SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

User avatar
Kümmel
Posts: 1352
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 9:07 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by Kümmel » Wed Jun 23, 2021 11:01 am

my favorite part is that the court's opinion (Breyer) writes out "fuck" but Thomas's dissent writes it "f***"

User avatar
Danger Zone
Moderator
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:34 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by Danger Zone » Wed Jun 23, 2021 11:05 am

Great opinion. Can Breyer please retire now?

User avatar
MKC
Posts: 5197
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:46 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by MKC » Wed Jun 23, 2021 11:31 am

California rule requiring farmers to let union organizers on their property is a taking under the fifth and fourteenth amendments:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/2 ... 7_ihdj.pdf

User avatar
icechicken
Lost in the sauce
Posts: 1474
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2018 2:14 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by icechicken » Wed Jun 23, 2021 12:39 pm

The caption also contained an upside-down smiley-face emoji.
i always lol when stuff like this crops up in opinions

edit: or how Snapchat friends consistently get scare quotes:
B. L.’s Snapchat “friends” included other Mahanoy Area High School students, some of whom also belonged to the cheerleading squad. At least one of them, using a separate cellphone, took pictures of B. L.’s posts and shared them with other members of the cheerleading squad.

User avatar
ymmv
pregnant with a better version of myself
Posts: 22360
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 12:24 am
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by ymmv » Wed Jun 23, 2021 3:43 pm


User avatar
Nebby
Posts: 11312
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:24 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by Nebby » Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:21 pm

The only redeeming distinction is that it was non-government actors who were allowed on-site. I can't see any judge (who isn't rotted to the core with brain dead conservativism) trying to extend the holding to regulations authorizing the government to conduct on-site inspections.

Story
Posts: 142
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2019 3:56 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by Story » Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:41 pm

Nebby wrote:
Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:21 pm
The only redeeming distinction is that it was non-government actors who were allowed on-site. I can't see any judge (who isn't rotted to the core with brain dead conservativism) trying to extend the holding to regulations authorizing the government to conduct on-site inspections.
I’m not sure. I think it’d be fairly easy for a judge to extend this holding to government inspectors.

Unless the allowing of inspectors onto the business’s property was a condition for getting a license or permit of some sort.

User avatar
Nebby
Posts: 11312
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:24 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by Nebby » Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:56 pm

Like I said, brain dead conservatives are the exception

User avatar
beep
Posts: 3723
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 3:05 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by beep » Wed Jun 23, 2021 7:18 pm

Story wrote:
Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:41 pm
Nebby wrote:
Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:21 pm
The only redeeming distinction is that it was non-government actors who were allowed on-site. I can't see any judge (who isn't rotted to the core with brain dead conservativism) trying to extend the holding to regulations authorizing the government to conduct on-site inspections.
I’m not sure. I think it’d be fairly easy for a judge to extend this holding to government inspectors.

Unless the allowing of inspectors onto the business’s property was a condition for getting a license or permit of some sort.
below is how i read the op. on this question, too:


User avatar
ymmv
pregnant with a better version of myself
Posts: 22360
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 12:24 am
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by ymmv » Thu Jun 24, 2021 10:01 pm

I completely missed the Fulton decision, somehow. Fuck this court.

User avatar
haus
Posts: 2246
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 7:35 pm

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by haus » Thu Jun 24, 2021 10:15 pm

ymmv wrote:
Thu Jun 24, 2021 10:01 pm
I completely missed the Fulton decision, somehow. Fuck this court.
Can someone explain to me how Fulton does not lead to a bizarro world where any law that has any discretion built for some type of hypothetical case will no longer apply to anyone who pretends to be a member of a “religion”?

ETA

Looking forward to my future a senior member of the church of I can’t drive 55

User avatar
ymmv
pregnant with a better version of myself
Posts: 22360
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 12:24 am
Contact:

Re: SCOTUS and Other Big Cases

Post by ymmv » Thu Jun 24, 2021 10:19 pm

haus wrote:
Thu Jun 24, 2021 10:15 pm
ymmv wrote:
Thu Jun 24, 2021 10:01 pm
I completely missed the Fulton decision, somehow. Fuck this court.
Can someone explain to me how Fulton does not lead to a bizarro world where any law that has any discretion built for some type of hypothetical case will no longer apply to anyone who pretends to be a member of a “religion”?
That is very much the direction the court has been steering for decades, or at least since they explicitly charted the course in Hobby Lobby.

The liberal justices have occasionally indicated some fleeting awareness of this before inevitably demonstrating their willingness to go along with it. Because they don’t actually believe in larger political programs, and other than maybe Sotomayor they like to pretend not to understand their role as a tool of concerted policy (which the conservatives have generally understood all too well).

Fulton is some obvious Bob Jones dissent bullshit though.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests