Supreme Court Watch

Status
Not open for further replies.
Probably the biggest happening since the 2016 election if not the biggest social media happening of all time. Get your snipping tool ready.
I know what you meant but imagine the Twitter Faggot cope about vasectomies to support their female allies.... While they continue to raise their wife's child. That subset will be my personal favorite.
 
Glorious, turning over some power back to the states. This could slow the tide of Californians spreading their plague elsewhere.

"You've ruined your own lands, you'll not ruin mine!"

What's next? Tech companies are going to start busing Guatemalans and lower-class blacks to leftist states so they can continue to implement Sanger's eugenics movement?
Sanger was lauded by the women of the KKK for her dedication to aborting black babies.
 
Now do Obergefell v Hodges. it would be the salt trifecta. Imagine, Biden stole the election because Orange Man Bad and mean tweets; libs lose abortion, gun control BTFO and if fag marriage is not federally protected, would serve them right.

Stolen elections have consequences, sweaty.
 
Well the same things that apply to Roe vs Wade apply to Marriage.

There is nothing in the Federal Government that comments about Marriage thus it should be entirely in the hands of the States.
Except there's the full faith and credit clause governing inter-state government policy for things like licensing, which marriage ultimately is from the government's perspective. Laws re: both same sex or interracial marriage prevent that from being given in this case.
 
Yup. And, surprising, at least me, at least one Justice (Clarence Thomas) wants to take it further and reexamine the legal grounds for the cases that made same-sex and interracial marriage federally legal. Like, Roe was pretty obvious judicial activism but I buy the legal arguments in favor of Obgerfell/Loving.
The argumentation of Obgerfell/Loving was significantly better, in that there was an argument at all. Bit it was still a massive example of legislation via the judiciary. Granted the Republicans stepped into a massive minefield when they allowed civil unions to be a thing.

So doing a re-examination of the case probably wouldn't change much, but who knows.
 
Screenshot_20220624-094807_DuckDuckGo.jpgFWBhpLpXwAAhZaY.pngFWBhxY9X0AIId4D.pngFWBh20yWYAEwJvL.pngFWBiF8oXoAA4pGS.png
 
OH SHIT, IT HAPPENED! YOU CAN PRE-ORDER THE 30th ANNIVERSARY KIRBY NENDOROID WITH FREE SHIPPING! BASED ENTERTAINMENT EARTH TO DO THIS DURING PRIDE WEEKEND!

View attachment 3420796
Thread theme song:
Supreme Court breaking bucks at the speed of sound.
Mmmmmm, that's some gud salt. I'm wearing the fattest shit eating grin right now. Keep it comin'!
 
The only precedent I really don't like is states that don't allow abortions going after people who leave the state to get one
How is that bad? If a state decrees abortion to be the taking of a human life then why shouldn't they prosecute one of their citizens for committing this crime?

There's issues around jurisdiction but there's precedent with crimes committed by American citizens overseas

Anyway it's about time that blue and red America physically separated themselves. Let the baby murdering whores go live among their own kind.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back