She shouldn’t resign now. They would find a way to delay a replacement confirmation easily with less than two months to go.
If she was going to resign it should have been 9 months ago.
18 Likes
Yeah it would be absolutely insane for her to resign right now. Republicans would pull every trick in the book to delay confirmation. I don’t think they’re even scheduled to reconvene until November 25. And they’re scheduled to end the session on December 20. That’s not a lot of time to vet a replacement, nominate them, hold hearings, and schedule a vote. Even a delay of a couple of days for some bullshit reason could prevent confirming a replacement, and then we would be good and fucked. And unlike Democrats, Republicans have no qualms about making up bullshit reasons to cause a delay.
20 Likes
12 Likes
Looks like nothing new there, just something that’s already become the same old same old? (I don’t see anything tempting enough in that box to click through and read.) 
8 Likes
He’s just saying they should just go ahead and drop all the cases because there’s no way any of them will hold up now after the immunity ruling. So just save time and trouble and drop them now. It’s a defeatist attitude, but he’s not wrong.
9 Likes
“Let them use Starlink!”
14 Likes
12 Likes
Ooh, lemme guess, and then go read it. Thomas and Alito, for sure. I’ll put Gorsuch and Roberts in the maybe category. Kavanaugh…50/50. ACB, KBJ, Sotomayor, and Kagan in favor of ethics enforcement. Ok, now I’ll go check…
ETA: Pretty much. Gorsuch was apparently the ring leader of the no ethics rules group. Interesting. He’s hard to pin down to a consistent ideology sometimes.
17 Likes
Maybe there’s more than sketchy real estate transactions in his past. 
13 Likes
Yeah, he’s one of the leading corporatists. He probably considers thousands of stock options a “gratuity.”
8 Likes
Fuck off, Alito. That’s what standing means. People shouldn’t get to sue when they haven’t been harmed, no matter how badly you want to rule on the case and impose your extra-judicial* bullshit on everyone
Alito said he was “concerned that some federal courts” are using the doctrine of standing “as a way of avoiding some particularly contentious constitutional questions.”
*In the sense of not supported by actual law
16 Likes
Fucking shitweasel.
12 Likes
The case “presents a question of great and growing national importance,” Alito wrote in brief dissent, joined by Thomas.
Then it shouldn’t be terribly difficult to find a plaintiff who does actually have standing.
I’m hoping this means that ACB and Gorsuch are starting to get concerned about how many cases they heard last year that should never have been heard. In 303 Creative, the “web designer” clearly didn’t have standing. Her case was hypothetical, and the gay client she allegedly turned down was straight and already married. In Loper Bright, the case was moot because the specific policy that prompted the lawsuit had already been rescinded.
22 Likes
10 Likes
The First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Coalition failed to successfully establish that the “zip code” system disproportionately harmed Asian American and white applicants because those groups still “earned more seats than their share of the applicant pool would suggest.”
That’s not exactly lack of standing, but it’s similar. They failed to show any harm. Actual, not theoretical, harm is supposed to be q requirement for a lawsuit like this.
The coalition appealed to the Supreme Court, contending that the lower court ruling amounted to “racial balancing by proxy.” But the justices refused to intervene.
Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented. Alito said the Boston policy was tantamount to “racial balancing by another name and is undoubtedly unconstitutional.”
I hope this trend of only 2 or 3 Justices being unreasonable continues, but I won’t hold my breath.
16 Likes
6 Likes
Depends on whether and how much they’ve been bribed?
12 Likes
SCOTUS is a bag full of dicks.
12 Likes
Yeah, though not full, thanks to those important good women.
11 Likes
And they always have been.
Ehhh…they’re not as bad as the others, but I don’t know if any of them are great. Sotomayor isn’t as bad as Alito and Thomas, but she’s also accepted money she arguably shouldn’t have. Kagan and Sotomayor are still often too pro-business and pro-cop, and KBJ has been a little inconsistent so far, although it’s way too soon to draw any meaningful conclusions about her. Honestly, after taking Con Law, I came to the conclusion that ASCJAB. (Ok, I gotta work that acronym a little. It’s not as catchy as ACAB.)
12 Likes