Tariff ruling.

[candycorn]

You don’t understand the meaning of “sock,” either.

I do.

You don’t understand the meaning of changing them, integrity, etc...

 

[Robert W]

Do you mean the US deficit? That don't confront me, ie: not my problem.

You seem to me to be a decent person and let's move past this, please.

 

[BackAgain]

I do.

You don’t understand the meaning of changing them, integrity, etc...

Wrong again, you asshole.

“Sock” does not mean that a member has had two or more usernames.

“Sock” means a second (or more) current usernames.

Candyass, you’re retarded.

Also, a scumbag like you should never talk about “integrity.” You have none; and you don’t understand that term any better than your non-existent grasp on “sock.”

Seriously. Were you born brainless or did you have multiple serious traumatic injuries inflicted on your skull?

 

[j-mac]

Enjoy it while it lasts. Few others are.

I will…I figure the next 20 years ought to be wonderful…

 

[skews13]

With congressional approval only. That's what the Supremes were really trying to say. We have 3 equal branches of government. Don seems to be the only one that doesn't understand that.

And after a new majority is seated after the midterms. They not only don't get extended, but completely vanish. Then Trump is forced to veto a budget that gives everybody a refund right before the 28' elections.

There is no stupid like maga stupid.

 

[SweetTea]

6-3 decision.

Yes, Republican SCJs will break rank on occasion because they are thinking independently and doing their jobs. I don’t agree with the ruling of some of them, but at least they aren’t being purely partisan. Democrats NEVER do that. They are partisan sheep, just like Democratic voters.

 

[JoeB131]

Yes, Republican SCJs will break rank on occasion because they are thinking independently and doing their jobs. I don’t agree with the ruling of some of them, but at least they aren’t being purely partisan. Democrats NEVER do that. They are partisan sheep, just like Democratic voters.

More like, even they know that these tariffs are an economic disaster that will hurt US businesses, and they gave Trump a chance to gracefully save face, which he isn't taking.

 

[SweetTea]

More like, even they know that these tariffs are an economic disaster that will hurt US businesses, and they gave Trump a chance to gracefully save face, which he isn't taking.

Neat, except this ruling isn’t the only example of them not voting as a block. When is the last time the Democrats did that? Lemmings, all of them.

 

[pknopp]

Yes, Republican SCJs will break rank on occasion because they are thinking independently and doing their jobs. I don’t agree with the ruling of some of them, but at least they aren’t being purely partisan. Democrats NEVER do that. They are partisan sheep, just like Democratic voters.

Why Is Elena Kagan Suddenly Siding With the Conservatives?

The liberals suddenly seem divided. What’s going on?

slate.com

 

[JoeB131]

Neat, except this ruling isn’t the only example of them not voting as a block. When is the last time the Democrats did that? Lemmings, all of them.

Actually, liberal justices have sided with the conservatives many times.

The Liberal Justices Are Not A Monolith

And of the three, Justice Jackson is emerging as the most full-throated progressive, in the mold of Justices Brennan and Douglas.

davidlat.substack.com

These two cases embody differences between the liberals that can be seen within their jurisprudence more generally. Justice Kagan, the most moderate of the three, sided with the administration in both D.V.D. and AFGE. As for merits cases, i.e., those decided after full briefing and argument, she was in the majority 83 percent of the time in the Term just ended, according to SCOTUSblog—the highest percentage of the liberals, reflecting her willingness to side with the conservatives from time to time.

In methodological terms, Justice Kagan also diverged from her fellow liberals. Her D.V.D. concurrence reflected her general practice of “focus[ing] more directly on the law as it maps onto any given case,” as Dahlia Lithwick wrote in Slate—as opposed to situating each decision as part of a larger project, whether by the Trump administration or the conservative supermajority, that must be resisted.


The problem here is that this SHOULD have been a 9-0 ruling against Cheeto Hitler. The constitution is clear. The ability to raise tariffs and taxes lies solely with the Legislative Branch.

That three justices sided with the clearly unconstitutional position of the grabber (and not surprisingly, two of them had extensive records of sexual misconduct) shows how bad the system has gotten.

 

[SweetTea]

Why Is Elena Kagan Suddenly Siding With the Conservatives?

The liberals suddenly seem divided. What’s going on?

slate.com

Wow, you found ONE. Kudos to you.

 

[pknopp]

Wow, you found ONE. Kudos to you.

It noted 6 cases just recently.

 

[SweetTea]

The problem here is that this SHOULD have been a 9-0 ruling

And the ruling overturning Roe v Wake should have been a 9-0 ruling. See how that works?

 

[SweetTea]

It noted 6 cases just recently.

For s supposed Independent, you sure do take the side of Democrats on just about every issue.

 

[pknopp]

For s supposed Independent, you sure do take the side of Democrats on just about every issue.

I simply like to counter poor arguments.

P.S. I sided on the RvW ruling though my thoughts on that are more complicated than your narrow view of the world.

 

[JoeB131]

And the ruling overturning Roe v Wake should have been a 9-0 ruling. See how that works?

Only if you are a retard.

Can we still say retard here?

(Oh, it's Roe v. WADE, not Roe v. Wake)

Roe was decided by 5 REPUBLICAN and 2 DEMOCRATIC justices. REPUBLICAN justices upheld it for 50 years.

It's only when Trump stacked the court with Catholic fanatics that we got an insane ruling that has caused chaos and has actually caused the number of abortions to INCREASE.

This case was constitutionally pretty clear. Only Congress can impose taxes, not the President.

 

[imasnitch]

Just released. Trump can not issue tariffs.

Best link I can provide.

Homepage

Independent News & Analysis of the U.S Supreme Court

www.scotusblog.com

The Global cabal are plotting another assassination plot on Pres. Trump. This is what happened to Pres. William Mckinley that they created instabilities during his term. But back then they couldn't use racial or immigration crises to create instabilities. And after they have killed him, they collapsed the economy so they can bring in their new system the income tax that prevented the Global cabal from paying tariffs to the US when bringing their products to the US and they started printing American money which Congress used to control, but Congress gave them the power.
Trump can stop them from killing him that is if he does what they want him to do

 

[pknopp]

The Global cabal are plotting another assassination plot on Pres. Trump. This is what happened to Pres. William Mckinley that they created instabilities during his term. But back then they couldn't use racial or immigration crises to create instabilities. And after they have killed him, they collapsed the economy so they can bring in their new system the income tax that prevented the Global cabal from paying tariffs to the US when bringing their products to the US and they started printing American money which Congress used to control, but Congress gave them the power.
Trump can stop them from killing him that is if he does what they want him to do

Trump creates the instability.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Yes, Republican SCJs will break rank on occasion because they are thinking independently and doing their jobs. I don’t agree with the ruling of some of them, but at least they aren’t being purely partisan. Democrats NEVER do that. They are partisan sheep, just like Democratic voters.

Then you have Kavanaugh, the drunken, prostrated dick who writes a dissenting opinion that relies on pretending not to know that tariffs are taxes.

A strikingly odd opinion to write.

 

[Nostra]

More like, even they know that these tariffs are an economic disaster that will hurt US businesses, and they gave Trump a chance to gracefully save face, which he isn't taking.

Where is that recession you clowns predicted the tariffs would cause, Short Bus?