By way of background, this attorney (Mooppan) in defense of the Muslim ban made the argument before the 9th Circuit that aunts/uncles and grandparents do not constitute ‘close familial relationships’, causing one justice to remark – out of the gate during oral argument – “what universe does that come from?”
8 Likes
Church Lady sez “Well isn’t that special? Then who should rule on this? Let me see, who could it be…SATAN?!?”.
Apparently, yes, and he’s already made it clear what his position is on the matter. Tremendously, tremendously clear. So sad.
Seriously, though, he’s making all but impossible for Roberts to have his back, because to rule in favor of Satan, er Trump would be to render the courts’ power moot on all such and similar issues, and he’s not about to do that. In fact for him to rule thusly would be self-contradictory, because such a ruling itself requires the courts to have the power to rule over such disputes.
Who’s coming up with these crazyass legal theories for Trump, Jared?
6 Likes
Oh, they’re that alright—and pretty brazen in their lying, too.
2 Likes
No, you’re insulting stupid people by calling these people stupid. They inhabit a whole new level of idiocy yet to be named or properly researched. People who drive the wrong way onto a highway off ramp are stupid. These folks, though, I don’t even know what to call them.
Trumpid? Trumpiots? Trumpans? Trumpiciles?
5 Likes
The one in which (spoiler alert!!!) re-animating Palpatine without explanation and that ridiculous ReyLo kiss makes sense. Thankfully it was a long time ago and far, far away.
1 Like
What they’re actually doing is forcing the Roberts court to shred the modern imperial presidency, GOP version, because it’s either that or render the courts and themselves to permanent irrelevancy. You couldn’t come up with a dumber legal strategy if you tried. This is way beyond overreach. This is like an event horizon of stupid. This is like eating yourself alive. This is like leaving Hannibal Lecter alone for too long in a room with no food, except maybe some chianti. Have at it, morons.
9 Likes
Does seem a lot like shooting yourself in the foot but I’ve seen tRump appointed judges apparently have no problem giving up their authority and purview and shredding their robes to appease this jackass.
Exhibit A:
3 Likes
Best short description of the Trump administration and the GOP in general I’ve read in three years.
You win the interwebs for the day.
5 Likes
There aren’t enough of them yet to make this work and in any case it all ends up with SOTUS, and even if Thomas, Alito and the 2 illegitimate justices (actually, Alito was illegitimate too because Bush II was an illegitimate president) rule in favor, I just don’t see how Roberts does too. Push come to shove, he’s going to do what’s best for the courts and his own independence. If he doesn’t, we are officially no longer a constitutional republic, with him as a rubber stamp and cheerleader for a man he surely knows is his intellectual inferior by orders of magnitude.
6 Likes
I try. Also, I just spent some time in Israel and France, where teh stoopid’s been known to thrive (neither Macron nor Bibi are unintelligent, but they’re both stupid). I am versed in the ways of idiocy.
3 Likes
Marbury v. Madison , 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803), was a U.S. Supreme Court case that established the principle of judicial review in the United States, meaning that American courts have the power to strike down laws, statutes, and some government actions that violate the Constitution of the United States. Decided in 1803, Marbury remains the single most important decision in American constitutional law.[1] The Court’s landmark decision established that the U.S. Constitution is actual “law”, not just a statement of political principles and ideals, and helped define the boundary between the constitutionally separate executive and judicial branches of the American form of government.
7 Likes
Roberts is too careful about his reputation and his legacy to let this go south.
He’ll brave the slings and arrows from the right and vote with the liberals on this one—partly for the reasons I mentioned, and partly to preserve the power of the federal courts.
6 Likes
Discussing anything with discobot is pointless.
Just sayin’.
2 Likes
I hope you’re both right about Roberts. I’m quietly freaking out this is all going to shit in a hurry and nothing is gonna stop this trumptrain. I also pray Notorious RBG is pacing herself judiciously, staying as centered and healthy as she can possibly be in the meantime. Sorry but as soon as 2020 hit, instead of optimism, gloom seemed to set in.
6 Likes
I am worried about France.
For selfish reasons of course, but still, genuinely worried.
2 Likes
I spent a few days in Paris and the transit strike was awful. Had to walk miles because stations and lines were closed. I managed and Paris is the sort of city you need to walk in to enjoy, but I was with my mother who’s getting on in years and it wasn’t easy for her. I planned this months ago for her birthday and it never occurred to me that there might be strikes around the holidays.
Personal inconvenience aside, it doesn’t speak well of France’s internal politics that such a standoff could occur and last for so long, with neither side willing to budge. This is an open invitation for La Pen to step in as a “savior”, which would be vastly worse for workers. Not saying they should cave to Macron, a petulant and imperious neoliberal, but if this isn’t resolved, it’s not going to go well for France.
I wonder if Frexit is next?
2 Likes
Fine, then let’s go on precedence from the Clinton Impeachment. RECALL: Susan McDougal did 18mos in the fed slammer for not kowtowing to a Republican subpoena to testify. Time to put McGhan, Bolton, Mulvaney, et alia, in a penitentiary to soften them up and so effect some “learned helplessness.” Why is this so hard for Congress to do right now?
7 Likes
DIdn’t Jack Sheldon cover this in Schoolhouse Rock? Guess Barr’s DOJ missed that day?
Wish I shared your optimism. Hope you’re right.
Yeah but there are legal schools and theories that hold that MvM was wrongly decided or at least didn’t establish JR, based on the assertion that a branch can’t be allowed to determine the nature and extent of its powers, especially those not explicitly enumerated and specified in the constitution. I don’t subscribe to this theory, nor do most actual constitutional experts, and even if one did subscribe to it, it’s kind of too late to put that genie back in the bottle. But it’s out there, and there are those who are determined to make it the prevailing constitutional theory, and thus effectively undo 200 years of judicial rulings. I think that Barr is one of its adherents. These people are radicals, and in my view pretty much insane, akin to Dominionists and Opus Dei types (of which Barr is too, I believe), and they’re hell-bent on prevailing, and are now using Trump to try to make it happen. Hopefully Roberts isn’t one of them, or we’re in trouble. I suspect that he isn’t, or, used to be, but, now as chief justice, realizes that it would destroy his power and render the courts moot. Ego and self-preservation may well save us.
Just as the framers envisioned and intended.
1 Like