SCOTUS decisions

[imprimis]

Said no on the census question.

Said courts cannot strike down partisan gerrymandering of districts.

https://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-allows-partisan-election-141700269.html

 

[iasooner1]

Not exactly. They left the census question open for more interpretation

 

[Ostatedchi]

Sounds like Oklahomans need to answer that we all have 14,000 people living in our households. Then we can get a dozen more representatives in congress.

 

[aix_xpert]

I love that both sides do it, yet each side whines when its done to them.

 

[imprimis]

Not exactly. They left the census question open for more interpretation

True, but as argued it was 9-0 against inclusion.

 

[HighStickHarry]

I love that both sides do it, yet each side whines when its done to them.

Exactly. @CowboyUp just walks around pantsless showing his ass on this issue.

 

[CowboyJD]

True, but as argued it was 9-0 against inclusion.

And left the lower court decision banning it for 2020 in place with no guarantee that reconsideration can get done in time for it to actually be on the forms for 2020...in fact, probably not enough time.

Basically, this was a punt on deciding the question for at least 10 more years because it will likely be moot by the time it can get back to SCOTUS.

 

[CowboyJD]

Also completely punted on the Murphy decision re: criminal jurisdiction on a whole lot of claimed Indian country in Oklahoma....continued it to next session.

 

[07pilt]

And left the lower court decision banning it for 2020 in place with no guarantee that reconsideration can get done in time for it to actually be on the forms for 2020...in fact, probably not enough time.

Basically, this was a punt on deciding the question for at least 10 more years because it will likely be moot by the time it can get back to SCOTUS.

JD if you are still there, can you explain in the implications of this decision? I get the reasoning I think, but at this point is it even possible for Ross to go back and and rejustify this, or do we have to wait for a new commerce secretary and a new justification? Wouldn't any subsequent reasoning from Ross be as pretextual as the current reasoning?

 

[CowboyPhil]

So now SCOTUS is kicking responsibilities down the road along with Congress basically? Is there any part of our government actually doing anything besides running for office continuously?

 

[Soonersincefitty]

So now SCOTUS is kicking responsibilities down the road along with Congress basically? Is there any part of our government actually doing anything besides running for office continuously?

Exactly.
A bunch of feckless bastards that don't have the courage of their convictions.
Probably because they have no convictions.

 

[2012Bearcat]

What is evident with the ruling on the census question is liberals fully believe citizen from other countries living in our country illegally should have a say in how our government is run. Next thing you know the liberals will be demanding illegals have the right to vote. Oops that already happening in California.

 

[07pilt]

What is evident with the ruling on the census question is liberals fully believe citizen from other countries living in our country illegally should have a say in how our government is run. Next thing you know the liberals will be demanding illegals have the right to vote. Oops that already happening in California.

Sorry you don't like the constitution.

 

[Been Jammin]

I will say one thing about the SCOTUS. I have been following most of their decisions over the last few months, and have been happy to see that most of them seem to leave the politics out of it when deciding how to vote. IMO, there are 2-3 of them that will always vote along party lines, and figure out a way to rationalize their vote, but the others do what they think is directed by the law, with no regard for what their political party would like them to do. I find that to be refreshing, and as it should be.

I'm sure some of you will say that this is how it has always been, but with our country as divided as it is today (along party lines), I was expecting the SCOTUS to become more politically influenced. I am not seeing that happening so far.

 

[2012Bearcat]

Sorry you don't like the constitution.

Obviously you didn't read the ruling.

 

[07pilt]

Obviously you didn't read the ruling.

I did

 

[CowboyJD]

JD if you are still there, can you explain in the implications of this decision? I get the reasoning I think, but at this point is it even possible for Ross to go back and and rejustify this, or do we have to wait for a new commerce secretary and a new justification? Wouldn't any subsequent reasoning from Ross be as pretextual as the current reasoning?

The true implications are that it won’t be allowed on the 2020 census....and that is what this suit was about.

They remanded for further hearing to the lower court to give Ross to rejustify. He’ll be doing that to the court that granted the injunction and they will surely be dubious of any other claim. Opposing counsel will surely argue that it is. And the lower court gets to schedule those hearings, and then if it is appealed, it won’t be heard until next court session....in October of 2019 and no decisions likely until this time 2020....when it will be moot...not still an actual action in controversy with another census not for 10 years.

 

[2012Bearcat]

I did

Then you realize the case has not been decided.

 

[CowboyJD]

So now SCOTUS is kicking responsibilities down the road along with Congress basically? Is there any part of our government actually doing anything besides running for office continuously?

They honestly gave Trump another bite at the Apple.

 

[Pokeabear]

Also completely punted on the Murphy decision re: criminal jurisdiction on a whole lot of claimed Indian country in Oklahoma....continued it to next session.

This was something I was very interested in. Kinda glad to see it will be re argued honestly.

 

[07pilt]

Then you realize the case has not been decided.

I think the constitutionality of non-citizen voters is well established.

 

[CowboyJD]

This was something I was very interested in. Kinda glad to see it will be re argued honestly.

Kinda one of the biggest, most important decisions opinions the SCOTUS has had in a long time....so yeah.

Gorsuch recused because he was on the 10th Circuit CA when it was heard there. Rumor is it’s a 4-4 tie and they don’t want to have that on such a huge issue.

The potential impact on Oklahoma of this decision is HUGE. A huge chunk of the statecould revert back to criminal jurisdiction of the tribes because nearly all the treaties in the state were handled exactly like the Creeks was.

 

[CowboyJD]

I will say one thing about the SCOTUS. I have been following most of their decisions over the last few months, and have been happy to see that most of them seem to leave the politics out of it when deciding how to vote. IMO, there are 2-3 of them that will always vote along party lines, and figure out a way to rationalize their vote, but the others do what they think is directed by the law, with no regard for what their political party would like them to do. I find that to be refreshing, and as it should be.

I'm sure some of you will say that this is how it has always been, but with our country as divided as it is today (along party lines), I was expecting the SCOTUS to become more politically influenced. I am not seeing that happening so far.

I still see a whole lot of political wrangling going on behind the scenes as a long-time student/followerof SCOTUS decisions. It’s certainly subtle than in the other branches, but it is definitely there.

For instance, Roberts wrote the census decision remanding. Joined by the four liberals. I can almost guarantee that if he had just ruled based upon the justifications put forth by the government, he would have voted along with those four to affirm the lower court decision. Hell, he basically called them liars in the decision. That would have been disastrous for Trump et al. Instead, he wrote an opinion remanding, tell Trump to get his shit together when he gets another bite at the apple. My bet is, that Roberts knows there isn’t enough time to get that done so he accomplished what he thought was right (no citizenship question in 2020) while lessening the political impact on the Republicans/Trump.

 

[Pokeabear]

I still see a whole lot of political wrangling going on behind the scenes as a long-time student/followerof SCOTUS decisions. It’s certainly subtle than in the other branches, but it is definitely there.

For instance, Roberts wrote the census decision remanding. Joined by the four liberals. I can almost guarantee that if he had just ruled based upon the justifications put forth by the government, he would have voted along with those four to affirm the lower court decision. Hell, he basically called them liars in the decision. That would have been disastrous for Trump et al. Instead, he wrote an opinion remanding, tell Trump to get his shit together when he gets another bite at the apple. My bet is, that Roberts knows there isn’t enough time to get that done so he accomplished what he thought was right (no citizenship question in 2020) while lessening the political impact on the Republicans/Trump.

Politics should be no consideration to scotus and yet......

 

[CowboyJD]

Politics should be no consideration to scotus and yet......

I would say ideally it shouldn’t, BUT it has been from the very beginning.

Marbury v. Madison was inherently political....and that was what? 10 years into the court’s existence.

 

[JimmyBob]

I would say ideally it shouldn’t, BUT it has been from the very beginning.

Marbury v. Madison was inherently political....and that was what? 10 years into the court’s existence.

Thanks for the info on both cases.

 

[CowboyJD]

Thanks for the info on both cases.

You are welcome.

Legal discussions will likely continue to draw me back even when I’ve completely grown bored and beyond outrage or really caring about political discussions.

 

[MegaPoke]

@CowboyJD

A lot of people suggesting this. Thoughts?

 

[Ostatedchi]

Republicans in solidly blue states should just simply not answer the census. That would reduce the count and might offset the number of illegals. Of course, Republicans in red states should lie our asses off and say there are a dozen people living in each of our households - they just happen to be undocumented. This is a battle for the allocation of representatives in the House. We can't let the left skew the allocation with illegals.

 

[07pilt]

Republicans in solidly blue states should just simply not answer the census. That would reduce the count and might offset the number of illegals. Of course, Republicans in red states should lie our asses off and say there are a dozen people living in each of our households - they just happen to be undocumented. This is a battle for the allocation of representatives in the House. We can't let the left skew the allocation with illegals.

What other laws can we break for political gain?

 

[iasooner1]

No matter what happens on the census the election won't be effected nor the courts changed until 22

 

[NZ Poke]

You are welcome.

Legal discussions will likely continue to draw me back even when I’ve completely grown bored and beyond outrage or really caring about political discussions.

Good morning.

 

[Ostatedchi]

What other laws can we break for political gain?

apparently any that we want.

 

[Ostatedchi]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/are-you-citizen-here-s-what-happens-if-you-lie-n861841

 

[CowboyJD]

Good morning.

View embedded media

View embedded media

Yes, we know...."Jews bad...danger to America."

 

[CowboyJD]

@CowboyJD

A lot of people suggesting this. Thoughts?

View embedded media

Don't think they can delay the census.

Agree that they can ask questions beyond just counting.

Issue with the citizen question was whether or not there was a discriminatory intent that posed sufficient concern that it could result in false accounting of actual numbers.

Don’t think they can get rehearing done in time. Geekrad doesn’t know what s/he is talking about....remanding is not “all” they did. There are some pretty clear signals in the decision that Geekrad isn’t picking up on at all.

 

[iasooner1]

This and for the legal bagels, Trump didn't write any of this, law-yers did; his job is to protect America first and if the liars were sloppy, that's on them

 

[CowboyJD]

Two thousand years is a long time to hold a grudge against Jesus.

View embedded media

You’re not even trying to hide or cloak your anti-Semitism anymore.

 

[Been Jammin]

You’re not even trying to hide or cloak your anti-Semitism anymore.

Been a long time since he tried. It has been blatantly obvious since the days when he posted the anti-semitic caricature meme and was called out on it.

 

[CowboyJD]

Been a long time since he tried. It has been blatantly obvious since the days when he posted the anti-semitic caricature meme and was called out on it.

I’m not here much nowadays and don’t read everything.

I did see the controversy over PB’s Jesus avatar. Seeing that makes me wonder why NZ is allowed to continue posting his anti-Semitic BS. Maybe it’s a squeaky wheel gets the grease kind of thing and not as many people are offended by it as they were by PB’s Jesus antics.