Yes by all means letâs legislate CYA (cover your a$$) in the courtsâŚpoor babies and their âreputationsââŚ
Still bitter he couldnât make bank off the Coke-pubes accusation.
Itâs a shame you have to go to law school to understand how truly, deeply weird Thomasâ jurisprudence, such as it is and what there is of it, really is.
Awful idea. But if they did loosen libel laws, I wonder how much Hillary could collect from right-wing media outlets.
So, Coke-Can Thomas wants to weaken NY Times v. Sullivan so pubic - er public - figures can more easily sue when their reputations are damaged. Canât imagine why heâd be interested in such a thing. He probably wants to whittle away at that whole âtruth is an absolute defenseâ thing and get rid of any consideration of comedy, parody, sarcasm, and free speech.
New libel rule: If I get butt-hurt, I can sue your ass.
What a great idea! Nobody would have ever been able to report about Russia because they wouldnât have had rock-solid evidence in hand to defend their publishing in court.
"âThe states are perfectly capable of striking an acceptable balance between encouraging robust public discourse and providing a meaningful remedy for reputational harm,â
HAHAHAHAHA!!! Yeah rightâŚthe balance: blue states continue to follow the current state of common sense jurisprudence while red states quickly enact legislation making it super easy for public officials to sue for libel and win.
ââŚdo not comport with the meaning of the Constitution at the time it was adopted.â
How can these âStrict Constitionalistsâ ever square reverence for their fantasy of 18th-century Virginia with the reality of Trumpâs America?
OK, trick question, they actually do not even try.
So has Ginny been hanging out with POtuS again lately?
How did Danforth ever think this hack was fit for the Supreme Court?
âThe states are perfectly capable of striking an acceptable balance between encouraging robust public discourse and providing a meaningful remedy for reputational harm,â he wrote.
Yes, of course. Because speech is limited by state boundaries and conservatives honestly want to protect themselves against fifty different libel laws.
Seriously, the problem isnât just that they define âStates Rightsâ as more important than anything while insisting that âoriginalismâ means they can ignore precedent, but that they DONâT actually believe any of this. Not a day goes by that conservatives donât rant about what liberals do in liberal states, because what they really want is to be Absolute Kings over the whole country and everything else is a rationalization.
Wealth management is the only tenet of the Conservative Movement.
Well, a hypocrite must have some defense for his behavior.
Is he hoping Agent Orange will appoint him chief of staff? After all, if Jared and Mulvaney can hold more than one job, why canât Clarence?
See Bush v. Gore, theyâll find a way around thatâŚ
So Sleeping Beauty wakes up after decades and the first thing he says is how the powerful should be made more so because how would anything else be fair? Go back to sleep, fella. Your nomination was a nasty joke and I think you know it. No need to prove it more than is already evident.
So Justice Thomas how are the 50 states going to individually regulate the internet?
âWe should not continue to reflexively apply this policy-driven approach to the Constitution,â Thomas wrote in a 14-page opinion that no other justice joined."
Who is more corrupt and nuts, Ginny Thomas or Clarence Thomas?? Survey says???