“The right-wing legal world is passionately committed to weakening the administrative state, the parts of the government that are charged with regulating corporate polluters, protecting workers’ rights, dictating public health policy and more.”
This is why Mitch placed all the federalist hacks on the Court. Abortion is an issue he doesn’t gone one shit about. Freeing corporate America to whatever the hell they want is the goal.
And guess what is the preferred outcome of those people paying 10 million a year to the wife of John Roberts?
Here is their plan B…
A 4-4 vote wouldn’t overturn the Chevron Doctrine.
And back in the Gilded Age we had bombings of financial centers, assassinations of Robber Barons and the like.
With more efficient weapons these days, should be good times! 2A solutions, AR-15!
Is this what they really want?
Truth and it’s been clear since the Clinton administration that work requirements don’t work in most aid programs generally even among those who are employable.
Proof positive once again that reich-wing legislators loves their cruelty even more when it’s specious and utterly gratuitous; i.e., contraindicated even by ‘centrist’ outfits like Milken Institute
Fun fact: originally, so was Nino.
This is the reason. The odds that her vote could have made a difference are small. And her recusal at this moment does offer a nice reminder to the public that Thomas didn’t recuse himself when his friend had business before the court.
This is another candidate for “should we just refuse to follow a Court order”. The very appealing line goes something like “we refuse to allow nine justices, the majority of whom were appointed and confirmed by politicians representing a minority of voters, arrogate to themselves power which rightfully belongs to the elected branches.”
Checks and balances are a real thing - and the founders anticipated that if the Supreme Court became drunk with power that the other two branches would simply refuse to listen to it.
But this is the sort of thing we need to prepare for… well, ideally years ago, but the second best time is now…
edit: grammar
Don’t you mean post-Lochner, pre-West Coast Hotel?
Lochner era, baby! Your big govt regulation takes away my rights to be oppressed, dammit.
Maybe we’d finally get gun control.
Does anyone here get the feeling that there are an awful lot of these “existential” cases before SCOTUS lately?
Traditionally, SCOTUS cases arose when A felt wronged by B, sued, and it ascended all the way up to the highest court. But since the radicalization of the GOP and the well-funded right-wing legal foundations, an increasing number of cases are “manufactured” for ideological purposes, with a straw litigant who’s been prepped to play the victim and file suit.
And, lo and behold, the newly right-wing court agrees to hear the cases.
Like everything else in the right-wing world, the cases at issue are a “manufactroversy” whose resolution is always intended to make life easier for billionaires and religious nuts.
The Dark Money interests are utilizing their purchased Supreme Court to continue their decades-long efforts to gut the Federal government. They can be stopped but it will take a lot of voters getting off their asses and electing Democrats.
For him his true passion is to allow corporations to donate unlimited funds to political campaigns. He’d probably sell his children for that.
And then expanding the court (h/t @txlawyer).
His children won’t go anywhere near him, because…
Hey… who needs the ATF anyway?
This asswipe got an AR style weapon. Entirely possible he got it at a gun store. With it he killed 5 people and I would be good money he is now in Mexico as the site of this shooting is not all that far from the border. Driving time 5 to 6 hours.
Deported multiple times
Busted for drunk driving
Who knows what other crimes?
Real nice guy
Destroying the American Republic from within. That is the Federalist Society’s ultimate goal.
This unfair claim does offers no insight into what motivates the RIght’s abject hypocrisy. The Right sees the government as controlled by special interests (i.e helping people who aren’t them), therefore the government is a bloated enterprise that is a fundamentally inefficient way to achieve core societal objectives (i.e., their core objectives.) They oppose government controls on business practices except when they want a government bailout or help to squash the competition. They want the government to stay out of people’s lives except when they want to control other people’s lives who have a different idea of how to lead their lives.
It’s a good thing to challenge agency power. Too often, Congress, who have no interest in doing the heavy lifting of government, pass laws that are very ambiguous, and leave it up to faceless bureaucrats to actually interpret what the laws say. Laws should be written so as not to require agency interpretation, simply what the law says. Yes, this will make for more work on the part of our Federal legislators, but they’re not doing anything anyway.
I was wondering (the article didn’t say) the reason for her recusal? Was this something she’d been involved on before her seating on the court?