U.S. Supreme Court: Post-Nino Edition

Awful but I expected this outcome.

yup, ever since Gorsuch this was the likely conclusion.

THANKS OBAMA

at least it was delayed for a little while and this ruling came out just in time for the midterms

They overturned Korematsu in the travel ban case, which is horrifying.

Horrifying because it's a complete fake out, let's be clear.

It’s amazing how much bullshit was set aside back then with the underfunding that Hillary Clinton would definitely win

In rejecting Korematsu, majority basically gave the green light to "hey, Islam isn't a RACE" forever, and go ahead and replace "Islam" with any vulnerable group of your choice.

lets not forget that Maverick vowed that the GOP would block any Hillary nomination for four years

Justice Kennedy's tl;dr seems to be "It's legal, but please stop doing this stuff" pic.twitter.com/bFSNPmyxUa

— Benjy Sarlin (@BenjySarlin) June 26, 2018

xposts
underfunding = understanding, whoops

lets not forget that Maverick vowed that the GOP would block any Hillary nomination for four years

i had actually forgotten about this. jfc

good news is he'll be dead soon!

lol

What the GOP did in blocking Obama's last SCOTUS appointment was outrageous, but those assuming Merrick Garland would have voted to invalidate Trump's travel ban are making assumptions inconsistent with his judicial record https://t.co/EbcQy7q9eI pic.twitter.com/Ba42kfl4s8

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) June 26, 2018

In that case, Dems and liberals should all have endorsed John Roberts -- he occasionally votes with the lib justices!

Xxp Ready for Justce Stephen Miller?

I really don't give a shit what Glenn Greenwald thinks about counterfactual situations tbh

In an alternate universe something bad might happen, it is true.

GG isn't the poster boy for contrarian thinking like he thinks he is

Glenn Greenwald's constant drone of well-actuallying the libs is getting extremely tedious

There are times when it's worth pointing out a hypocrisy or inconsistency, but the way he does it is just enervating and pointless

"getting"?

Somehow an actual lawyer pic.twitter.com/ZXIGN8HJTp

— Quinoa🖕Appropriator (@MattAlwaysWrong) June 26, 2018

obama almost definitely not have gotten away with it, but i bet if you gave him a crystal ball he would've tried to pack the court.

too bad crystal balls are make-believe, they could've helped a lot!

it's a lot more expedient to criticize him for mishandling the Garland situation. He unquestionably should've recess-appointed him and dared the GOP to try to remove him from the court.

Who could ever have foreseen the GOP would return to power at some point and ruthlessly exercise it

you're crazy if you think that he could've gotten a 60-vote majority on a tenth justice, let alone an eleventh

the only precedent of attempted court-packing in american history happened when the most popular president of all time, the one who was elected to four terms, couldn't make it work with a massive majority in a time of even greater crisis than 2009

didn't he have a filibuster-proof majority for a hot minute, or do I have that wrong

he would have if one of the senators in that majority wasn't Joe Lieberman

i have a hard time thinking that he would've been able to convince the Feinsteins, Schumers, and Feingolds of the senate to vote for court-packing

He had a veto-proof majority from mid '09 till January 2010.

back in those doe-eyed early days of the obama administration when we all thought we would enter a golden era of bipartisan cooperation

a shame Obama couldn't wave that magic wand!

I can sort of forgive the Chuck Schumers of the world for being Chuck Schumers in 2009, I just can't forgive them for being them in 2018.

back in those doe-eyed early days of the obama administration when we all thought we would enter a golden era of bipartisan cooperation

lol

Aside from bipartisan BS, court packing is several layers away from obama stylings even with giant crystal balls.

Janus decision tomorrow 😖

Yeah we know how thats gonna go

really

Expectation is it will hurt my employer big time. Inside take TK tmw after we all report to the mothership.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Supreme Court rules states can't force government workers to pay union fees, a setback for organized labor

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) June 27, 2018

So glad money is speech.

http://thehill.com/sites/default/files/styles/thumb_small_article/public/mcconnellmitch_gorsuchneil.jpg?itok=SJiqaVek

So what happens now? Like what changes for government unions -- do they ask everyone to fill out a form first before they can collect dues and give people the chance to opt out or what?

and the non-union members enjoy the benefits they didn't pay for

amazingly enough, only around 1/3 of government employees are unionized

xp yeah I get the free-ride aspect, but what is the practical mechanism by which this actually reduces govt unionization? What happens at the ground level?

lowers union revenues, likely contributes to the overall lowering of union acceptance/viability in the workplace

these guys doing a bang up job of late . fuck

CONSERVATIVES: If you want something, work hard and pay for it.
ALSO CONSERVATIVES: You should be able to benefit from union negotiations without paying dues.

i fucking hate this week