Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Mainboard' started by harvey birdman, Dec 8, 2015.
ok bub, let them have even more of a stranglehold on us I'm sure your fancy new people will get the ball to start the 2nd half.
If you think that’s foolish, what till you here about this thing they call “the Bible”
Appreciate yours and wes' responses.
Thomas and Alito are such shitheals. Those two fuckheads need to croak
So their solution to “what about Chicago” is to turn every city into what they believe Chicago to be?
Thank you for the pointers for those of us who have never lived somewhere where this is something we run into.
If I spot someone carrying, I’m probably walking out of that store, no matter how bad I need that latte.
Won't be Chicago because there will be so many good guys with guns that bad guys with guns will be too afraid to commit crimes.
A lot of states are going to do this when roe is overturned
But that won’t be ignoring a ruling. That proposed Dobbs opinion isn’t going to ban abortion. States can still offer it?
Or are you saying starting with that, they’ll ignore rulings in future?
it will be an obvious partisan ruling that it will give way for states to ignore these 9 psychos
If the draft is indeed the final decision, states will be granted the ability to create their own laws regarding abortion, so it’s not analogous to this situation. Here, blue states would need to either ignore (highly unlikely) this new precedent or, create new laws that try to skirt it (more likely but ultimately futile until the constitution of the SC changes). This is going to get a lot uglier with an R president.
Im also pretty sure the next step in the fight against abortion rights is a federal ban and criminalization. It was too far a leap even for this court in the current climate, but it’s coming.
They’ll try a national ban, but btwn the few pro-choice GOP senators, and those that didn’t really care that much and didn’t want to catch the car, I doubt they ever pass one.
you sweet summer child
There's absolutely no way they wouldn't nuke the filibuster and get 51 senators to pass a national ban. Dems are going to likely lose the House in just a few months, you can bitch about Biden "not being able to do anything about Manchin" but huge swaths of people are unmotivated to vote now and they aren't seeing shit that is getting them excited.
I mean, Article III and such.
States ignoring the highest Federal court would lead to a Constitutional crisis, obviously, and then God-knows-what with the Executive Branch enforcing the Court's decisions.
Collins and Murkowski are both pro-choice. Neither would vote to create a ban. And then you have people like McConnell, who I doubt care very much either way, who won’t want to do it for the politics of it. Could cause a huge backlash.
no they arent lol jesus man cmon
Are we still doing this shit in 2022?
those 2 will do whatever the national party tells them to do.
If they were actually Pro-Choice, they would have voted down justice nominees who were clearly anti choice.
Yes they are. And they also both only get elected because they get votes from people who don’t generally vote GOP. Alaska may be red, but the right win in Alaska hates Murkowski. And Collins is never winning a ranked choice election in Maine after voting for a national ban. Both of their election prospects would depend on them voting against. It’s a no-brainer.
Agreed. I think Collins has learned her lesson.
Lookit, I'm in favor of breaking the entire country up with hard, physical borders between the various fiefdoms that would emerge from an orgy of blood and violence (think India / Pakistan in the late 40s), but I'm going ahead and guess that most people in this country don't feel that way.
Hey, I can’t stand her. Just her voice makes me want to kill myself. But she knows how to get elected as an R in a blue state. Voting for that ain’t it.
Now hey, GOP gets 55+ Senate seats and dethrones McConnell with Rick “Voldemort” Scott and all bets are off.
I don’t think a future ban is going to come from the legislative branch. It’s going to be a legal challenge and it’s going to end up decided by this SC. From there, gridlock in congress is going to prevent a codification of a right to an abortion. It’ll be exactly what we are seeing with any REAL gun reform (I think the bipartisan bill is a step in the right direction but woefully inadequate)
No question a Republican executive would send in the national guard and cut all federal funding.
Depends. Whose blood is getting spilled in this hypothetical orgy?
Right. They would arrest the governors of whatever states weren't enforcing the will of the Supreme Court and charge them with Treason under Article III, Section III.
Any citizens in open defiance of their edicts would be arrested or shot. Simple as that.
Mostly poor people's, like in every conflict.
Sounds about right. As a former poor, I’m not okay with this.
I say, give them what they really want. These fucks were unable to live with the outcome of the Civil War and havent moved on. You wanna leave the union? By all means, go ahead. Red states are a drag on blue states economically and culturally.
the thing is though, the cultural divide in this country is much more rural / urban than say Alabama vs. Maryland. Eastern shore Maryland or the hills surrounding Cumberland are as conservative and ruby red as anywhere in the deep south. And there are progressive islands in the cities and inner suburbs in these oceans of red states.
I don't know how you fix this. Our entire form of governance is obsolete and barely functioning.
It’s not. But the media is playing it out that way. Here is the CNN headline:
Supreme Court limits ability to enforce Miranda rights
Weird that slave owners would view themselves as gods
yeah, I'm sure the SC determining that the cops don't have to inform people they detain of their 5th Amendment rights won't be something that is totally abused by justice system in this country.
I'm sure everyone the po-po coerce confessions out of will be able to afford competent lawyers who will be able to suppress all such statements when the prosecution attempts to enter it into evidence. I'm sure the right wing judges hearing such cases will be sympathetic to... idk... right out of law school public defenders of, idk, immigrants or someone else not fully aware of their rights.
Look -- this isn't an Earth shattering decision, but it's a further chipping away of the rule of law in this country.
this country has been in decline for a while but the last 6 years it has picked up a pace I didn’t think was possible
The law previously was that if the police do not let the defendant know of their Miranda rights any statements taken from them are inadmissible. That is still the law. This case simply states there is no private cause of action against the police officer for not reading them their Miranda rights. The defendant still has the same rights.
This case simply does not create a new tort and is consistent with already established law. If you want to argue there should be a tort that’s different but they haven’t taken away something that I don’t believe previously existed.
That’s not what it does, if I read it correctly. It just eliminates civil liability for the failure.
Or am I reading it wrong?
Still part of a decades long mission by SCOTUS to ensure you have no remedy if your rights are violated by the government. Which basically means the rights don't exist. Exclusionary rule aside
Didn't want to get lapped by the speeding degradation of the climate.
Right. My point is without any risk to themselves from civil tort, they're going to abuse the fuck out of this without any recourse for the accused. And that means more evidence that underfunded and sometimes ill equipped defense attorneys will have to suppress and more innocent people who will end up in our prison system.
This court is basically creating a system where the cops can do whatever they want without any check to their power. (*I'm sure the cynics will jump in here and point out that they can pretty much do what they want already, but still.)
Centuries long mission.
Except whence a police officer previously had some fear of repercussions aside from the statement not being admissible in court, now they can roll the dice.
Can't wait until tomorrow (or maybe Friday or next week) when the court dismantles the EPA. Feels like that's going to be a doozy too.