious private schools.

Someone convinced her that putting on the Hoodrat Barbie act is the best path for her to get more attention, more press, and therefore advance her political career. She's basically a black woman doing blackface, somehow.
Posted by: ballistic at June 27, 2025 12:40 PM (3BwY

___

And her plan is working! She gets much more press and attention as an angry ghetto rat screeching at Bad Whitey than she would as an articulate black woman thoughtfully critiquing the political opposition.

This is not uncommon in the black community, where a dual personality is used to further social or political goals. I know a number of smart, articulate black girls. They can go in and out of ghetto persona on cue, depending on their audience.

Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:47 PM (iFTx/)

286 283 Jumanji Action Jackson Brown is dumber than Sotomayor. I didn't think that was possible.
Posted by: Frank Barone at June 27, 2025 12:47 PM (IifOV)

=====

I think Jackson is just louder.

They're equally stupid.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:47 PM (GBKbO)

287 282 I was told there would be no law on this blog.
Posted by: eleven at June 27, 2025 12:46 PM (fV+MH)

Math.

Posted by: and we still get math so...meh at June 27, 2025 12:47 PM (TbWk/)

288 I don't consider people smart who can't determine cause and effect or make logical comparisons or hold cognitive dissonant viewpoints.

Posted by: polynikes at June 27, 2025 12:47 PM (VofaG)

289 The woman wouldn't recognize the Constitution if it bit her on the ass.

Well, she uses it as toilet paper, so it's always possible it could bite her in the ass.

Posted by: jim (in Kalifornia) at June 27, 2025 12:47 PM (ynpvh)

290 The way ACB left only the states injunction possibility, I think the class action isn't viable. Some idiot leftist judge might try it but the SC would block it

Posted by: Smell the Glove at June 27, 2025 12:48 PM (pwtJC)

291 In other news:

Garcia's lawyers are asking the criminal court to keep Garcia in jail now.

Because ICE's gonna deport his ass to South Sudan the second the criminal court lets him out.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:38 PM (GBKbO)

We should offer him an opportunity to earn citizenship. We'll fly him to Iran, drop him into one of the holes at Fordow, and - if he survives - he can tell us how much damage there is. Then, if he makes it back to the US, he can be a citizen... but sentenced to life in prison.

Posted by: I used to have a different nic at June 27, 2025 12:48 PM (ExV1e)

292 Sure wouldn't want clerkship for Jackson on a resume.

Posted by: Ben Had at June 27, 2025 12:48 PM (sJ4fj)

293 269 I want construction so strict it rules making Christmas a federal holiday was in violation of the first amendment.
Posted by: Madamemayhem (uppity wench) at June 27, 2025 12:42 PM (2J/Lj)

It definitely could be a State holiday under a constructionist view.
Posted by: polynikes at June 27, 2025 12:44 PM (VofaG)

Or...argue from practical purposes.

Yeah, if you make December 25 a day like any other...who will show up to work, except for the most critical of roles?

Posted by: Cow Demon at June 27, 2025 12:48 PM (vm8sq)

294 So if you caught Crockett off guard would she sound educated and intelligent? And how is she not offensive to black people?

--------_ -----------_ ----------_

For that matter, how is it not incredibly racist for the Democrats to insist she play the part of "sassy black woman from the ghetto" for their amusement. How is she not a 21st Century Step 'n' Fetchit?

Posted by: Victor Tango Kilo at June 27, 2025 12:48 PM (sJLOw)

295 I think the problem had to do with the fact that these district Ct judges were putting emergency injunctions basically before the plaintiffs even had a chance to file a response. It can't be immediately appealed like a normal injunction. These emergency injunctions were only supposed to be used if someone was in danger or the results would be immediately harmful.
These emergency injunctions served no purpose except to delay I p,emendation of the EOs with no recourse for the administration til the case could be heard often weeks away.

Posted by: Sharon(willow's apprentice) at June 27, 2025 12:48 PM (t/2Uw)

296 Great week for Trump. If only he could bang a supermodel. Oh wait ....

Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:48 PM (iFTx/)

297 Jasmine Crockett, showing off the new work from the nail salon. "Baby girl, get yourself one of these prime nosepickers".

Posted by: bill in arkansas, not gonna comply with nuttin, waiting for the 0300 knock on the door at June 27, 2025 12:48 PM (gm9Sb)

298 Someone convinced her that putting on the Hoodrat Barbie act is the best path for her to get more attention, more press, and therefore advance her political career. She's basically a black woman doing blackface, somehow.
Posted by: ballistic

Black fatigue.

Posted by: rickb223 at June 27, 2025 12:48 PM (flKEw)

299
Scott forgot to mention the kick to the nuts of the Old School NYC demorats when their idol Mario's son went down to ignominious defeat
Posted by: kallisto

===============

No Kings, baby. That means no princes either.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 27, 2025 12:48 PM (HuRzZ)

300 It's just high school with paychecks.

Posted by: Change my mind at June 27, 2025 12:48 PM (4qN3i)

301 is she as smart and articulate as obama...?? because, we've been there before
-----------------
Mmm, it only took a couple of screwups as Prez before his handlers put him on a steady diet of Teleprompters. Even this had consequences due to his HS reading level.

Posted by: pudinhead at June 27, 2025 12:49 PM (FmapG)

302 She would still dissent if she knew the law or not.

It's just bizarre that she's too stupid to dissent in a way that sounds legal.

Hey thanks Joe.

Posted by: eleven at June 27, 2025 12:49 PM (fV+MH)

303 292 Sure wouldn't want clerkship for Jackson on a resume.
Posted by: Ben Had at June 27, 2025 12:48 PM (sJ4fj)

-------

Holy shit, how embarrassing.

Posted by: Seems Legit at June 27, 2025 12:49 PM (PMtkd)

304 278 What stupid fuckin name.. kantanji blap dap a dap..
Sick of these woke Twitter personalities making it to meaningful and powerful positions. Go to hell
Posted by: melodicmetal1

I don’t really understand what you mean by Twitter personalities in this context, but thought you might find it interesting that Katanji is a unisex Hindu name.

Posted by: Piper at June 27, 2025 12:50 PM (p4NUW)

305 As I will maintain to my grave, 115-ish is by far and away the most dangerous class of IQ. They have a strong desire to prove they are a 140 and are easily turned into parrots to do it. See: Obama, Barack

This is not to say actual high IQ people cannot be manipulated or even become parrots. What they absolutely cannot be is weaponized in this particular way, which our leftard system, university and otherwise, is expressly designed to do.

Posted by: ... at June 27, 2025 12:50 PM (rCia8)

306 SCOTUS is an appellate court

and a pimp's love is different from that of a square

Posted by: Don Black at June 27, 2025 12:50 PM (AOsQT)

307 Conjecture:

That line is specifically why Barrett was made to write the majority opinion.

Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 27, 2025 12:50 PM (BjH5D)

308 I recently learned of a SCOTUS decision that cracked me up: Haynes v. United States.

They basically ruled that criminals didn’t have to register NFA firearms because that would be self incriminating. Only people that were legally allowed to own NFA firearms had to do it.

They broke gun control with that pretzel logic.

Posted by: sniffybigtoe at June 27, 2025 12:51 PM (hfg0k)

309 She's basically a black woman doing blackface, somehow.
Posted by: ballistic at June 27, 2025 12:40 PM (3BwY

She's just shuckin' and jivin', boss. She'd prolly make Speaker if she could tap dance.

Posted by: I used to have a different nic at June 27, 2025 12:51 PM (ExV1e)

310 "Katanji Brown-Jackson wrote an illiterate dissent in which she railed against "legalese" and "dry technical arguments"...

It's all about their feelings. And of course their ability to stop Trump.

Posted by: Ordinary Amerian at June 27, 2025 12:51 PM (w6syA)

311 Who names their kid Katanji?

Posted by: Ok, I'll ask at June 27, 2025 12:51 PM (4qN3i)

312 Jasmine Crockashit is not dumb. She's quite smart and articulate. Her dumb ghetto-rat ranting is an act. There are videos of her before she adopted this persona where she talks intelligently about issues.
Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:36 PM (iFTx/)
----
Exactly right lol. She was born into an upper-middle to upper-class family of professionals and spent her childhood attending prestigious private schools.

Someone convinced her that putting on the Hoodrat Barbie act is the best path for her to get more attention, more press, and therefore advance her political career. She's basically a black woman doing blackface, somehow.
Posted by: ballistic

I tried to tell everyone that the last time we were talking about her and everyone said I didn't know what I was talking about. That she only went to private schools as a DEI student.
Posted by: rickb223 at June 27, 2025 12:45 PM (flKEw)
____

You were not wrong. I too have been called wrong for thinking this. Whatevs. There are videos of her out there where they can judge for themselves whether the ghetto-rat persona is an act or not.

Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 12:51 PM (iFTx/)

313 There will be some awkward moments between AOC and KBJ at the Supreme Court water cooler from now on.
Posted by: Frasier Crane at June 27, 2025 12:18 PM (bNf8H)

Do we need a discussion about the "masculine gaze" vs. the "feminine glare"?

Posted by: mrp at June 27, 2025 12:51 PM (rj6Yv)

314 Sharon I think it's actually even a bit worse than that.

Friday night orders on holiday weekends with deadline to respond almost immediately. Either completely waiving or setting ridiculous tiny bond levels for injunction plaintiffs (I thought there was something in the BBB that actually addresses this novel form of lawless judicial abuse, could be wrong).

Every aspect of some district court's actions in some of these cases has been ridiculously lawless and abusive.

Posted by: rhomboid at June 27, 2025 12:51 PM (1m82a)

315 There is some question about whether Jumanji was legally appointed. She was chosen by autopen.

Posted by: Notsothoreau at June 27, 2025 12:51 PM (AcTAo)

316 The supreme court has ruled wrongly. I am taking all powers of the government of the United States unto myself, as it should be. Police, arrest and execute Donald Trump immediately.
-Judge Boasberg, probably

Posted by: Aetius451AD work phone at June 27, 2025 12:51 PM (YUL+W)

317
Katanji Brown-Jackson wrote an illiterate dissent in which she railed against "legalese"
--------------

Doctor rails against complicated, difficult-to-predict human body.

Aerospace engineer rails against atmosphere and gravity.
Posted by: Blonde Morticia

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

Translator rails against target language.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 27, 2025 12:51 PM (HuRzZ)

318 Holy shit, how embarrassing.

Posted by: Seems Legit at June 27, 2025 12:49 PM (PMtkd)

Maybe not....

"Wow. If you can survive dealing with that dizzy bitch, you can survive anything!"

Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 27, 2025 12:52 PM (BjH5D)

319 Jasmine Crockett, showing off the new work from the nail salon. "Baby girl, get yourself one of these prime nosepickers".

.....

Why are black women so tacky?

Crockett with her fake nails.

Cori Bush with her bald dome.

Michelle Obama with her penis.

It's ridiculous.

Posted by: Problem Solved at June 27, 2025 12:52 PM (WFNbD)

320 Garcia's lawyers are asking the criminal court to keep Garcia in jail now.

==

why ? Sudan is beautiful this time of year !

Posted by: runner at June 27, 2025 12:52 PM (g47mK)

321 Juneteenth has entered the chat
Posted by: rickb223 at

Juneteenth is stupid and should not ever have Bern a fed holiday because it is stupid. But it isn't a religious holiday like Christmas.

Posted by: Madamemayhem (uppity wench) at June 27, 2025 12:52 PM (2J/Lj)

322 Murkowski and Collins did, though. (So did Mitt.)
---------
That Mitt was once the "best" the Republicans WOULD (not could) offer up for a Presidential candidate tells you a lot about the core of the party. We are so blessed that Trump, Vance, DeSantis, and Rubio are made of sterner stuff.

I'd like to throw Cruz in there for his willingness to fight, but he still buys into that "J6 was a nightmare" bullshit.

Posted by: Crusader at June 27, 2025 12:53 PM (TN0g+)

323 They always leave things in a "maybe this, maybe that" muddle.

==
The whole: it's a woman's prerogative to change her mind...is based on the reality that they really just want to be able to do what they want to do when they want to do it and bright line rules get in the way of that desired flexibility. So I'll tell you no this time but keep my options open if something more attractive ambles by and gives me a wink and a grin.

Posted by: Girls you know it's true.... at June 27, 2025 12:53 PM (fXFFd)

324 I loved the line:

"We will not dwell on Justice Jackson's argument"
-------

So much so it does not even sound like The Carrot.

Loosely translated it essentially means "She can go eat a big bowl of the shut the fuck up."

Posted by: ... at June 27, 2025 12:53 PM (rCia8)

325 Oh wait you eat a bowl of dicks, and drink a glass of shut the fuck up. Man do I feel stupid.

Posted by: ... at June 27, 2025 12:54 PM (rCia8)

326 It's all scripted. By people we don't vote for. Imagine their anger and frustration with the likes of Trump who has no script.
Posted by: Martini Farmer at June 27, 2025 12:43 PM (Q4IgG)

Joos? -- about 2/3 of our trolls

Posted by: I used to have a different nic at June 27, 2025 12:54 PM (ExV1e)

327 Did ACB call KBJ an indirect n word?
-----------
I think she referred to her in the ruling as a "fundamentally non-serious" choice.

Posted by: Crusader at June 27, 2025 12:54 PM (TN0g+)

328 China will have to find another way

Posted by: Otto Pen at June 27, 2025 12:54 PM (sJHOI)

329 A friend who was at Princeton at the time sez a special program was created specifically for Sotomayor (affirmative action coddling), as she was clearly too dumb to be a normal student.

But not clear that the dumb ones like her and Jackson are any more damaging to the country than the not obviously stupid ones like Roberts or Kennedy, with their absurd usurpations and lawlessness.

Posted by: rhomboid at June 27, 2025 12:54 PM (1m82a)

330 287 282 I was told there would be no law on this blog.
Posted by: eleven at June 27, 2025 12:46 PM (fV+MH)

Math.
Posted by: and we still get math

We have many laws, BTW.

Posted by: Math at June 27, 2025 12:55 PM (Fob1X)

331
Why are black women so tacky?

________

Sad to say, black women think that if X looks attractive, 10X must be 10 times more attractive. See, for example: eyelashes, nails, asses.

Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at June 27, 2025 12:55 PM (/HVsR)

332 Jackson wants what leftist judges always want, to dictate the law to the unwashed.

Also, so many are saying “SCOTUS has been politicized.” It always has been. It just is centrist now rather than overtly leftist.

Posted by: Nick in Tallahassee at June 27, 2025 12:55 PM (Z3f34)

333 "Shouldn't the "legalese" and "dry technical arguments" (as she dismisses all legal reasoning) be of some concern to her?"

Well, "No, because Katanji Brown-Jackson is a Leftist political hack and never should have been put forth as a Supreme Court Justice let alone approved by the Senate."

Posted by: Kurtz at June 27, 2025 12:55 PM (GGsXJ)

334 SCOTUS slaps them down, "Know your place, bitches."
Posted by: davidt

That bitch enforcement might be a pickle, Justice Butt Pirate.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 27, 2025 12:55 PM (mlg/3)

335 mathin is hard

Posted by: butkus51 at June 27, 2025 12:55 PM (+yda9)

336 200 Trying to nail down the various Justices' judicial philosophy

Thomas- the law is the law as written
Alito- what Clarence said!
Roberts- leave me out of this
Katanga Jackson- on no you di' int!
Kagan- what are we doing for lunch?
Kavanaugh- whatever you guys think, I guess
Sotomayor- I'm with Katanga whatsername
Barrett - this is my Magic 8-Ball
Gorsuch- what
Posted by: Don Black at June 27, 2025 12:34 PM (AOsQT)

Love this! I do wonder wth goes on most of the time, and this seems true!

Posted by: ChristyBlinkyTheGreat at June 27, 2025 12:55 PM (6PCLE)

337 Juneteenth is stupid and should not ever have Bern a fed holiday because it is stupid. But it isn't a religious holiday like Christmas.
Posted by: Madamemayhem (uppity wench) at June 27, 2025 12:52 PM (2J/Lj)

It was also just a local holiday for a part of one state. It’s like making the Maine Lobster Festival a national holiday.

Posted by: sniffybigtoe at June 27, 2025 12:55 PM (hfg0k)

338 The "legalese" whine is as stupid as the "got off on a technicality" of years ago.

You mean the "technicality" of their Constitutional rights?

The arresting officer failing to state a probable cause for the arrest is a "technicality."

There's a long list of "technicalities" and "legalese" they violated to ramrod through the convictions against Trump.
And the J6ers.

Posted by: People's Hippo Voice at June 27, 2025 12:55 PM (GnVQ5)

339 I believe the usage is "bag of dicks'.

Posted by: Aetius451AD work phone at June 27, 2025 12:56 PM (YUL+W)

340 "She doesn't like the dry, boring law getting in the way of her social justice activism. She wants to be free to just pop off like Whoopie Goldberg on The View, but with the force of law behind her ignorant mumblings."

TBH, That's what CLS is, and Ketanji is positively marinated in it.

Posted by: Jeff Weimer at June 27, 2025 12:56 PM (0Jl9j)

341 Very glad for the ruling but can't help but wonder, what if, God forbid, they had a simple majority of Ketanjis?

That's where the Democrats want to take us.

I know everyone here knows that, but it is sobering to know how close we could be to total lunacy.

Posted by: RM at June 27, 2025 12:56 PM (n/1Oj)

342 I assume because Amy Hyphenation couldn't bring herself to say this in an unequivocal way, we'll now spend the next year or more litigating the exceptions. Class action nonsense here we come.

Posted by: bear with asymmetrical balls at June 27, 2025 12:56 PM (4/BuS)

343 It was also just a local holiday for a part of one state. It’s like making the Maine Lobster Festival a national holiday.
Posted by: sniffybigtoe at June 27, 2025 12:55 PM (hfg0k)

Balderdash!

Posted by: Red Lobster at June 27, 2025 12:56 PM (BjH5D)

344 Sad to say, black women think that if X looks attractive, 10X must be 10 times more attractive. See, for example: eyelashes, nails, asses.
Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh

Eyelashes should never look like a tarantula crawling out of your eye sockets.

Posted by: rickb223 at June 27, 2025 12:56 PM (flKEw)

345 Maple usurpations? Good on hotcakes.

Posted by: Commissar of plenty and festive little hats at June 27, 2025 12:57 PM (bk5Wq)

346 I'm sure the cries of racism will be loud and whiney.

Poor ACB. Hope she likes the hot seat.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at June 27, 2025 12:57 PM (RUMEY)

347 'd like to throw Cruz in there for his willingness to fight, but he still buys into that "J6 was a nightmare" bullshit.
Posted by: Crusader at June 27, 2025 12:53 PM (TN0g+)

He has come around a bit after looking at it from the outside instead of being in the middle of it. And what I think made him the most angry and probably still is is that he was scheduled to speak and lay out why he voted no to certify the electoral vote. I am disappointed no one will ever get to hear it.

Posted by: polynikes at June 27, 2025 12:57 PM (VofaG)

348 ACB dunking KBJ into the center of the Earth really humanizes her in my view, lol.

Imagine being Coney Barrett who is actually an intelligent woman, spending your adult life studying the law and working your ass off and ending up on the Supreme Court.

Then the walking, talking embodiment of DEI comes be-bopping into the courtroom, knowing absolutely jack shit and contributing nothing to the furtherance of settled law, but her voice counts just as much as yours. We've all had that co-worker who lucked themselves into their role but it's clear they're case studies in the Peter Principle. Eventually it wears on you and you have to tell them, professionally, that they're fucking retarded.

Posted by: ballistic at June 27, 2025 12:57 PM (3BwY8)

349 No Kings, baby. That means no princes either.
Posted by: Blonde Morticia

But Queens are still cool, right?
-- Lindsey Graham

Posted by: Bulg at June 27, 2025 12:57 PM (77rzZ)

350 311 Who names their kid Katanji?
--------------
A samurai, or a some guy that really likes samurai movies (like TJM). Samurai movies seem to attract Gladiator movie aficionados.

Posted by: pudinhead at June 27, 2025 12:58 PM (FmapG)

351 I know everyone here knows that, but it is sobering to know how close we could be to total lunacy.

Posted by: RM at June 27, 2025 12:56 PM (n/1Oj)

We were exactly one Trump away from just that. I shudder to think where we would be right now had he decided to bask in the adulation he got from 80% of people and all the Talk Shows as a game show host.

Posted by: ... at June 27, 2025 12:58 PM (rCia8)

352 "The math ain't mathin'" sounds like something that Kennedy guy from Louisiana would say....

Posted by: Red Lobster at June 27, 2025 12:58 PM (BjH5D)

353 Help me out here, but was Justice Jackson-Brown the gal, who, as a nominee for the seat on the US Supreme Court of the United States that she now holds, could not deliver a clear definition on what a woman is?

Posted by: mrp at June 27, 2025 12:58 PM (rj6Yv)

354
Jumanji Brown's got to be fuming after getting very publicly derobbed(Pants'd) in front of everyone.

Scalia laughs from the grave.

Posted by: Frank Barone at June 27, 2025 12:58 PM (IifOV)

355 10X must be 10 times more attractive.

Fingernails like a mandarin chinaman.

Posted by: Commissar of plenty and festive little hats at June 27, 2025 12:58 PM (bk5Wq)

356 Crustacean sock fail!

Posted by: Warai-otoko at June 27, 2025 12:58 PM (BjH5D)

357 Someone convinced her that putting on the Hoodrat Barbie act is the best path for her to get more attention, more press, and therefore advance her political career. She's basically a black woman doing blackface, somehow.
Posted by: ballistic

It's obvious pandering but who's she pandering to? The hoodrat constituency or white liberals who believe that being ratchet is "authentic blackness"? I would imagine that most black folks with two brain cells to rub together are cringing the fuck out over this.

Posted by: Who's the audience? at June 27, 2025 12:58 PM (TbWk/)

358 "We have many laws, BTW.
Posted by: Math "

Holy shit. Math is here!

Math is a Ron.

Posted by: eleven at June 27, 2025 12:58 PM (fV+MH)

359 I bet Crockett's congressional staff is something to behold. That right there is problem number one. They think the ghetto rat persona is working and they probably get as much shits and grins from using it on the whites as Crockett does.

It's an act, for clicks, congressional style.

Posted by: Martini Farmer at June 27, 2025 12:59 PM (Q4IgG)

360 We need a Supreme Court Justice bell curve!

Posted by: AlaBAMA at June 27, 2025 12:59 PM (RUMEY)

361 could not deliver a clear definition on what a woman is?

Boobs.

Posted by: Commissar of plenty and festive little hats at June 27, 2025 12:59 PM (bk5Wq)

362 Juneteenth is stupid and should not ever have Bern a fed holiday because it is stupid. But it isn't a religious holiday like Christmas.
Posted by: Madamemayhem (uppity wench) at June 27, 2025 12:52 PM (2J/Lj)

I want to know why Bern is in your autocorrect. Is there something we should know???

Posted by: ... at June 27, 2025 01:00 PM (rCia8)

363 Eyelashes should never look like a tarantula crawling out of your eye sockets.
Posted by: rickb223 at June 27, 2025 12:56 PM (flKEw)

Glued-on palm fronds.

Posted by: How can they keep their eyes open with those things? at June 27, 2025 01:00 PM (TbWk/)

364 361 could not deliver a clear definition on what a woman is?

Boobs.
Posted by: Commissar of plenty and festive little hats at June 27, 2025 12:59 PM (bk5Wq)

I don't think that's a fine enough sifter, sir. Plenty of boobs out there on chicks with dicks.

Posted by: AlaBAMA at June 27, 2025 01:00 PM (RUMEY)

365 Holy shit. Math is here!

Math is a Ron.
Posted by: eleven at June 27, 2025 12:58 PM (fV+MH)
---
Time to break out the banhammer! Stat!

Posted by: "Perfessor" Squirrel at June 27, 2025 01:01 PM (7fElN)

366 It’s like making the Maine Lobster Festival a national holiday.

Posted by: sniffybigtoe at June 27, 2025 12:55 PM (hfg0k)

I like that idea!

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (with a beret and a Gauloises) at June 27, 2025 01:01 PM (L5An7)

367 Where would Scalia be right now if he were still alive? Probably screaming into his pillow.

Posted by: ... at June 27, 2025 01:01 PM (rCia8)

368 311 Who names their kid Katanji?
Posted by: Ok, I'll ask at June 27, 2025 12:51 PM (4qN3i)

Based on ny superior knowledge, I'd say the birth certificate woman visited her mother after delivery. Brown's Mama was on the phone talking about her cat to Angie and this is what the birth certificate lady wrote down, as she could not get her off her phone.

I hereby write this without legalese, but in cursive so some cannot read it.

Who knew that someday cursive would be another foreign language?

Posted by: ChristyBlinkyTheGreat at June 27, 2025 01:01 PM (6PCLE)

369 315 There is some question about whether Jumanji was legally appointed. She was chosen by autopen.
Posted by: Notsothoreau at June 27, 2025

She was confirmed. I think we are stuck with this very poor excuse for a legal mind.

Posted by: Piper at June 27, 2025 01:01 PM (p4NUW)

370 I’m too mad about Congress BS to be happy about this.

Posted by: sniffybigtoe at June 27, 2025 01:01 PM (hfg0k)

371 "Judicial philosophy" is a perfect artifact of the arrogance and aggrandizement of the Legal Cult.

Glorified clerks. But they need an individual "philosophy" to do their jobs.

Another great one is "orginalist". Hilarious. So if I look at the contract we both signed and just decide that no, the part where I pay you for a service doesn't mean I pay you for a service (the "originalist" "interpretation"), then you're out of luck, if I'm not an "originalist".

Posted by: rhomboid at June 27, 2025 01:01 PM (1m82a)

372 The DEI on the Supreme Court needs to be impeached and removed. No retards on the court!

Posted by: Smellslikevictory at June 27, 2025 01:02 PM (jPdyB)

373 Wow! A GOOD DAY!

THANK YOU GOD!

My brother FINALLY signed papers and for the first time in about 6 months, I know where I am going to be living next month!!!

The closing is officially Monday but all papers have been signed. I won't rest comfortably until this is all complete but all paperwork has been done.

It cost me about 60 or 70 grand for 2 years of peace and quiet, but whatever. What a nightmare. Mom and Dad would be so disappointed that things turned out like this.

If there are any caregivers of elderly people here and you live in your parent's house, push to get the entire house in your name in the will if you have siblings. Trust me. Just do it.

I'm still nervous until this closes but I'm getting beer after I clean up.

Posted by: Stateless BUT NOT HOMELESS MAYBE.. 51% - mental state clawing up from 10%, shit happened, clawing ba at June 27, 2025 01:02 PM (jvJvP)

374 "We have many laws, BTW.
Posted by: Math "
-----
Holy shit. Math is here!

Math is a Ron.

So we've been wrong the whole time?

Posted by: Oddbob at June 27, 2025 01:02 PM (/y8xj)

375 Who knew that someday cursive would be another foreign language?
Posted by: ChristyBlinkyTheGreat

My cursive certainly is.

Posted by: Bulg at June 27, 2025 01:02 PM (77rzZ)

376 And the Supreme Court ruling too!

Amazing day!

Posted by: Stateless BUT NOT HOMELESS MAYBE.. 51% - mental state clawing up from 10%, shit happened, clawing ba at June 27, 2025 01:03 PM (jvJvP)

377 I'm still nervous until this closes but I'm getting beer after I clean up.
Posted by: Stateless BUT NOT HOMELESS MAYBE

Cheers.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 27, 2025 01:03 PM (mlg/3)

378 Eyelashes should never look like a tarantula crawling out of your eye sockets.
Posted by: rickb223 at June 27, 2025 12:56 PM (flKEw)

https://tinyurl.com/4jy23sns

Posted by: I used to have a different nic at June 27, 2025 01:03 PM (ExV1e)

379 Where would Scalia be right now if he were still alive? Probably screaming into his pillow.
Posted by: ...

Bro, too soon.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 27, 2025 01:03 PM (mlg/3)

380 373 Congratulations, Stateless! That's great news.

Posted by: Bulg at June 27, 2025 01:03 PM (77rzZ)

381
Whoa. In other countries of the world, Huge Islamist Attack on Military Factory in Belgium. 100+ Islamists attack...

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 27, 2025 01:04 PM (HuRzZ)

382
I hate to say this, but... she's not doing women any favors. Both of these female justices seem to find it impossible to make clear decisions. They always leave things in a "maybe this, maybe that" muddle.

Posted by: ace at June 27

Is this related to asking where we want to go for dinner?

Posted by: Piper at June 27, 2025 01:04 PM (p4NUW)

383
Juneteenth was all right when it was just a Texas observance. Actually I don't recall it even being a state holiday. But Pandering Joe had to make it another holiday to tell us America sucks.

Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at June 27, 2025 01:04 PM (/HVsR)

384 357 Someone convinced her that putting on the Hoodrat Barbie act is the best path for her to get more attention, more press, and therefore advance her political career. She's basically a black woman doing blackface, somehow.
Posted by: ballistic

It's obvious pandering but who's she pandering to? The hoodrat constituency or white liberals who believe that being ratchet is "authentic blackness"? I would imagine that most black folks with two brain cells to rub together are cringing the fuck out over this.
Posted by: Who's the audience? at June 27, 2025 12:58 PM (TbWk/)

I think this is factually, culturally backward.

When she speaks well, she's acting "white." Blacks do this all the time: put on a more polished presentation for the masses, but act "black" around their peer group. She is ghetto (either by circumstances or by having chosen to adopt ghetto culture), and this is her true self leaking out, not an affectation.

It's kinda like homos. They can present almost normal. But if a coven of them assembles, they queen out, and it's all lisping and curled wrists. At least for a certain demo of the people of fudge.

Posted by: bear with asymmetrical balls at June 27, 2025 01:04 PM (4/BuS)

385 Posted by: ballistic at June 27, 2025 12:57 PM (3BwY

Well said.

Posted by: Ordinary Amerian at June 27, 2025 01:04 PM (w6syA)

386 Boobs.
Posted by: Commissar of plenty and festive little hats at June 27, 2025 12:59 PM (bk5Wq)

One might think that is a clever reply, but after witnessing the festivities on Bourbon Street during a Halloween night celebrated many, many moons ago, I find this definition insufficient.

Posted by: mrp at June 27, 2025 01:04 PM (rj6Yv)

387 @373 Stateless , congrats glad to hear it's getting wrapped up

Posted by: Smell the Glove at June 27, 2025 01:04 PM (pwtJC)

388 @LeadingReport
·
1h
BREAKING: J.D. Vance surges to a commanding 34-point lead in the 2028 Republican presidential primary, per Emerson.

Posted by: Don Black at June 27, 2025 01:04 PM (AOsQT)

389 Don’t forget to thank Paul Ryan for recommending Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Posted by: redridinghood at June 27, 2025 01:04 PM (85jOI)

390 Fake "birthright" citizenship also impacted https: legalinsurrection.com 2025 06 trump-responds-to-supreme-court-birthright-citizen-decision/

Posted by: Smellslikevictory at June 27, 2025 01:04 PM (jPdyB)

391 Yahoo news headline: SCOTUS rules to give Trump more power

Posted by: kallisto at June 27, 2025 01:04 PM (dCxaZ)

392 Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 27, 2025 01:03 PM (mlg/3
Posted by: Bulg at June 27, 2025 01:03 PM (77rzZ

Thank you.

I was going insane.

Posted by: Stateless BUT NOT HOMELESS MAYBE.. 51% - mental state clawing up from 10%, shit happened, clawing ba at June 27, 2025 01:05 PM (jvJvP)

393 Unfortunately, the unreliable ditz Coney Barret left open the possibility that lowly district court justices can issue nationwide injunctions in cases where a state is suing the federal government

yeah. That's what I was thinking. Her ruling was too narrow and missed the mark, probably because she WANTED it to miss the mark.

Federal courts are not able to rule against the executive branch PERIOD because they lack jurisdiction. Federal courts are a creation of congress and are not coequal with the other two branches. They can rule against individual persons in the executive branch, but not against actions by the branch its self in carrying out its duties.

Only the Supreme Court can do this.

Plus, each district and area granted by congress to a federal judge permits them decisions over that area not globally or nationally. Once again, only the Supreme Court can rule on cases over the entire USA.

Failing to rule on this leaves these courts open to try to overrule the executive branch, just in tricksy ways.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 27, 2025 01:05 PM (dfIr7)

394 @359 Crockett's staff probably looks like the bar scene in Star Wars

Posted by: Smell the Glove at June 27, 2025 01:05 PM (pwtJC)

395 309 She's basically a black woman doing blackface, somehow.
Posted by: ballistic at June 27, 2025 12:40 PM (3BwY

She's just shuckin' and jivin', boss. She'd prolly make Speaker if she could tap dance.

Posted by: I used to have a different nic at June 27, 2025 12:51 PM (ExV1e)

The only difference between statements from Jazzmine and Hakeen Jeffries is the choice of key words. The messaging is identical.

Posted by: Gref at June 27, 2025 01:05 PM (aBgBM)

396
Eyelashes should never look like a tarantula crawling out of your eye sockets.
Posted by: rickb223 at June 27, 2025 12:56 PM (flKEw)

When my husband, who is less detail oriented than I am in general snark, notices caterpillar eyelashes it is a thing to behold. In public he pokes me to LOOK! The fake eyelash trends blow what is left of his mind.

Posted by: ChristyBlinkyTheGreat at June 27, 2025 01:05 PM (6PCLE)

397
Who knew that someday cursive would be another foreign language?
Posted by: ChristyBlinkyTheGreat at June 27, 2025 01:01 PM (6PCLE)

_______

Tell me about it.

Posted by: Manual Transmissions at June 27, 2025 01:05 PM (/HVsR)

398 388 @LeadingReport
·
1h
BREAKING: J.D. Vance surges to a commanding 34-point lead in the 2028 Republican presidential primary, per Emerson.
Posted by: Don Black at June 27, 2025 01:04 PM (AOsQT)

=====

I wouldn't expect anyone else to be close to him now. The only one with the kind of exposure he's getting now is Rubio, and in people's mind's Secretary of State doesn't lead to the presidency, VP does.

3 years and all, but this is probably Vance's to lose. He's gonna have sky-high name recognition, and if Trump's presidency is considered a success, he's the heir apparent to that.

It'll be a crowning with some noise.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 01:06 PM (GBKbO)

399 391 Yahoo news headline: SCOTUS rules to give Trump more power
Posted by: kallisto at June 27, 2025 01:04 PM (dCxaZ)

That's perfect. Now the lefties don't lose their Fascist mantra.

Trump just got mo power! No Kings!

Posted by: AlaBAMA at June 27, 2025 01:06 PM (RUMEY)

400 365 Holy shit. Math is here!

Math is a Ron.
Posted by: eleven at June 27, 2025 12:58 PM (fV+MH)
---
Time to break out the banhammer! Stat!
Posted by: "Perfessor" Squirrel

Suit yourself, I'll go back to lurking.
I'll still be watching each of you, closely.

Posted by: Math at June 27, 2025 01:06 PM (2E0GD)

401 I think this is factually, culturally backward.

When she speaks well, she's acting "white." Blacks do this all the time: put on a more polished presentation for the masses, but act "black" around their peer group. She is ghetto (either by circumstances or by having chosen to adopt ghetto culture), and this is her true self leaking out, not an affectation.
---------
Agreed. Her "passion" only comes out when she's speaking stupidly. The other stuff was just an act.

Posted by: Crusader at June 27, 2025 01:06 PM (TN0g+)

402 389 Don’t forget to thank Paul Ryan for recommending Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Posted by: redridinghood at June 27, 2025 01:04 PM (85jOI)

======

Her idiocy is going to turn the court more rightward.

So, Ryan is actually a super secret triple agent playing 12th dimensional chess!

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 01:06 PM (GBKbO)

403
Darn, nothing to hate-watch yet. Plenty of triumph among the podcasters and youtubers, but the Obama bros must still be picking themselves off the floor. I'm looking forward to The Bulwark and Pod Save America, those stupid frat kids.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 27, 2025 01:07 PM (HuRzZ)

404 I stopped using cursive because my cursive sucks.

It was always an op against us lefties anyway.

Posted by: eleven at June 27, 2025 01:07 PM (fV+MH)

405 Seriously though... that politician declaring blacks have higher cancer rates due to the use of hearing the N word daily, was the best most ridiculous thing I've heard lately

Its right up there with the "food deserts" crap blaming a lack of local grocery stores for diabetes in poor kids. Dude. There's even less excuse these days than ever before for not feeding your kids properly. These dumb parents are ordering door dash fast food for their kids, they can order groceries through the same service and feed them well.

Between delivery and public transport, there's no excuse to not feed your kids. Food desserts is just a power grab by the usual suspects.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 27, 2025 01:07 PM (dfIr7)

406 That's perfect. Now the lefties don't lose their Fascist mantra.

Trump just got mo power! No Kings!

Posted by: AlaBAMA at June 27, 2025 01:06 PM (RUMEY)

gotta keep the Useless Idiots all fired up!

Posted by: kallisto at June 27, 2025 01:07 PM (dCxaZ)

407 Jackson has two degrees from Harvard.

DEI credentialism.

Penn is trying to fire tenured professor Amy Wax for documenting this.

Posted by: The ARC of History! at June 27, 2025 01:08 PM (xTIDn)

408 393 Unfortunately, the unreliable ditz Coney Barret left open the possibility that lowly district court justices can issue nationwide injunctions in cases where a state is suing the federal government

yeah. That's what I was thinking. Her ruling was too narrow and missed the mark, probably because she WANTED it to miss the mark.

Federal courts are not able to rule against the executive branch PERIOD because they lack jurisdiction. Federal courts are a creation of congress and are not coequal with the other two branches. They can rule against individual persons in the executive branch, but not against actions by the branch its self in carrying out its duties.

Only the Supreme Court can do this.

Plus, each district and area granted by congress to a federal judge permits them decisions over that area not globally or nationally. Once again, only the Supreme Court can rule on cases over the entire USA.

Failing to rule on this leaves these courts open to try to overrule the executive branch, just in tricksy ways.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 27, 2025 01:05 PM (dfIr7)

Clarence Thomas warned tricksy ways will be used. In his concurring opinion.

Posted by: Gref at June 27, 2025 01:08 PM (aBgBM)

409 Michelle Obama with her penis.

My Auto-Pen.

Posted by: Barack at June 27, 2025 01:08 PM (g8z90)

410 Amy should slap Ketanji with a tariff too just for good measure.

Posted by: Blast Hardcheese at June 27, 2025 01:08 PM (V362x)

411 387 @373 Stateless , congrats glad to hear it's getting wrapped up

Posted by: Smell the Glove at June 27, 2025 01:04 PM (pwtJC

I'm still nervous.

Twice this year, on the day papers were to be signed, my brother changed his mind. Twice!

I won't fully relax until it's official.

I've been giving off nervous, jumpy vibes for months.

Posted by: Stateless BUT NOT HOMELESS MAYBE.. 51% - mental state clawing up from 10%, shit happened, clawing ba at June 27, 2025 01:08 PM (jvJvP)

412 I want to know why Bern is in your autocorrect. Is there something we should know???
Posted by: ... at June 27, 2025 01:00 PM (rCia

Evidently it thinks I'm Swiss. The town in Indiana is Berne, with an e so it wouldn't be that.

Posted by: Madamemayhem (uppity wench) at June 27, 2025 01:08 PM (2J/Lj)

413 Suit yourself, I'll go back to lurking.
I'll still be watching each of you, closely.
Posted by: Math

Math at NSA

Posted by: Bulg at June 27, 2025 01:08 PM (77rzZ)

414 Seriously though... that politician declaring blacks have higher cancer rates due to the use of hearing the N word daily, was the best most ridiculous thing I've heard lately
---------

If it's so bad maybe they should stop saying it. Just a thought.

Posted by: ... at June 27, 2025 01:08 PM (rCia8)

415 I hate to say this, but... she's not doing women any favors. Both of these female justices seem to find it impossible to make clear decisions. They always leave things in a "maybe this, maybe that" muddle.

Posted by: ace at June 27

Is this related to asking where we want to go for dinner?
Posted by: Piper at June 27, 2025 01:04 PM (p4NUW)
______

Sandy Day O'Connor has entered the chat ....

Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 01:08 PM (iFTx/)

416 ha ha manual is the best anti-theft device!

Posted by: Black Orchid at June 27, 2025 01:09 PM (Pv3Rg)

417 Who's your fucking DADDY now???

Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 01:09 PM (iFTx/)

418
Comments are brilliant and spot-on today.

You morons all get a raise.

Posted by: Auspex at June 27, 2025 01:09 PM (j4U/Z)

419 Sotomayor is no better than Jackson - basically the law is whatever she wants it to be.

Posted by: El Mariachi - Attorney at Law at June 27, 2025 01:09 PM (D1vbu)

420 Everyone have a great day.

Canadian news is talking about the Supreme Court now. B8g news!

Posted by: Stateless BUT NOT HOMELESS MAYBE.. 51% - mental state clawing up from 10%, shit happened, clawing ba at June 27, 2025 01:09 PM (jvJvP)

421 Can't wait for the District Court Militias to enforce their rebukes. This is how we get Judge Dredd, right?

Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 27, 2025 01:09 PM (mlg/3)

422 I always get suspicious when anyone uses the term "legalese". They usually mean "Don't read it just sign it." But they'll certainly hold you to every detail of a legal agreement,(as they should), and tell you, "Well, if you didn't understand it, you should not have signed it."

There may be some terms that require explanation here and there for the layman, but it usually just isn't as bad as people claim. "Don't read it. It's just legalese." can be a trap.

Posted by: Don in SoCo at June 27, 2025 01:09 PM (vd6bO)

423 418
Comments are brilliant and spot-on today.

You morons all get a raise.
Posted by: Auspex at June 27, 2025 01:09 PM (j4U/Z)

=====

And then there's me.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 01:09 PM (GBKbO)

424 Sandy Day O'Connor has entered the chat ....
Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade

She really needs to lighten up.

Posted by: Bulg at June 27, 2025 01:10 PM (77rzZ)

425 I stopped using cursive because my cursive sucks.

It was always an op against us lefties anyway.
----------
I'd argue that cursive was never proper for anything other than private journals and signatures. Back before people lugged computers everywhere, I'm certain that my insistence on using the printed word for my field reports earned me a promotion or two--my supervisors commented more than once that they could actually *read* my reports.

Posted by: Crusader at June 27, 2025 01:10 PM (TN0g+)

426 Having someone so ridiculously ignorant on the SC is rare.

She is definitely the dumbest and least qualified supreme court justice in my lifetime and in my understanding, historically. Its shocking that someone so lacking in judicial ability and mental capacity even was considered for the job. Its an insult to black women to even say she should be on the job I mean... this is the best you could find???

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 27, 2025 01:10 PM (dfIr7)

427 I am happy about this news, but also a little sad that we, as a community, are losing this very hearty meme. RIP Judge Kamehameha.

But I’m sure the left will pull through for us with more lunacy soon.

Posted by: H at June 27, 2025 01:10 PM (2gjbv)

428 Today's ruling also nukes the contempt finding against the FL AG for him not demanding the various law enforcement officers comply with the court's injunction.

The Court emphasizes that injunctions can only apply to those before the court.

And, by extension, nor can a court enjoin indirectly what it cannot enjoin directly

Posted by: People's Hippo Voice at June 27, 2025 01:10 PM (GnVQ5)

429 Seriously though... that politician declaring blacks have higher cancer rates due to the use of hearing the N word daily, was the best most ridiculous thing I've heard lately
---------

Naggers. Right. Yes, of course.

Posted by: Randy Marsh at June 27, 2025 01:10 PM (TbWk/)

430 418
Comments are brilliant and spot-on today.

You morons all get a raise.
Posted by: Auspex at June 27, 2025 01:09 PM (j4U/Z)

Can I just get my cardboard membership card laminated instead?

Posted by: AlaBAMA at June 27, 2025 01:10 PM (RUMEY)

431 Today the Hawaiian Judges join the Maytag repairman in anonymity.

Posted by: Beyond Norman Parameters at June 27, 2025 01:10 PM (ymA/R)

432 I read the OP and the first thought that came to my mind was that Justice Amy Coney Barret's decision is going to be studied and debated in law schools across the country for decades to come.

FAFO.

Posted by: mrp at June 27, 2025 01:11 PM (rj6Yv)

433 And then there's me.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison

Just eat your slop and be glad, comrade.

Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 27, 2025 01:11 PM (mlg/3)

434 433 And then there's me.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison

Just eat your slop and be glad, comrade.
Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 27, 2025 01:11 PM (mlg/3)

=====

But I want some more.

Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 01:11 PM (GBKbO)

435 BREAKING: J.D. Vance surges to a commanding 34-point lead in the 2028 Republican presidential primary, per Emerson.
Posted by: Don Black at June 27, 2025 01:04 PM (AOsQT)
++++
Polls this early are meaningless.

Given his performance so far, though, it's his to lose as far as I'm concerned.

Posted by: Joe Mannix (Not a cop!) at June 27, 2025 01:11 PM (6bTRc)

436 Sandy Day O'Connor has entered the chat ....
Posted by: Elric The (One and Only) Blade at June 27, 2025 01:08 PM (iFTx/)

No, it doesn't . She no longer has to do "maybe this, maybe that" about where she wants to go to dinner

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at June 27, 2025 01:11 PM (2GCMq)

437 Nood. Parents can parent.

Posted by: I used to have a different nic at June 27, 2025 01:12 PM (ExV1e)

438 Amy should slap Ketanji with a tariff too just for good measure.
----------
And then Roberts can declare it a tax.

Posted by: Crusader at June 27, 2025 01:12 PM (TN0g+)

439 'd like to throw Cruz in there for his willingness to fight, but he still buys into that "J6 was a nightmare" bullshit.
Posted by: Crusader at June 27, 2025 12:53 PM (TN0g+)

He has come around a bit after looking at it from the outside instead of being in the middle of it. And what I think made him the most angry and probably still is is that he was scheduled to speak and lay out why he voted no to certify the electoral vote. I am disappointed no one will ever get to hear it.

Posted by: polynikes

I am of the opinion that certification was not certain, and that is why the fake insurrection was staged. They were then able to bypass the rules.

Posted by: Thomas Paine at June 27, 2025 01:12 PM (Vfq+S)

440 ACE HAZ A NOOD

Posted by: Skip at June 27, 2025 01:12 PM (+qU29)

441
Jackson has two degrees from Harvard.

DEI credentialism.

Penn is trying to fire tenured professor Amy Wax for documenting this.
Posted by: The ARC of History!

===============

I've said for years, the next wave of POC grievance will be "Whitey deliberately let us get away with cheating in order to discredit us." ChatCPT could write that Ph.D. thesis now.

Posted by: Blonde Morticia at June 27, 2025 01:12 PM (HuRzZ)

442 If there are any caregivers of elderly people here and you live in your parent's house, push to get the entire house in your name in the will if you have siblings. Trust me. Just do it.

I'm still nervous until this closes but I'm getting beer after I clean up.
Posted by: Stateless BUT NOT HOMELESS MAYBE

Wha???

No house should be owned by an individual.

What everyone NEEDS to do, and I had assumed everybody had already done, is to create a trust named after the owners, then in the paperwork of the trust clearly spell out the hierarchy of trustees. This way, when the current trustee passes away, there is no change in ownership (the trust still owns trhe house), merely a change in trustee.

It's basically like a will, but much better for you, because there are no estate taxes, no increase in property tax on the house,no probate, etc.

Posted by: zombie at June 27, 2025 01:12 PM (pMi6S)

443
Who knew that someday cursive would be another foreign language?
Posted by: ChristyBlinkyTheGreat

_________

At the Versailles Conference, Lloyd George was warned the telephone line he was speaking on may not be secure. He airily replied, "That's all right. We'll use Welsh."

Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at June 27, 2025 01:12 PM (/HVsR)

444 I'd argue that cursive was never proper for anything other than private journals and signatures. Back before people lugged computers everywhere, I'm certain that my insistence on using the printed word for my field reports earned me a promotion or two--my supervisors commented more than once that they could actually *read* my reports.
Posted by: Crusader

I agree. Cursive stinks. Just say what you want to say, dammit, and don't make a freakin' art project out of it.

Posted by: Bulg at June 27, 2025 01:12 PM (77rzZ)

445 Posted by: Stateless BUT NOT HOMELESS MAYBE

Congratulations. I lived under that cloud for quite a while, too.

Posted by: t-bird at June 27, 2025 01:12 PM (TJMjl)

446 Have they done anything to the Boston judge who said he was going to ignore the Supreme Court yet?

Posted by: The ARC of History! at June 27, 2025 01:12 PM (xTIDn)

447 Just checked the old 401k

I'm within a tenth of a per cent of the high of January 2025.

I thought it was going to take longer for the market to adjust to King Trump's decrees...but I'll take it!!

Posted by: kallisto at June 27, 2025 01:12 PM (dCxaZ)

448 "Law and Law! What is Law?!"

- Jackson, frustrated by the constant inquiries about Law

Posted by: El Mariachi - Attorney at Law at June 27, 2025 01:12 PM (D1vbu)

449 Between delivery and public transport, there's no excuse to not feed your kids"

Yeah, about that...

Posted by: 24/7/365 school meals at June 27, 2025 01:13 PM (tubbA)

450 Sniffybigtoe, Juneteenth is the equivalent of picking the day the last Japanese on the tiniest island finally got word that WW2 was over. And making that the official day the war was over. Not, you know, the actual day.

The rest of the states can't help it that Texas was slow to the news that slaves were freed. Catch up. Do better. Instead we make it into a national holiday to hate on white people.

Also, native americans still had slaves, so not all blacks were free by Juneteenth anyway. We had to do a treaty with the tribes to get them to finally stop owning slaves.

Posted by: LizLem at June 27, 2025 01:13 PM (Eng1Z)

451 4 And she's on SCOTUS for 40 more years.
Posted by: TheJamesMadison, reflecting on change and permanence with Ozu at June 27, 2025 12:11 PM (GBKbO)

Jumanji Jemima-Jerimiundah isn't going to live to 94.

Ain't no damned way.

Posted by: XTC at June 27, 2025 01:13 PM (UnA8+)

452
Coney Barret blasted her, accusing her simply ignoring 250 years of constitutional practice in order to create an "imperial judiciary."

i/o
@avidseries
"We will not dwell on Justice Jackson's argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries' worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself. We observe only this: Justice Jackson decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary."

-----

I anticipate a chick fight with lots of hair-pulling and slapping.

Posted by: Semi-Literate Thug at June 27, 2025 01:13 PM (ES1Rb)

453 408 393 Unfortunately, the unreliable ditz Coney Barret left open the possibility that lowly district court justices can issue nationwide injunctions in cases where a state is suing the federal government
Posted by: Gref
=======
ACB left this door open because standing for states is different than those of regular litigants due to the 10th Amendment. Individual plaintiffs have no 'constitutional' right to pursue decisions that affect others beyond the litigants bound in the case.

States do because states as a whole are a class defined by the US Constitution as having sovereignty themselves.

So NY would have the right as they did in Clinton v. NY to pursue an injunction that overturned the line item veto law because it affected them financially as well as others. Conservative states have used the same process to challenge overreach by Biden in things like shutting down all oil leasing in the Gulf, executive orders on guns, and so on.

Posted by: Cheese Nazi Chef at June 27, 2025 01:13 PM (ctrM5)

454 ACB must have been exasperated beyond words to dump on KJB like she did. Not at all collegial.

Posted by: mr tmz at June 27, 2025 01:13 PM (rJ48h)

455 391 Yahoo news headline: SCOTUS rules to give Trump more power

Posted by: kallisto at June 27, 2025 01:04 PM (dCxaZ)

+++++

You've got to commend Yahoo for being able to twist a common-sense victory into what sounds like a sinister over-the-top and forced authoritative capabilities allowed for Trump.

Posted by: washrivergal at June 27, 2025 01:14 PM (drgfo)

456 The more I think about the Kantjani (whatever) response, the more I pray for the demolition of DEI.

Posted by: Seems Legit at June 27, 2025 01:14 PM (PMtkd)

457 if not for "legalese" the Supreme Court would not exist ... the Constitution and the "law" are not "what you would like them to be", they are what is written down in the Constitution or the law in question ... i.e. "legalese" ... without that we would not be a nation of laws but a nation of feelings defined by ignorant DEI hires to the Supreme Court (or any court for that matter)

Posted by: The Dark Lord at June 27, 2025 01:14 PM (DBAaD)

458 She is definitely the dumbest and least qualified supreme court justice in my lifetime and in my understanding, historically. Its shocking that someone so lacking in judicial ability and mental capacity even was considered for the job. Its an insult to black women to even say she should be on the job I mean... this is the best you could find???
Posted by: Christopher R Taylor

Yoohoo, I have a law degree.

Posted by: Kamala at June 27, 2025 01:14 PM (0Htd1)

459 >>> Loosely translated it essentially means "She can go eat a big bowl of the shut the fuck up."

or "Ketanji, you ignorant slut."

Posted by: LizLem at June 27, 2025 01:14 PM (Eng1Z)

460 Galen was Doc Adams first name on Gunsmoke.

Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at June 27, 2025 01:14 PM (63Dwl)

461 >>> You've got to commend Yahoo for being able to twist a common-sense victory into what sounds like a sinister over-the-top and forced authoritative capabilities allowed for Trump.

Child's play!

Posted by: This is CNN at June 27, 2025 01:15 PM (Eng1Z)

462 442 If there are any caregivers of elderly people here and you live in your parent's house, push to get the entire house in your name in the will if you have siblings. Trust me. Just do it.

I'm still nervous until this closes but I'm getting beer after I clean up.
Posted by: Stateless
=====
Depending on the state, some US states allow real property titles to pass directly to the named individuals on the title without going to probate. Transfer on Death Deeds.

Posted by: Cheese Nazi Chef at June 27, 2025 01:16 PM (ctrM5)

463 I hate to say this, but... she's not doing women any favors.

I agree, but while its rare to find a man who can handle power well and rule wisely, its even rarer to find a woman who can. While men tend to abuse power and get into excesses of force and hedonism, women tend to misuse power by deciding irrationally and with excess empathy. The number of truly great female leaders is very few -- Thatcher, Queen Victoria, Queen Elizabeth, for example -- and they were REALLY great. But they tended to not let their compassion overrule their reason.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 27, 2025 01:17 PM (dfIr7)

464
It's basically like a will, but much better for you, because there are no estate taxes, no increase in property tax on the house,no probate, etc.

Posted by: zombie at June 27, 20

Thank you zombie.

I wish I would have known. My late parents and I just figured things would be amicably settled. Boy were we wrong.

Posted by: Stateless BUT NOT HOMELESS MAYBE.. 51% - mental state clawing up from 10%, shit happened, clawing ba at June 27, 2025 01:17 PM (jvJvP)

465 So am I understanding this correctly: there were 2 dissenting opinions, one signed by Kagan, Sotomayor and KJB, where Sotomayor made actual legal arguments, and then a second solo dissenting opinion by KJB saying reading is hard and judges should just do what they feel?

Posted by: MaureenTheTemp at June 27, 2025 01:18 PM (HI5Mk)

466 t-bird.

I'm sorry you went through that.

Posted by: Stateless BUT NOT HOMELESS MAYBE.. 51% - mental state clawing up from 10%, shit happened, clawing ba at June 27, 2025 01:19 PM (jvJvP)

467 Perhaps TX can sue the Federal government on the NFA, and we can get a nationwide injunction ruling that the NFA is unenforceable. Imagine the taxation power being used to effectively curtail any of the other Bill of Rights: Only the 2A, the Red Headed Step Child of Constitutional rights, can be so curtailed by the taxation clause in the main body.

Posted by: An Observation sez Trump is my President at June 27, 2025 01:19 PM (Da7Vv)

468 Sad to say, black women think that if X looks attractive, 10X must be 10 times more attractive. See, for example: eyelashes, nails, asses.
Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh

There are people on Judge Judy who look as if their eyelashes weight a half pound each. I don't know how they keep their eyes open.

Posted by: Kamala at June 27, 2025 01:19 PM (0Htd1)

469 Could the ruling limiting Hawaiian Judges see the Left file similar cases by ideologically aligned plaintiffs in multiple Federal districts at the same time? The Left is mad as a swarm of hornets over this ruling; I can't imagine they are going to let this go without an all legal assault to undermine it.

Posted by: Alteria Pilgram - My President has convictions. at June 27, 2025 01:20 PM (NXz8h)

470 454 ACB must have been exasperated beyond words to dump on KJB like she did. Not at all collegial.
Posted by: mr tmz

Being on the Supreme Court is something similar to tenured faculty in a department. Life long 'marriage' of convenience where the parties often develop hatreds lasting as long as they are on the bench.

In the case of William O. Douglas, his relationship with his Scotus colleagues outlasted several of his marriages and they had to endure his alcoholism, petty nastiness, and his cavalier ignorance of the law. He is the guy creating the penumbras, shadows, etc. argument but was stupid enough to put it into an opinion to reach the result he wanted. AKA 'right of privacy' in Griswold.

Griswold itself was a collusive suit in where the Planned Parenthood plaintiff purposefully found someone willing to 'arrest' them so as to gain standing. Suit failed twice before because CT never enforced its silly law against contraceptives.

Posted by: Cheese Nazi Chef at June 27, 2025 01:20 PM (ctrM5)

471 Hi, Zombie! We first "met" at LGF two decades ago.
FWIW, Florida has what is called a "lady bird deed" that allows a person to transfer ownership of a house to a beneficiary upon death without the expenses of maintaining a trust. The property taxes will recalculate, but if the beneficiary occupies the property, he or she can apply for the homestead exemption.
This was the better option for me when I made my will last year.

Posted by: goddessoftheclassroom at June 27, 2025 01:21 PM (USyCi)

472 Depending on the state, some US states allow real property titles to pass directly to the named individuals on the title without going to probate.

In Oregon at least the property naturally devolves to the next of kin automatically and without probate.

So NY would have the right as they did in Clinton v. NY to pursue an injunction that overturned the line item veto law because it affected them financially as well as others. Conservative states have used the same process to challenge overreach by Biden in things like shutting down all oil leasing in the Gulf, executive orders on guns, and so on.

Sure but... that is the Supreme Court's job, not federal courts.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 27, 2025 01:22 PM (dfIr7)

473 469 Could the ruling limiting Hawaiian Judges see the Left file similar cases by ideologically aligned plaintiffs in multiple Federal districts at the same time? The Left is mad as a swarm of hornets over this ruling; I can't imagine they are going to let this go without an all legal assault to undermine it.
Posted by: Alteria Pilgram
=====
Scotus actually has the means to handle it via normal procedures. They have a Grant cert, vacate the lower court ruling, and remand to that court to fix their damn opinion. GVR for short and these rarely if ever have opinions attached to them. Sort of like swatting a fly to Scotus.

Scotus can also consolidate all the various cases into one and issue stays of all those courts in one opinion before resolving the issue.

Posted by: Cheese Nazi Chef at June 27, 2025 01:22 PM (ctrM5)

474 464 Stateless BUT NOT HOMELESS MAYBE.. 51% - mental state clawing up from 10%, shit happened, clawing ba at June 27, 2025 01:19 PM (jvJvP)

I am so sorry that you're having to deal with that.

Posted by: goddessoftheclassroom at June 27, 2025 01:23 PM (USyCi)

475 Sure but... that is the Supreme Court's job, not federal courts.
Posted by: Christopher R Taylor
=======
Nope, the problem is Scotus is NOT a trial court nor is the Courts of Appeal. District Courts ARE the proper place for litigation to start because they hold at least hearings normally to develop the fact pattern and legal reasoning for upper courts to pick through for legal errors.

Posted by: Cheese Nazi Chef at June 27, 2025 01:24 PM (ctrM5)

476 I am so sorry that you're having to deal with that.

Posted by: goddessoftheclassroom at June 27, 2025 01:23 PM (USyCi

Thank you.

I'll be a better Moron after all this.

Posted by: Stateless BUT NOT HOMELESS MAYBE.. 51% - mental state clawing up from 10%, shit happened, clawing ba at June 27, 2025 01:25 PM (jvJvP)

477 Aw, man, I need a cigarette!

Seriously, it's about freaking time. And Barrett finally fired her cannon, at Jumanji Jackson, which is delicious.

Here's a tasty morsel for the Horde: "Don't Interrupt the Enemy When He Is Making a Mistake" (Napoleon). https://wlehman.substack.com/p/dont-interrupt-them

Posted by: Beverly at June 27, 2025 01:26 PM (Epeb0)

478 Sad to say, black women think that if X looks attractive, 10X must be 10 times more attractive. See, for example: eyelashes, nails, asses.

Not just black women. Puerto Rican women, white women, in fact the only ones that seem to reject this are oriental women.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 27, 2025 01:27 PM (dfIr7)

479 Off sock.

Posted by: whig at June 27, 2025 01:28 PM (ctrM5)

480 Yoohoo, I have a law degree.

Posted by: Kamala at June 27, 2025 01:14 PM (0Htd1)

Oh man, this just reminded me of a story that came up last summer, not long after Kamala became their candidate. Apparently there was a cheating scandal in California with the California bar exam. Law students were paying lawyers to take their exam for them, usually after they failed. I wonder if Kamala did the same thing, she seems too stupid to have passed the bar exam.

Posted by: Farquad at June 27, 2025 01:33 PM (YkGND)

481 in fact the only ones that seem to reject this are oriental women.
=
South Korean chicks do a lot of plastic surgery bro...

Posted by: Girls you know it's true.... at June 27, 2025 01:33 PM (fXFFd)

482 they know Trump is right--that Marbury is not Constitutional:
They do not have the unlimited right to decide the Constitutionality of laws.

Posted by: People's Hippo Voice at June 27, 2025 12:34 PM

Say rather that they don't have the exclusive right to decide the Constitutionality of laws.

Each branch is empowered, nay, required, to interpret the Constitution and to follow it as their judgment determines.

Posted by: toby928 at June 27, 2025 01:33 PM (jc0TO)

483 Nope, the problem is Scotus is NOT a trial court nor is the Courts of Appeal.

Except that they are the only court coequal to the executive branch. Federal courts are by definition inferior, having been created by congress. They are not able to rule on the executive branch any more than they can the supreme court or any more than a state legislature can impeach a US senator. They lack jurisdiction.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 27, 2025 01:34 PM (dfIr7)

484 Each branch is empowered, nay, required, to interpret the Constitution and to follow it as their judgment determines.

But the final say is supposed to be the people of the USA, the citizen voters. Not courts.

South Korean chicks do a lot of plastic surgery bro.

But you rarely see an oriental girl walking around with three inch nails and eyelashes and a gigantic rear end.

Posted by: Christopher R Taylor at June 27, 2025 01:35 PM (dfIr7)

485 I know next to nothing about the law, but I've got this strange, sick feeling that Boasburg and others will contrive a way around these rulings.

Posted by: Ordinary Amerian at June 27, 2025 01:38 PM (w6syA)

486 I know next to nothing about the law, but I've got this strange, sick feeling that Boasburg and others will contrive a way around these rulings.
Posted by: Ordinary Amerian at June 27, 2025 01:38 PM

They will try. AFAIK, he's still claiming jurisdiction in a case that the SC ruled moot.

Posted by: toby928 at June 27, 2025 01:45 PM (jc0TO)

487 So, did Scalia die a natural death? Or was he “helped”?

Posted by: NemoMeImpuneLacessit at June 27, 2025 01:46 PM (NWqJf)

488 How did Ketanji Jackson Brown pass the bar? Did she get extra DEI points?

Posted by: NemoMeImpuneLacessit at June 27, 2025 01:49 PM (NWqJf)

489 It goes in effect in 30 days, so pump out those babies...illegals already being deported by ICE.

So if they got three women working on it together they could make the deadline, right?

Posted by: Socratease at June 27, 2025 01:51 PM (YgfoU)

490 Whoops: Nine women.

Posted by: Socratease at June 27, 2025 01:52 PM (YgfoU)

491 Imagine how Scalia's opinion would have read.

"STULTA KETANJI EST."

Posted by: LWC at June 27, 2025 02:16 PM (x4ce5)

492 After a wise Latina, could an omniscient negress have far behind

Posted by: DEEBEE at June 27, 2025 02:22 PM (x/6At)

493 Vote Out Rogue Imperialists Judges Now

Posted by: Tamaa the Drongo Bird at June 27, 2025 06:26 PM (wGqjj)

Processing 0.07, elapsed 0.0878 seconds.
14 queries taking 0.0213 seconds, 501 records returned.
Page size 271 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.