The US Supreme Court and its decisions

[Ironbite4]

VICTORY! VICTORY FOR STUDENT LOAN BORROWERS!

Supreme Court rejects bid to block major class-action settlement on student debt relief

Conservatives urged the court to take up the case, which addresses Biden’s power to cancel student debt

www.politico.com

Ironbite-now do Thomas.

 

[Ungnome]

While the court made the right decision in this case, I wouldn't claim victory on that issue just yet.

There's a large difference between a class action brought about due to borderline fraud and a ruling on an executive order removing large amounts of debts to legit organizations.

 

[NovaSaber]

Amy Coney Barrett's surprising remarks in Supreme Court religion case

Barrett questioned whether allowing a postal worker not to work Sundays could harm the morale of other employees.

www.newsweek.com

"I mean, you might have many religious people in a workplace seeking the same accommodation for Sundays off or - or other kinds of accommodations," Barrett said on Tuesday, according to a transcript of oral arguments released by the Court.

"And I guess it seems to me, as Justice Kavanaugh said, morale can be very important. It kind of seems to me that you're defining conduct of the business as the bottom line, like you want a dollar amount on it," she went on.

I don't like that she's arguing from "burden on employers" instead of in religious equality/neutrality, but the end result is still her being less actively opposed to equality than the plaintiff is, since he is arguing from "religious reasons should be privileged above personal reasons" instead of arguing for the right of any employee to specify days for any reason that their employer isn't allowed to schedule them for.

 

[Pocket]

I find it interesting that the Post Office will no longer make "special accommodation" for people who don't want to work Sundays, but they did make a "special accommodation" to a gigacorporation to deliver packages on Sundays, breaking a tradition of not operating on Sundays that had been in place for over two centuries.

I suppose it's academic now, since Amazon just has their own delivery fleet and doesn't need to rely on the Post Office or anyone else.

 

[Plutoniumboss]

Thing is, we're not talking about "The Post Office" in general, we're talking about a post office with maybe three or four workers. There is a reasonable argument to be made that accommodating him could and did cause undue hardship on the other workers.

 

[Paladin]

All 9 Supreme Court justices push back on oversight: 'Raises more questions,' Senate chair says

All nine Supreme Court justices, in a rare move, signed a joint statement rebutting proposals for independent ethics oversight, mandatory rules and greater transparency

abcnews.go.com

Burn it down.

 

[CoffeeHorse]

"The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office."

I can't find the part where it says "during good Behaviour as they alone define it, non-bindingly". Some level of oversight is implied.

 

[The Mighty Mollusk]

The motion is literally asking them to hold themselves accountable. Of course they're not gonna do it.

 

[MrBlud]

Checks and balances *are* important but the Supreme Court wants to check and balance the other branches but not let them check and balance it.

 

[Pocket]

And the thing is, we were all totally fine with it when they were mostly on our side.

 

[wonko the sane?]

Because when it favored our side; they weren't removing bodily autonomy for millions of citizens and over turning long standing precedents in favour of political agendas. Context is important man. You are perfectly able to operate a system without checks and balances... so long as the operators aren't blatantly and openly corrupt.

Edit: in the sentence "this is what's expected of you, but there is no oversight or consequences" progressives hear the first half, while republicans only hear the second half.

 

[MrBlud]

Even then, I’d want a Democratic Judge to resign if they were being as blatantly corrupt as Thomas.

 

[wonko the sane?]

Oh, no, obviously. Republicans are freaking out over the possibility of being held accountable and prosecuted for their crimes: when it's literally what people ******* want. You find a democrat or independent that broke the law? You are REQUIRED to prosecute them: they broke the ******* law. They've spent so long operating as if they were above the law that they functionally ARE now. Precedent is in favour of rich, white conservatives not having any consequences what so ever.

 

[NovaSaber]

Anti-abortion activists move focus to contraception: report

For decades, feminists have been warning that if the U.S. Supreme Court ever overturned Roe v. Wade, far-right Christian fundamentalists would go after contraception and the landmark Griswold v. Connecticut ruling as well. And sure enough, when the High Court overturned Roe in 2022 with its 5-4...

www.rawstory.com

For decades, feminists have been warning that if the U.S. Supreme Court ever overturned Roe v. Wade, far-right Christian fundamentalists would go after contraception and the landmark Griswold v. Connecticut ruling as well. And sure enough, when the High Court overturned Roe in 2022 with its 5-4 ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, Justice Clarence Thomas recommended that the High Court also "reconsider" Griswold.

Thomas is Catholic, not a Protestant evangelical. But like Justice Samuel Alito and the late Justice Antonin Scalia, he has been an ally of far-right evangelicals and a persistent critic of Roe and other right-to-privacy rulings.

 

[Patch]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1664645066957152256

 

[Pale Rider]

This news is huge and just may mean we're not screwed after all:

Supreme Court Rejects Radical GOP Argument In Shocking Decision

The court rejected the argument that only state legislatures have a say on redistricting and election laws.

www.huffpost.com

 

[Ungnome]

Nice to see the court having a broken clock moment.

 

[KidTDragon]

Guess the GOP's just gonna have to fall back on all their other voter suppression tactics.

 

[Dekafox]

https://www.npr.org/live-updates/supreme-court-affirmative-action-harvard-unc

Another 40-year precedent shot down.

 

[KidTDragon]

I was wondering how they were going to make it up to the GOP after the Moore vs. Harper ruling.