SCOTUS and whatnot

[CMRivdogs]

Not the Supreme  Court, but its sure to end up there

 

[CMRivdogs]

 

[smr-nj]

14 hours ago, CMRivdogs said:

 

“Freedom for me, but not for thee”.

[chasfh]

3 hours ago, smr-nj said:

“Freedom for me, but not for thee”.

Wouldn’t surprise me to learn that some dishonest pundit on Fox has pointed out that there are no rights for trans people explicitly mentioned in the Constitution. 

[CMRivdogs]

So, Alito was in the room where it happened? It's time to set term limits on judges...or maybe just age limits

 

[Tigeraholic1]

Common sense.

 

[pfife]

Its not common sense

[CMRivdogs]

 

Edited 8 hours ago by CMRivdogs

[chasfh]

1 hour ago, CMRivdogs said:

 

So adorable how the "[the justices would] be shocked at how well organized and secure [elections] are" poster proceeds from the assumption that they are honest and impartial actors.

[gehringer_2]

2 hours ago, chasfh said:

So adorable how the "[the justices would] be shocked at how well organized and secure [elections] are" poster proceeds from the assumption that they are honest and impartial actors.

The way the system is supposed to work, findings of fact - like how an election works, are supposed to be established at the trial court. Unfortunately, that's a distinction that often doesn't make a difference in the end, because the Justices are still using their own belief system and the 'facts' they hold within that belief system, to make their judgements on matters that in theory are only about 'the law' of a case, but never really are.

In a technological age where the Justices are often totally ignorant about the real world context of what they are deciding, I wonder if the fact that appeal courts are not tasked to retry the facts of cases almost becomes an impediment to good outcomes.

Edited 4 hours ago by gehringer_2