SCOTUS Shadow Docket Proves They Work For Trump

[Crepitus]

There’s no longer any doubt that the country’s highest court favors trump

So when a national injunction was issued against a trump law or EO, the court intervened 70% of the time.

Those injunctions BTW were issued by judges appointed by both sides of the aisle.

And when a Biden law or EO was challenged?

0% intervention.

Not once.

And every injunction was issued by a right wing judge. Most of them in texas.

Some pretty clear bias showing here.

 

[yidnar]

There’s no longer any doubt that the country’s highest court favors trump

So when a national injunction was issued against a trump law or EO, the court intervened 70% of the time.

Those injunctions BTW were issued by judges appointed by both sides of the aisle.

And when a Biden law or EO was challenged?

0% intervention.

Not once.

And every injunction was issued by a right wing judge. Most of them in texas.

Some pretty clear bias showing here.

 

[ReinyDays]

SCOTUS favors Big Business ... so does Trump ... why don't you? ...

These are publicly traded companies ... if you see SCOTUS as they are, then why don't you invest accordingly? ... instead of bitching about it to complete strangers on the internet? ...

 

[ThisIsMe]

There’s no longer any doubt that the country’s highest court favors trump

So when a national injunction was issued against a trump law or EO, the court intervened 70% of the time.

Those injunctions BTW were issued by judges appointed by both sides of the aisle.

And when a Biden law or EO was challenged?

0% intervention.

Not once.

And every injunction was issued by a right wing judge. Most of them in texas.

Some pretty clear bias showing here.

Scotus has also ruled against trump on several occasions

 

[j-mac]

There’s no longer any doubt that the country’s highest court favors trump

So when a national injunction was issued against a trump law or EO, the court intervened 70% of the time.

Those injunctions BTW were issued by judges appointed by both sides of the aisle.

And when a Biden law or EO was challenged?

0% intervention.

Not once.

And every injunction was issued by a right wing judge. Most of them in texas.

Some pretty clear bias showing here.

Think it might have something to do with the sheer volume of Lawfare dems have thrown at the wall?

And on a different note, in another thread today, we were all talking about conspiracy theories, and who throws them out there…From what I was told from my opponents, I have one question Creep, when did you become a RW’er?

 

[scruffy]

There’s no longer any doubt that the country’s highest court favors trump

That's okay, so does everyone else.

No one in their right mind is buying what the Democrats are trying to sell.

 

[Seymour Flops]

There’s no longer any doubt that the country’s highest court favors trump

So when a national injunction was issued against a trump law or EO, the court intervened 70% of the time.

Those injunctions BTW were issued by judges appointed by both sides of the aisle.

And when a Biden law or EO was challenged?

0% intervention.

Not once.

And every injunction was issued by a right wing judge. Most of them in texas.

Some pretty clear bias showing here.

Even if you are correct, how is that a shadow docket?

 

[Dr. Phosphorous]

There’s no longer any doubt that the country’s highest court favors trump

So when a national injunction was issued against a trump law or EO, the court intervened 70% of the time.

Those injunctions BTW were issued by judges appointed by both sides of the aisle.

And when a Biden law or EO was challenged?

0% intervention.

Not once.

And every injunction was issued by a right wing judge. Most of them in texas.

Some pretty clear bias showing here.

There is an obvious double standard here.

And SCOTUS is not even trying to hide it.

 

[Dr. Phosphorous]

That's okay, so does everyone else.

No one in their right mind is buying what the Democrats are trying to sell.

The law is not supposed to be partial to Republicans or Democrats, Nazi ****.

 

[Doc7505]

The law is not supposed to be partial to Republicans or Democrats, Nazi ****.

~~~~~~
that is hilarious coming from you after 4 years of Democrat lawfare and kangaroo courts persecuting Trump, concerned parents and Jan 6'ers.

 

[Dr. Phosphorous]

~~~~~~
that is hilarious coming from you after 4 years of Democrat lawfare and kangaroo courts persecuting Trump, concerned parents and Jan 6'ers.

There was no lawfare, simp. Trump broke the law because he is a traitor. The End.

 

[Leviticus]

The shadow docket should have been banned a long f****** time ago. The court should not be allowed to hear any case that has not been heard by a lower court. They should not be allowed to pick and choose specific things that they want to rule on that have not been brought them as part of an appeal.

 

[jackflash]

There’s no longer any doubt that the country’s highest court favors trump

So when a national injunction was issued against a trump law or EO, the court intervened 70% of the time.

Those injunctions BTW were issued by judges appointed by both sides of the aisle.

And when a Biden law or EO was challenged?

0% intervention.

Not once.

And every injunction was issued by a right wing judge. Most of them in texas.

Some pretty clear bias showing here.

View attachment 1134723

Pres. Trump has the SCOTUS in his pocket, that's WHY the U.S. district court justices tow the line for pres. Trump, or get humiliated senseless.

 

[g5000]

View attachment 1134723

When I see The Donald dancing to the gay anthem like that, it looks like he is masturbating two large penises to give himself a facial.

Once you see it, you can't unsee it.

 

[Rawley]

The shadow docket should have been banned a long f****** time ago. The court should not be allowed to hear any case that has not been heard by a lower court. They should not be allowed to pick and choose specific things that they want to rule on that have not been brought them as part of an appeal.

?? The Shadow Docket are appealed from lower Courts.

 

[Rawley]

There’s no longer any doubt that the country’s highest court favors trump

So when a national injunction was issued against a trump law or EO, the court intervened 70% of the time.

Those injunctions BTW were issued by judges appointed by both sides of the aisle.

And when a Biden law or EO was challenged?

0% intervention.

Not once.

And every injunction was issued by a right wing judge. Most of them in texas.

Some pretty clear bias showing here.

SO the Court left more injunctions in place against Trump than they did against Biden. And exactly how does that put them in Trump's pocket?

 

[Leviticus]

?? The Shadow Docket are appealed from lower Courts.

No they are not and that is the issue. Originally the supreme Court could only hear a case if it was ruled on by a lower court. First they were not allowed to hear original cases or make rulings on matters that were not previously injuticated by a lower court. Except on very specific instances. The shadow docket allows them to basically bring up any case they want to, regardless of whether it's been heard by a lower court or not and make rulings on them without even hearing arguments. Basically it allows the majority on the court to bring up whatever they want and rule however they want without any oversight or transparency.

 

[Rawley]

No they are not and that is the issue. Originally the supreme Court could only hear a case if it was ruled on by a lower court. First they were not allowed to hear original cases or make rulings on matters that were not previously injuticated by a lower court. Except on very specific instances. The shadow docket allows them to basically bring up any case they want to, regardless of whether it's been heard by a lower court or not and make rulings on them without even hearing arguments. Basically it allows the majority on the court to bring up whatever they want and rule however they want without any oversight or transparency.

Not sure where you are getting that. But they are called interlocutory appeals. An order is made by the lower court (adjudicated) which is appealed through the Circuit Court and up to the SC. It's not like the randomly pick issues out of the air.

 

[whitehall]

The Court does what it's paid to do and that's interpreting the Constitution.

 

[Crepitus]

View attachment 1134723

It's not winning when you cheat.