Supreme Court Decisions Expected Today

[struth]

What isn’t very bright is YOU commenting on a case you know nothing about. Especially Especially considering that the argument is definitely based on whether the program falls under a 2001 emergency student debt relief program law

Before you accuse others of not being very bright, I suggest you read up on the arguments.

Supreme Court student loan case: The arguments explained

How does the student loan forgiveness plan work? And how did the issue wind up before the Supreme Court? Here's what you need to know.

apnews.com

You have to be dumber than several sacks of hammers to continually call other people stupid on topics you know nothing about. Especially given how easy it would be to verify the claims before you put open your mouth wider and stick the other foot in.

haha the 2001 Heroes Act dealt with service men and women…the President issued an EO telling the Sec of Education to expand that to cover non service men and women to cancel their debt.

 

[HeyNorm]

Individuals are who are being banned.

Go ahead, change the subject all you want. And cosplay as well. I won’t play along with either.

 

[pknopp]

Go ahead, change the subject all you want. And cosplay as well. I won’t play along with either.

No clue what you are rambling about.

 

[HeyNorm]

No clue what you are rambling about.

Yes you do. It how your lame game is played. Now go cosplay elsewhere.

 

[Dragonlady]

No. It's not "just like" that at all. DeSantis is passing laws to do this, via government - thus violating equal rights. Despite the ambitions of liberals, businesses are not government, and no one's rights are being violated. They're just people, running their business as they see fit.

“Seeing fit” doesn’t give you the right to refuse service because you don’t like the colour of someone’s skin, their religion, or accent.

 

[BS Filter]

The Supreme Court will continue its campaign to strip individual rights

Like what?

 

[BS Filter]

“Seeing fit” doesn’t give you the right to refuse service because you don’t like the colour of someone’s skin, their religion, or accent.

How about no shirt, no shoes, no service.

 

[dblack]

“Seeing fit” doesn’t give you the right to refuse service because you don’t like the colour of someone’s skin, their religion, or accent.

Why not? And why just those? Surely there are other objectionable opinions you'd like to ban, eh?

 

[dblack]

Why not? And why just those? Surely there are other objectionable opinions you'd like to ban, eh?

Also, if it should be illegal for a business owner to discriminate, should the customers be held to the same standards? Should it be illegal for someone to drive across town to buy groceries because the local store is "ethnically diverse"? Should it be illegal for customers to avoid the cake store that always has the rainbow flag up - because they are, however irrationally, afraid of gays?

 

[dblack]

“Seeing fit” doesn’t give you the right to refuse service because you don’t like the colour of someone’s skin, their religion, or accent.

Accent??

 

[OKTexas]

Maybe. Cowards should have ruled when they had the chance.

Looks like we actually agree on something. Did hell just freeze over?

.

 

[OKTexas]

I agree with every word in your post except the comparison of car pmts and mortgages to student loan debts. The banks secured your car and home loans with assets that they can repossess. There is nothing to repossess from a deadbeat student/graduate.

Student loans are secured by every tax refund the deadbeat ever hopes to get. And the IRS can go after other assets as well.

.

 

[OKTexas]

All too often the people that were refused service were refused because of race, religion or sexual orientation.

Just like Ron DeSantis is banning books about being black or Hispanic or Asian or gay. He’s not banning books about being straight and white.

Wow, the lying foreign commie ***** strikes again. DeSantis hasn't banned any books. The FL legislature has chosen not to have them available to children where they would be age inappropriate. They are still in publication and still available for sale in the State.

.

 

[GMCGeneral]

Sarah Huckabee is not a protected group

Doesn't matter. Businesses have the ABSOLUTE right to pick and choose clientele.

 

[dblack]

Doesn't matter. Businesses have the ABSOLUTE right to pick and choose clientele.

They sure as hell should have. Liberals, however, don't think people doing business should have rights. But they don't want anyone "doing business" in the first place. Everything should be government.

 

[rightwinger]

Doesn't matter. Businesses have the ABSOLUTE right to pick and choose clientele.

Where have you been the last 50 years?

 

[rightwinger]

They sure as hell should have. Liberals, however, don't think people doing business should have rights. But they don't want anyone "doing business" in the first place. Everything should be government.

Businesses need to follow the laws to stay in business
They don’t get to pick and choose.
Refusing a patron because of race, religion, nationality or sexuality is one of those laws

 

[justoffal]

A business is not a person.
The owner is free to hate gays.

But if his business is open to the public, it must accommodate the whole public

”We don’t serve Negroes” is no longer allowed

Somewhat apples and oranges. Whereas not everyone has the same skin color everyone does indeed possess a genetic sex. So there's really no discrimination here... Since the person refusing the service is not looking at the skin color he is merely exercising his right not to propagate a sexual habit that he disagrees with. There is no discrimination here.

 

[berg80]

To paraphrase the majority's opinion, "Let's keep the advantage in college admissions where it belongs, with white kids."

 

[Concerned American]

Doesn't matter. Businesses have the ABSOLUTE right to pick and choose clientele.

Tell the bakers and florists that.