Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. Supreme Court 9-0 Decision

Supreme Court 9-0 Decision

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
21 Posts 8 Posters 190 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • HoraceH Horace

    @Axtremus Maybe read the link, which is to the decision.

    Unless we're all being gaslit by a .gov website.

    Typical conservative SCOTUS, if so.

    They changed Kagan's and Jackson's opinions.

    I hate white males.

    AxtremusA Away
    AxtremusA Away
    Axtremus
    wrote on last edited by
    #8

    @Horace said in Supreme Court 9-0 Decision:

    @Axtremus Maybe read the link, which is to the decision.

    OK, the Kagan, Sotomayor, Jackson, and Kavanaugh agree with the majority's judgement but disagreed with the rationale the majority used to get to that judgment; they separate opinions to that effect. E.g., Kavanaugh's opinion says he agrees with majority to dump the "significant nexus" test but disagree with the majority's "continuous connected surface" test.

    That's explains why some reported it as a 9-0 decision while some others reported it as a 5-4 decision.

    I hate white males.

    Sorry to see that. Hate is often an unhealthy emotion. I hope you feel better soon.

    HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
    • LuFins DadL LuFins Dad

      And another!

      https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/supreme-court-geraldine-tyler-minneapolis-hennepin-county/89-4af70ecc-dfe3-4a07-9497-b49d3f1565c2

      AxtremusA Away
      AxtremusA Away
      Axtremus
      wrote on last edited by
      #9

      @LuFins-Dad said in Supreme Court 9-0 Decision:

      https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/supreme-court-geraldine-tyler-minneapolis-hennepin-county/89-4af70ecc-dfe3-4a07-9497-b49d3f1565c2

      👍

      1 Reply Last reply
      • AxtremusA Axtremus

        @Horace said in Supreme Court 9-0 Decision:

        @Axtremus Maybe read the link, which is to the decision.

        OK, the Kagan, Sotomayor, Jackson, and Kavanaugh agree with the majority's judgement but disagreed with the rationale the majority used to get to that judgment; they separate opinions to that effect. E.g., Kavanaugh's opinion says he agrees with majority to dump the "significant nexus" test but disagree with the majority's "continuous connected surface" test.

        That's explains why some reported it as a 9-0 decision while some others reported it as a 5-4 decision.

        I hate white males.

        Sorry to see that. Hate is often an unhealthy emotion. I hope you feel better soon.

        HoraceH Offline
        HoraceH Offline
        Horace
        wrote on last edited by
        #10

        @Axtremus said in Supreme Court 9-0 Decision:

        @Horace said in Supreme Court 9-0 Decision:

        @Axtremus Maybe read the link, which is to the decision.

        OK, the Kagan, Sotomayor, Jackson, and Kavanaugh agree with the majority's judgement but disagreed with the rationale the majority used to get to that judgment; they separate opinions to that effect. E.g., Kavanaugh's opinion says he agrees with majority to dump the "significant nexus" test but disagree with the majority's "continuous connected surface" test.

        That's explains why some reported it as a 9-0 decision while some others reported it as a 5-4 decision.

        That would be known as dishonest reporting. A lie, even.

        I doubt many SCOTUS decisions are universally supported by all justices in all facets of judgement. That's why they give different written opinions.

        And I will never - ever - apologize for hating white males. If you don't, then I feel sorry for your evil heart.

        Education is extremely important.

        1 Reply Last reply
        • Doctor PhibesD Offline
          Doctor PhibesD Offline
          Doctor Phibes
          wrote on last edited by
          #11

          Call me Ishmael if you will, but I hate white whales.

          I was only joking

          1 Reply Last reply
          • George KG Offline
            George KG Offline
            George K
            wrote on last edited by
            #12

            My disdain for them has grown to become Ahab-it.

            "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

            The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

            Doctor PhibesD 1 Reply Last reply
            • George KG George K

              My disdain for them has grown to become Ahab-it.

              Doctor PhibesD Offline
              Doctor PhibesD Offline
              Doctor Phibes
              wrote on last edited by
              #13

              @George-K said in Supreme Court 9-0 Decision:

              My disdain for them has grown to become Ahab-it.

              They are real Dicks.

              I was only joking

              1 Reply Last reply
              • JonJ Offline
                JonJ Offline
                Jon
                wrote on last edited by
                #14

                Two great decisions.

                Not long ago I posted about the old lady’s case under the thread title “May it be unanimous”. I got my wish.

                1 Reply Last reply
                • MikM Away
                  MikM Away
                  Mik
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #15

                  So this court is not quite as disastrous as previously presented. Go figure.

                  “I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • George KG Offline
                    George KG Offline
                    George K
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #16

                    It took CBS 5 paragraphs to say that the decision was unanimous, and then hastily, within the same sentence commenting that the reasoning was split.

                    And of course, despite the unanimous ruling, it labeled SCOTUS as a "conservative court." (Tut, tut, look at those wingnuts).

                    "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

                    The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

                    JonJ 1 Reply Last reply
                    • George KG George K

                      It took CBS 5 paragraphs to say that the decision was unanimous, and then hastily, within the same sentence commenting that the reasoning was split.

                      And of course, despite the unanimous ruling, it labeled SCOTUS as a "conservative court." (Tut, tut, look at those wingnuts).

                      JonJ Offline
                      JonJ Offline
                      Jon
                      wrote on last edited by Jon
                      #17

                      @George-K I would say it’s more complicated than that.

                      The court unanimously decided that this couple’s land didn’t constitute wetlands under the clean water act. Fair enough, but that in itself would have impact just on them and cases with similar fact patterns.

                      A majority of 5 went on to very specifically define what was included and excluded from the Act, in a very sweeping way, going far beyond what was necessary to find for the plaintiff in this one case.

                      So the dissent (written by that libtard Brett Kavanaugh) was on rather substantial policy matters, not quite captured by saying ‘different reasoning’.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      • George KG Offline
                        George KG Offline
                        George K
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #18

                        I'm not disputing your take on how the court decided. Simply pointing out how CBS framed it as the "conservative court" decided, when as a matter of fact, as you point out MAGA Kavanaugh dissented on the policy.

                        "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

                        The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        • JonJ Offline
                          JonJ Offline
                          Jon
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #19

                          The ironic thing is the SCOTUS ruling peels back what was an executive power grab beyond what congress intended and wrote in the bill. Institutionally, this is a pro-congress decision.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          • JollyJ Offline
                            JollyJ Offline
                            Jolly
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #20

                            Isn't that the way it's supposed to be?

                            “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                            Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            • JonJ Offline
                              JonJ Offline
                              Jon
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #21

                              It is. I was pointing out the irony of congressional leaders complaining about Scotus reversing an executive power grab of their territory. But we've pretty much passed the point when're institutional interests trump party interests, for both sides. Exceptions exist, of course.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              Reply
                              • Reply as topic
                              Log in to reply
                              • Oldest to Newest
                              • Newest to Oldest
                              • Most Votes


                              • Login

                              • Don't have an account? Register

                              • Login or register to search.
                              • First post
                                Last post
                              0
                              • Categories
                              • Recent
                              • Tags
                              • Popular
                              • Users
                              • Groups