Q and Q+ I Double Dog Dare You in Commenting on this?

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
Password	(Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
Archive	Archive [500 char limit]
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

Embed	(replaces files and can be used instead)
Voice recorder	Show voice recorder (the Stop button will be clickable 5 seconds after you press Record)
Options	Do not bump (you can also write sage in the email field) Hide country (this board displays your country when you post if this is unchecked)
Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf Max filesize is 16 MB. Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000. You may upload 5 per post.

Q and Q+ I Double Dog Dare You in Commenting on this? Angel 06/15/20 (Mon) 21:18:32 0c5dd5 No.9495

I already know the answer and it is No...

The end of the Supreme Court

It's clear that the inverted justices of the Supreme Court are observably among the "all asserts" that have reportedly been activated.

Within 35 minutes today at 10 a.m. Eastern, what some thought was the most conservative Supreme Court of all time concocted a fundamental right to transgenderism in the context of labor law, erased the Second Amendment, and interfered with a state death penalty case, but declined to interfere with a California law that criminalizes law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration agents.

Taken in totality, the “conservative” legal movement, which has promoted the idea of “appointing better judges” rather than fighting the entire concept of judicial supremacism, has failed miserably. This was its Waterloo.

Here is a brief summary of four very important decisions and orders issued by the court today:

The justices denied certiorari to gun rights groups in 10 gun cases where states have denied citizens the right to carry arms under any circumstance. Justice Thomas dissented in the denial of cert in the New Jersey right to carry case and was joined by Justice Kavanagh. It takes four justices to agree to hear a case, and it’s not clear which of the others would also have agreed but didn’t sign on to the dissent. Despite the plain meaning of the Constitution, 10 years after Heller, and with circuit splits, the court refuses to act.

In U.S. v. California et al., the Supreme Court denied the petition from the Department of Justice to overturn a Ninth Circuit ruling upholding California’s sanctuary law. California prohibits local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration agents. Only Thomas and Alito would have granted the appeal.

In what has become a growing trend of SCOTUS interference with the few remaining capital punishment cases, the justices remanded a Texas capital case because they believe the accused did not have sufficient counsel. Alito dissented, joined by Thomas and Gorsuch.

In a 6-3 opinion written by Justice Gorsuch, the court ruled that Title VII of the Civil Right act, which passed in 1964 before anyone could fathom transgenderism, applies to transgenderism and sexual orientation.

Taken together, these decisions show the court believes there is an inalienable right to transgenderism and illegal immigration but not to the Second Amendment. The court believes it can tamper with every state criminal and capital conviction on ever-evolving novel grounds, but it somehow believes a state can criminalize foundational federal immigration powers.

It's just another failure of conservativism. The good news is this is one more step towards the end of Paper America and the false hope it offered to those inclined towards cuckservatism and civnattery. Americans were never going to sue their way free of emanations and penumbras.

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2020/06/the-end-of-supreme-court.html?m=1

____________________________

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

Shut it down... Angel 06/15/20 (Mon) 21:36:59 0c5dd5 No.9496

File: 87b9be2901f2cf6⋯.jpeg (41.06 KB, 568x767, 568:767, 537B6708_F38E_414E_A37E_9….jpeg)

VD at 6/15/2020 04:07:00 PM

10 comments:

Sweet, Sweet VictoryJune 15, 2020 4:17 PM

What happened to Trump's appointed judges? His personal choices?

If they can't be trusted, who the fuck can?!

yoyoyoBigDJune 15, 2020 4:23 PM

Hmm, what's the point of voting republican(voting in general actually) if they act like leftists? I thought the point of cuckservatives was that they represented reprieval from the institutionalization of leftist agenda.

UnknownJune 15, 2020 4:23 PM

And now it's revealed, all impirial institutions have been seized by persons violently incompatable with the American nation. And all opposition is controlled theatre to delay mass arson. Unfortunate their choice of slaves are so inclined towards chaos, a little awkward to be your own accelerationist saboteur but the enemy is not the best at times. Absolutely crazy how fast things are going, I know I'm not smart enough to have a clue what could put the cat back in the bag but I pray Trump does.

HylemorphistJune 15, 2020 4:25 PM

The flavours of the oppressed change so quickly.

https://imgur.com/a/31b6TZO

Bobo #117June 15, 2020 4:27 PM

As the Grey Enigma's header says, "Help's not coming...neither is permission."

rikjames.313June 15, 2020 4:32 PM

The federal courts have been famously dirty for years. Our federal bench here is about 2/3 politically corrupt, and 3 of the judges are known to be personally corrupt.

The Third Circuit had a rule that since the second amendment was not an absolute right, any government restriction at all were fine. Heller undid that, but democratic judges literally don't care.

The Sixth Circuit, also very liberal, has for decades decided everything in a death penalty case is ineffective assistance of counsel. The insane circuit court decision that Trump's personal twitter is an official but unofficial government communication device so he can't block anyone but his tweets aren't protected

Socially I disagree that gay should be a protected class. Legally there is a lot more basis for this decision than a lot of the policy decisions out of the supreme court. I only read the decision once, but there is some argument for it on that one read. If Heller is in the 100% supported category, and Roe v Wade is the 100% unsupported example, than this is abut 1/3 of the way down from Roe

BarbarossaJune 15, 2020 4:34 PM

It also disposes of the notion that somehow finding the right five bodies to sit on the court is going to be all that's required to undo almost a century of damage to the republic.

Jack WardJune 15, 2020 4:34 PM

OK. So why bother to vote in Nov.? Maybe the way to go is vote in dems everywhere in sight. Give them the Presidency, both houses of congress, most governorships. Then, let the new/old normal simmer for a brief time and have at it with Civil War 2.

I think its time to let the Trump campaign know to stop sending me the 8 to 10, or more, daily, requests for donations. What the hell is 4D chess by a President any good for when the highest court in the land is so ready to fold/spindle/and staple we the Citizens.

Damn CrackersJune 15, 2020 4:44 PM

The Supreme Court is nothing more than the "extra-legislative" branch of the U.S. gov't.

Nihil DicitJune 15, 2020 4:58 PM

There's quite a few conservatards trying to spin this as a species of victory, as if everything that has happened to lead us to this point never occurred, or at at least doesn't count, and now "we have the tools to beat them at their own game (the courts)!".

At least when the ancient Romans realized their plots had failed, they fell on their swords. These clumpnuggets just keep babbling

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.