Supreme Court Watch

[mindlessobserver]

Clarence is only 1% as based as the average Native African, and yet he's still the most based black man in America.

Joking aside, not sure on what grounds contraception can be made illegal, or even same sex relationships/marriage. I'm not American so I'm not too familiar with their laws, but the Supreme Court can only interpret the Constitution and ammendments, meaning they'd have to justify both in the current framework of the law.

The question really isn't what justification the court has to ban or allow contraception and rather what right one of the States has to ban contraception. All of the reproductive health procedures and medicines fall into the gray area outside original constitutional intent. Strict scrutiny therefore mandates that the 10th amendment devolves ALL reproductive health power to the States.

The solution for liberals is pretty simple. Prove they represent the overwhelming majority and introduce a constitutional amendment. If their majority is overwhelming, it will pass.

 

[MarvinTheParanoidAndroid]

West Virginia v. the Environmental Protection Agency the outcome of which may absolutely murderdeath the ability of congress to delegate lawmaking to unelected federal agencies.

Meaning that the ATF, CDC, FDA, and EPA all get ratfucked, and contgress actually has to legislate. If the conservative bench is split on this, could lead to some fuckery.

I really hope they spring for a return to dual federation and shake off the albatross of regulated federation. This would shrink the reach and overt power of the Executive branch immensely.

 

[Darkholme's Dungeon]

I think the most interesting part about this is the sudden 180 from "The Supreme Court should use its powers to enforce abortion nationwide" to "The supreme Court is illegitimate and corrupt for not using its powers to enforce laws nationwide"

I know this is long-established but God have mercy this is the most blatantly hypocritical thing I've seen

Here's the funniest one I've seen and might deserve a highlight on the happenings.

https://twitter.com/WhiteBoyUsul/status/1541870239930978304?s=20&t=JPp54v_7H9i6wArxKtGmug

George Takei, a Star Trek "vet*" as claimed by the media, calling Clarence Thomas, "a clown in blackface sitting on the supreme court".
Gay Asian actor versus straight black judge. ROUND 1, FIGHT! It's not a fair one.
Begun, the cope wars have.

*Who the hell calls an actor a "veteran", is the media seriously trying to draw parallels this retarded actor as some war veteran with PTSD or some shit?

 

[Devout Muslim]

It’s interesting how often “muh eugenics” comes up as a pro Roe v Wade argument. One specific instance of this is the claim that now crime will increase.

This is based on the assertion by the Freaknomics guy that Roe V Wade was responsible for the drop in crime which inexplicably occurred ~16-20 years after Roe v Wade. I don’t know if somebody has addressed this but that’s an assertion not a proven fact. It’s only supported by econometric analysis, and that analysis isn’t without detractors. Personally, I prefer the leaded fuel argument (which attributes the drop in crime to the abolition of leaded fuel and a consequent reduction in widespread lead poisoning). There’s an interesting article on the lead hypothesis here.

 

[MarvinTheParanoidAndroid]

It's not about "killing muh babies", though. It's judeosocialised notions tapping into the prosocial tendencies inherent in huwhite people, then recontextualised as lapses against personal autonomy and individualism within the context US' hyperindividualised social values. Huwhite women of course will stand out because they have agency. And they frustrate you the most, because you are not allowed to patrol them as the natural guarantors of their security and ease of mind as brothers, fathers and significant others.

People arguing the biological cases for or against are getting lost in the rhetorical squid ink and are getting played on a very primal level - in a very simplified form, in good faith, in gene interest terms, it's "people who feel very strongly about not having antisocial people who'd harm their kind around" vs "people who feel very strongly about people averse to extending gene wellness furthering help to ones own kind" in an environment where you don't get to recognise yourself and exist as a genetic kind with gene driven collective interest. People pressing on how foul abortion is are straining as much as the silly hoes that are struggling to ignore it for what it is - but it is what it is. So the real question is what are the conditions that are not letting you have nice things™ that you'd all agree on and would come to naturally in harmony; why are you so low on social trust that you can't agree it's necessary because "reasons" or unacceptable because "reasons"?

The answer, as hinted before, is "diversity", and the fact you're not in charge of your culture generating and culture affirming institutions. Another kind is. It's your frustration with the unnecessary, unproductive and wasteful complexity needed to manage people groups that are not suited to be governed under same entity. It's jewish relativism vs judeoreligious neuroticism from top down fighting it out in the minds of white gentiles in an evolutionary mismatch as compromised tools used in the misguided attempted furtherance of huwhites peoples inherent want for objective, conforming and socially approved fairness.

This is what a seizure looks like in written form.

Get ready for lots of fallout and unintended consequences.

First they get to get the abortion, then some dude gets investigated for rape, then this gets added to the already huge #metoo bonuses, as well as getting to be a "hero."

If anything this will do much more to create a bigger rift between the sexes as many women will callously ruin the lives of innocent people to get an abortion. If you thought the war of the sexes was bad now, just wait.

I think the most interesting part about this is the sudden 180 from "The Supreme Court should use its powers to enforce abortion nationwide" to "The supreme Court is illegitimate and corrupt for not using its powers to enforce laws nationwide"

I know this is long-established but God have mercy this is the most blatantly hypocritical thing I've seen

It's not just hypocritical, it's a fundamental misunderstanding of what the Supreme Court is and what it does. SCOTUS can't "enforce" anything.

Here's the funniest one I've seen and might deserve a highlight on the happenings.

https://twitter.com/WhiteBoyUsul/status/1541870239930978304?s=20&t=JPp54v_7H9i6wArxKtGmug

View attachment 3441207
George Takei, a Star Trek "vet" as claimed by the media, calling Clarence Thomas, "a clown in blackface sitting on the supreme court".
Gay Asian actor versus straight black judge. ROUND 1, FIGHT! It's not a fair one.
Begun, the cope wars have.

Why is all the focus on Clarence Thomas himself? What about the other conservative majority Justices who voted to overturn Roe Vs Wade? Could it be because Clarence is the only black person on the Supreme Court, so they placed their focus on him because he's not acting the way a Democrat would expect a black man to act? Does that mean to imply they expect less autonomy from Clarence Thomas due to his skin color than the rest of the Supreme Court? Saying he's in black face implies that he's a fraud and mockery of what a real black person is, now what would that be to someone like George Takei? His anger towards Thomas comes from him acting in contrary to what he expected from Thomas, so does that imply he expected compliance and obedience? Was his expectation of Clarence Thomas one of a servile nature? The sort who is "allowed" indoors by his betters? Could it be that George Takei considers Clarence Thomas to be a house nigger? With an insult like that, it beggars belief he could think any differently.

 

[Arthur Finklestein]

This is based on the assertion by the Freaknomics guy that Roe V Wade was responsible for the drop in crime which inexplicably occurred ~16-20 years after Roe v Wade. I don’t know if somebody has addressed this but that’s an assertion not a proven fact. It’s only supported by econometric analysis, and that analysis isn’t without detractors. Personally, I prefer the leaded fuel argument (which attributes the drop in crime to the abolition of leaded fuel and a consequent reduction in widespread lead poisoning). There’s an interesting article on the lead hypothesis

I think the reason why crime dropped in the 2000s is because all males testosterone levels have been dropping precipitously.

 

[Darkholme's Dungeon]

Why is all the focus on Clarence Thomas himself? What about the other conservative majority Justices who voted to overturn Roe Vs Wade? Could it be because Clarence is the only black person on the Supreme Court, so they placed their focus on him because he's not acting the way a Democrat would expect a black man to act? Does that mean to imply they expect less autonomy from Clarence Thomas due to his skin color than the rest of the Supreme Court? Saying he's in black face implies that he's a fraud and mockery of what a real black person is, now what would that be to someone like George Takei? His anger towards Thomas comes from him acting in contrary to what he expected from Thomas, so does that imply he expected compliance and obedience? Was his expectation of Clarence Thomas one of a servile nature? The sort who is "allowed" indoors by his betters? Could it be that George Takei considers Clarence Thomas to be a house nigger? With an insult like that, it beggars belief he could think any differently.

Takei is what people like Thomas have the biggest disdain for as mentioned by @Catch The Rainbow . The irony is not lost on me that an Asian man is saying what white liberals refuse to say in order for the veil to stay on a bit longer (even when he himself, is viewed in the same disdain by his compatriots).

 

[MarvinTheParanoidAndroid]

I think the reason why crime dropped in the 2000s is because all males testosterone levels have been dropping precipitously to include blacks. The recorded black on black crime rate peaked in the 1920s before most of them would have been exposed to any gasoline on a regular basis.

You're forgetting about black codes, debt peonage and convict leasing, those were all on the decline by the 1920s until they were all abolished in totality in 1941, so that statistic for black crime is actually unreliable because black codes were specifically made to make black people look like criminals.

 

[mindlessobserver]

Takei is what people like Thomas have the biggest disdain for as mentioned by @Catch The Rainbow . The irony is not lost on me that an Asian man is saying what white liberals refuse to say in order for the veil to stay on a bit longer (even when he himself, is viewed in the same disdain by his compatriots).

Gay men have a reflexive hatred of both women and heterosexual/reproductive relationships. It has to be pointed out just how hostile the G and T in LGBT is to actual biological females. They HATE women. It's a hatred born of envy and contempt. They wish they could do what women can do, create life and a new generation. They also hate that women demand of them a level of responsibility to actually not be hedonistic morons and instead focus on a viable future for their children.

It blows my mind how so many young girls have been convinced that it's us edge Lord right wingers who are against them instead of the skin walkers telling them that happiness can be found in meaningless sex and murdering their unborn so they can continue a pointless, lonely, hedonistic life as a non-reproductive corporate peon.

 

[Arthur Finklestein]

You're forgetting about black codes, debt peonage and convict leasing, those were all on the decline by the 1920s until they were all abolished in totality in 1941, so that statistic for black crime is actually unreliable because black codes were specifically made to make black people look like criminals.

LMAO no one has to make blacks look like criminals; that's the way they are.

 

[The Ugly One]

Clarence is only 1% as based as the average Native African, and yet he's still the most based black man in America.

Joking aside, not sure on what grounds contraception can be made illegal, or even same sex relationships/marriage. I'm not American so I'm not too familiar with their laws, but the Supreme Court can only interpret the Constitution and ammendments, meaning they'd have to justify both in the current framework of the law.

State and federal governments regulate all kinds of medical devices up this way and down that way. Anything associated with sex gets a special carve-out when it comes to these kinds of laws because according to our courts, the most sacred right of all is the right to cum.

Gay men have a reflexive hatred of both women and heterosexual/reproductive relationships. It has to be pointed out just how hostile the G and T in LGBT is to actual biological females. They HATE women. It's a hatred born of envy and contempt. They wish they could do what women can do, create life and a new generation have sex with men and not uncontrollably shit themselves.

FTFY

 

[HTTP Error 404]

Roe v Wade repeal didn't plain outright say "Abortion is now illegal everywhere" rape and incest cases are usually covered, and if not? You're going to have to go to another state. Simple as that.

Rape, Death of the Mother, and Incest cases are less than 2% of abortions. The vast, vast majority of them are "if I'm pregnant I can't be a whore in the club anymore, uwu " alongside "If Worker Female-5138 can't kill her unapproved spawn then productivity will be down 10% until she gives birth, and there's a non-zero chance that she'll quit to be a parent, this is harming our profits, engage the useful idiots!"

what's up with the people saying more black people get abortions than white people, as if that's some kind of gotcha moment that owns the conservitards? Are you a liberal who thinks republicans sit around a KKK cross figuring out the best way to kill all black people?

That's ridiculous.

We moved to zoom years ago.

After gamergate, I think people like this are largely responsible for roe v wade being overturned.

There's a line in the sand where you're so insufferable you make people who would otherwise agree with you side with your enemies out of pure spite, and these people tap dance a mile past it regularly when they talk like this.

This. Absolutely this. I was reluctantly pro-"choice" until the political lines were drawn around vidya and I found myself in the alt-right pit with everyone else. Then I actually took a look at the utter freakjobs celebrating -- not supporting, celebrating -- abortion, and realized "oh wait, these are the same utterly insufferable 400 pound dykes that are demanding I give up my hobbies so they can make lesbian walking simulators about how evil I am on my dime." A few seconds of open minded research later and -- oh hey, that "what about rape / incest / death of the mother" thing? Turns out that's less than 2% of abortions. Almost every single abortion is just because some whore felt being a mother would be too much of a pain in the ass. That's not what people signed up for during the compromise. The left violated the compromise, so they shouldn't be surprised when the republicans refuse to compromise anymore.

Why not just go to a blue state if you want abortion? I really don't understand why this has to be nationalized.

Becuase a key belief of the lefty belief system is that they know how to live your lives better than you. The idea of states not enacting lefty policies is anathema to them. They literally cannot accept the idea that societies out there exist that aren't bugman hives in California. Worse, every society that exists that isn't a lefty shithole is one more chance that a society will exist that does things better than the lefty shitholes do, and that's literally not possible in their minds.

 

[Darkholme's Dungeon]

State and federal governments regulate all kinds of medical devices up this way and down that way. Anything associated with sex gets a special carve-out when it comes to these kinds of laws because according to our courts, the most sacred right of all is the right to cum.


FTFY

I see you choosin' the hard way.

 

[mindlessobserver]

Becuase a key belief of the lefty belief system is that they know how to live your lives better than you. The idea of states not enacting lefty policies is anathema to them. They literally cannot accept the idea that societies out there exist that aren't bugman hives in California. Worse, every society that exists that isn't a lefty shithole is one more chance that a society will exist that does things better than the lefty shitholes do, and that's literally not possible in their minds.

Right now, there are people going to sleep in West Virginia blissfully not giving one solitary fuck what people in New York and San Francisco are doing with their lives.

Right now, there are people in New York and San Francisco going to sleep absolutely terrified that there are people in West Virginia who don't believe what they do, and worse, have guns and could actually inplement violence against them when they mandate West Virginia be forced to believe what they do.

 

[JambledUpWords]

Women acting like they’re Katniss Everdeen:

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

Here's the funniest one I've seen and might deserve a highlight on the happenings.

https://twitter.com/WhiteBoyUsul/status/1541870239930978304?s=20&t=JPp54v_7H9i6wArxKtGmug

View attachment 3441207
George Takei, a Star Trek "vet*" as claimed by the media, calling Clarence Thomas, "a clown in blackface sitting on the supreme court".
Gay Asian actor versus straight black judge. ROUND 1, FIGHT! It's not a fair one.
Begun, the cope wars have.

*Who the hell calls an actor a "veteran", is the media seriously trying to draw parallels this retarded actor as some war veteran with PTSD or some shit?

I hope someone makes a compilation of racism against Clarence Thomas.

 

[AnOminous]

Why is all the focus on Clarence Thomas himself?

You really have to ask?

 

[mindlessobserver]

Women acting like they’re Katniss Everdeen:

View attachment 3441462
View attachment 3441464
View attachment 3441465
View attachment 3441466
View attachment 3441467
View attachment 3441468
View attachment 3441471
View attachment 3441472
View attachment 3441474
View attachment 3441476
View attachment 3441481

I think the most hilarious part about those books and movies is how the point went right over the heads of the the left wing.

Workers in rural Appalachia literally enslaved by a bunch of hedonistic libertertines in the big city who periodically only notice them so they can kidnap their kids in a power play, shower them with gifts from their superior culture and then ritually murder them as a way to remind rural Appalachia that they are slaves and no matter how hard they work they will always be slaves.

It's an old grievance of the mountain folk. How their children get swept up by the big city and never come back. Or worse, how when the Federal Government literally bombed a miner strike with army air force fighter-bombers. The battle sequencd between Katniss' "resistance" at District 8 was a beat for beat recreation of the battle of Blair Mountain.

The point of those books was about as subtle as a two by four to the face and yet idiots STILL miss it.

 

[Norbert the Tiger]

Clarence is only 1% as based as the average Native African, and yet he's still the most based black man in America.

Joking aside, not sure on what grounds contraception can be made illegal, or even same sex relationships/marriage. I'm not American so I'm not too familiar with their laws, but the Supreme Court can only interpret the Constitution and ammendments, meaning they'd have to justify both in the current framework of the law.

As you are not from America your confusion is understandable. CT did not suggest SCOTUS could ban contraceptives, gay marriage etc. Rather, he wants to overturn a line of cases that read chimeric "rights" in the Constitution that are not explictly mentioned in the document. One of the worst cases that started this is Griswold v Connecticut which held state laws banning contraceptives are unconconstiutional on the theory there is an implied right to privacy. There is an infamousss line about "penumbras" emanating from the shadows of the Constitution or some such opaque, nebulous verbiage.
I agree that there is an implied right to privacy (5th Amendment prohibition against unreasonable search and seizures) and banning contraceptives is really bad policy but I'm very ambivalent about the idea that an implied right to privacy makes prohibition of contraceptives unconstitutional. The notion that logic can be applied to medical procedures like abortion is preposterous (Roe relied on Griswold) and that is that is why Dobbs overruling Roe and Casey is a very good thing.

The question really isn't what justification the court has to ban or allow contraception and rather what right one of the States has to ban contraception. All of the reproductive health procedures and medicines fall into the gray area outside original constitutional intent. Strict scrutiny therefore mandates that the 10th amendment devolves ALL reproductive health power to the States.

The solution for liberals is pretty simple. Prove they represent the overwhelming majority and introduce a constitutional amendment. If their majority is overwhelming, it will pass.

Fyi, strict scrutiny is a legal term and concept derived from the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause. The term was coined by Scotus and is a level of scrutiny applied by the courts to different treatment based on race and other protected groups. If I recall correctly correctly sex is still intermediate scrutiny but may be in effect strict scrutiny or close it it (maybe a case held sex is strict scruintyx I don't remember). Strict scruinty lays out a way a state could theoretically get away with disparate treatment of protected groups but that is pretty much theoretical only. I do not know off hand of any instances where a government action invoked strict scrutiny and was not struck down. One legal scholar out it thusly "strict scrutiny is strict in theory, fatal in fact."
What Dobbs did is acknowledge that protecting unborn life is a legitimate state interest and that abortion laws are now to be looked at under ration basis scrutiny. This is the inverse of strict scrutiny and unless the state is acting in a wholly capricious or arbitrary manner, courts are to rubber stamp approval. At least theoretically. In practice with activist judges.....

 

[RTX Mario]

https://twitter.com/commentsooc/status/1541737583927083008