The Supreme Court discussion thread

Democrats are trying to convince Sotomayor to retire from the court at 70 , and fill the seat in the lame duck session before they lose control of presidency + senate, in the offchance she has to retire (or dies) during the next Trump term (which would destroy democrats' chances of getting back a SCOTUS majority for a generation ).

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/pla...

If only someone had convinced RBG that she wasn't immortal. I actually see women wearing shirts celebrating her, not realizing that her hubris destroyed her legacy.

That would be wisdom, not hubris.

And completely fair, considering what the Republicans pulled in 2016.

I have a feeling we'll be needing this.

Bump.

lol...

only if someone complains under the GUISE of self serving righteousness.

I have no idea what that means, but whatever.

disastrous psychotic decision by SCOTUS

https://x.com/joshgerstein/status/189728...

BREAKING: #SCOTUS, in 5-4 decision, declines Trump administration request to lift judge's order requiring immediate payout of about $2B for prior foreign aid work. Roberts & Barrett side w/lib appointees. Other GOP noms dissent

It's psychotic to think that the government should pay its bills for services already ordered and received?

I can see why Trump might think so, as his personal business practices always included stiffing people who worked for him, but most people who support market capitalism think that enforcement of contracts is pretty important.

Imagine that, multiple failed appeals and a court order are needed to make Trump pay government bills for work already completed. Lol, at it being a psychotic decision.

There’s like a 75% chance this still won’t get paid, imo.

Everything about how this has gone indicates that they cut off all these payments with a hatchet, have no idea how to turn them back on, and will just keep delaying and delaying. Unless you think it’s actually true that Marco Rubio sat there and went through hundreds of contracts and made individualized decisions about each one.

Aren’t you self-employed?

What would your reaction be if you performed work for a client and then afterwards they said - sorry we have new ownership, we’re not going to pay that out?

pretty sure luc works for usaid

Can you explain why you believe this decision is psychotic?

Luciom doesn't understand that this decision largely was the result of an own goal by Trump's Justice Department.

Well, to be brutally honest, she is a Justice.
So BFD... it's 2bil. that's sofa cushion money.
Much ado about nothing.

Because an inappellable TRO shouldn't be allowed to force a payment which can't be guaranteed to be recouped if litigation proves the payment wasn't actually due.

It's a travesty to allow TROs to have such scope. I stand by the minority opinion on that, a huge violation of the rule of law was allowed to happen. Alito was really on fire explaining why that's the case

Like I said, you don't understand the own goal.

Who is "she"?

That I go and litigate that, I wouldnt expect a judge to be allowed to force them to pay immediately "then we sort it out" while I can spend all the money and then have none to return if it's found out that I wasn't actually right to request that payment.

And that would actually never happen in civil litigation, at most they force some escrow of the money.

You are allowed to give your take on this

The traitor who is siding with liberals more and more often

OK. She is one of five justices who voted in the majority, and not the only GOP appointee. Why are you focused on her?

LOL at "traitor." Is she supposed to make what she believes to be the correct decision or is she just supposed to side reflexively with the administration that appointed her?