2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 112,334
- 52,581
- 2,290
Yep.....9-0 decision against the democrats......so now we are going to hear calls for packing the court again..right...even with a 9-0 decision...
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You clearly don’t understand the case. That said, there is nothing important that has been newly decided where the trumpkin appointees don’t destroy the decision making process of the court. Trumpkins wouldn’t understand stare decisis if it bit them.Yep.....9-0 decision against the democrats......so now we are going to hear calls for packing the court again..right...even with a 9-0 decision...
What?You clearly don’t understand the case. That said, there is nothing important that has been newly decided where the trumpkin appointees don’t destroy the decision making process of the court. Trumpkins wouldn’t understand stare decisis if it bit them.Yep.....9-0 decision against the democrats......so now we are going to hear calls for packing the court again..right...even with a 9-0 decision...
there is no constitutional provision setting the number of justices. Maybe if you don’t like it, your christofascist scum shouldn’t have stolen two judgeships
No, you are merely misquoting the article statement...Yep.....9-0 decision against the democrats......so now we are going to hear calls for packing the court again..right...even with a 9-0 decision...
Kagan’s opinion represents a blunt refutation of this sleight-of-hand attempt to undermine immigration law. Jonathan Turley has suggested that the Court’s recent string of unanimous decisions like this one may be a subtle message to Democrats, warning them against packing the Supreme Court. While Turley has a point, the Supreme Court often hands down unanimous decisions — yet these decisions do not often gain the same coverage as 5-4 rulings on controversial issues.
You clearly don’t understand the case. That said, there is nothing important that has been newly decided where the trumpkin appointees don’t destroy the decision making process of the court. Trumpkins wouldn’t understand stare decisis if it bit them.Yep.....9-0 decision against the democrats......so now we are going to hear calls for packing the court again..right...even with a 9-0 decision...
there is no constitutional provision setting the number of justices. Maybe if you don’t like it, your christofascist scum shouldn’t have stolen two judgeships
You clearly don’t understand the case. That said, there is nothing important that has been newly decided where the trumpkin appointees don’t destroy the decision making process of the court. Trumpkins wouldn’t understand stare decisis if it bit them.Yep.....9-0 decision against the democrats......so now we are going to hear calls for packing the court again..right...even with a 9-0 decision...
there is no constitutional provision setting the number of justices. Maybe if you don’t like it, your christofascist scum shouldn’t have stolen two judgeships
You clearly don’t understand the case. That said, there is nothing important that has been newly decided where the trumpkin appointees don’t destroy the decision making process of the court. Trumpkins wouldn’t understand stare decisis if it bit them.Yep.....9-0 decision against the democrats......so now we are going to hear calls for packing the court again..right...even with a 9-0 decision...
there is no constitutional provision setting the number of justices. Maybe if you don’t like it, your christofascist scum shouldn’t have stolen two judgeships
You like all Dems are stupid mf's.You clearly don’t understand the case. That said, there is nothing important that has been newly decided where the trumpkin appointees don’t destroy the decision making process of the court. Trumpkins wouldn’t understand stare decisis if it bit them.Yep.....9-0 decision against the democrats......so now we are going to hear calls for packing the court again..right...even with a 9-0 decision...
there is no constitutional provision setting the number of justices. Maybe if you don’t like it, your christofascist scum shouldn’t have stolen two judgeships
Yep.....9-0 decision against the democrats......so now we are going to hear calls for packing the court again..right...even with a 9-0 decision...
So it is OK with you to for a fraud to inhabit the WH, but legally appointed justices are not. Get the fuck outta here commie.You clearly don’t understand the case. That said, there is nothing important that has been newly decided where the trumpkin appointees don’t destroy the decision making process of the court. Trumpkins wouldn’t understand stare decisis if it bit them.Yep.....9-0 decision against the democrats......so now we are going to hear calls for packing the court again..right...even with a 9-0 decision...
there is no constitutional provision setting the number of justices. Maybe if you don’t like it, your christofascist scum shouldn’t have stolen two judgeships
Na. All they have to do is justice Alito them all as they are all found in bed with a pillow over their collective faces.Yep.....9-0 decision against the democrats......so now we are going to hear calls for packing the court again..right...even with a 9-0 decision...
You don't understand why the supreme court has been ruling 9 to 0 recentlyYou clearly don’t understand the case. That said, there is nothing important that has been newly decided where the trumpkin appointees don’t destroy the decision making process of the court. Trumpkins wouldn’t understand stare decisis if it bit them.Yep.....9-0 decision against the democrats......so now we are going to hear calls for packing the court again..right...even with a 9-0 decision...
there is no constitutional provision setting the number of justices. Maybe if you don’t like it, your christofascist scum shouldn’t have stolen two judgeships