Supreme Court Puts On Hold Judge’s Order That Census Count Must Continue | Talking Points Memo

discobot · October 13, 2020, 8:52pm

The Supreme Court has put on hold a federal judge’s order that data collection must continue in the 2020 census through the end of the month.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1338262

maximus · October 13, 2020, 8:54pm

The proverbial handwriting is on the Wall…

josephebacon · October 13, 2020, 8:57pm

Yep, the fix is in with the completely corrupted court.

pablointhegazebo · October 13, 2020, 9:00pm

Sort of puts a finer point on the charade going on with Amy Covid Barrett.

enn · October 13, 2020, 9:00pm

Not sure it matters. The whole census will need re-done anyway.

filmknight · October 13, 2020, 9:01pm

I got real tired of all the arguments about “That’ll never happen - Roberts won’t want to tarnish his reputation/reputation of the court” - whenever I was arguing that the fix was in, regarding ANY of tRumps shennanigans.

Bullshit.

Welcome to the Courts of Chaos.

Biden must balance this court - priority one. Everything else can wait if we get the senate. Otherwise, everything else is in jeopardy.

mattinpa · October 13, 2020, 9:02pm

So much for the theory that the court, protective of its reputation, might steer toward the middle.

@filmknight thinking alike I see

jinnj · October 13, 2020, 9:04pm

The Supreme Court has indefinitely put on hold the 2020 Presidential Election
citing - “this just does not seem be the right time to do this sort of thing”
… “maybe in a few years… perhaps”

maximus · October 13, 2020, 9:05pm

I don’t care how many polls are showing Biden with a bigly lead.

Don’t be complacent, vote like our lives depend on it.

It does.

anon84323658 · October 13, 2020, 9:06pm

These Mutha-frukers.

And… Mrs Covid has stated Roe v Wade isn’t one-of-those Precedent-Setting cases…so there we have it…bye-bye Roe v Wade in about 5.4.3.2…

benthere · October 13, 2020, 9:07pm

So the vote was 7-1?? What?? Really??

serendipitoussomnambulist · October 13, 2020, 9:07pm

Two-bit Trump family whores and jackbooted thugs.

inversion · October 13, 2020, 9:07pm

I’d love to know why Kagan voted with the majority.

closet_luddite · October 13, 2020, 9:09pm

I think we might need to add 8 seats, not 4

bdtex · October 13, 2020, 9:11pm

Someone help me wrap my brain around the GOP strategy. This has gotta be about targeting urban centers in the redistricting process. That much I know. It seems likely to hurt some red states too though.

benthere · October 13, 2020, 9:11pm

And Breyer too.

jtx · October 13, 2020, 9:12pm

They didnt say that she did, only one judge gave a dissenting opinion. It is also a temporary stay while the lower court makes its decision.

emiliano4 · October 13, 2020, 9:12pm

Yeah…it’s a two-thing deal.

(1) It shows dramatically what we need to do

(2) It puts into more focus the voting task we have before us

I’ll be blunt:

Trump has not taken our free will. If every person able to vote does vote for Joe and the down ticket candidates, we cannot lose.

ncsteve · October 13, 2020, 9:13pm

I would like to take this opportunity to once again tell every person who responded to my 2016 social media pleas not to vote third party because control of the courts for a generation was at stake by calling it “scaremongering” to go fuck themselves.

enn · October 13, 2020, 9:14pm

It’s not just SCOTUS, a lot of lower levels have begged for additional judges.

https://ballotpedia.org/Current_federal_judicial_vacancies

There are 59 current Article III vacancies in the federal judiciary of 870 total Article III judgeships. Including non-Article III judges from the United States Court of Federal Claims and the United States territorial courts, there are 64 vacancies out of 890 active federal judicial positions.