2023 SCOTUS Rulings

[Baldy]

You mean cases where lower courts have already decided that a petitioner had standing to bring a pre-enforcement challenge?

So SCOTUS can’t overturn lower courts or precedence?

Ok.

Of course they can, silly, but obviously they (as well as every other lower court) believes people have a right to bring a pre-enforcement challenge.

Why don't you?

[BDKJMU]

They shouldn’t be basing their decisions on law. They should be basing it on the Constitution.

You mean like deciding cases on things that actually happened vs. hypotheticals?

No. Deciding cases giving primacy to the text of the Constitution vs case law.

[BDKJMU]

They shouldn’t be basing their decisions on law. They should be basing it on the Constitution.

The Constitution is the bedrock but laws passed by Congress and previous decisions are also factors. Personal opinions and ideology should not be factors.

Alito and Thomas are the best jurists.

FIFY. And Scalia was the best of our lifetimes.

Being ab Originalist isn’t being an idelaogue.

[UNI88]

The Constitution is the bedrock but laws passed by Congress and previous decisions are also factors. Personal opinions and ideology should not be factors.

As jurists, Alito and Thomas are right there with Sotomayer and Kagan.

FIFY. And Scalia was the best of our lifetimes.

Being ab Originalist isn’t being an idelaogue.

Scalia might be the best but RBG was right there with him.

Alito and Thomas are complete buffoons compared to Scalia just like Sotomayer and Kagan are complete buffoons compared to RBG.

[UNI88]

[UNI88]

Watch: Asian American student defends his stance against affirmative action in interview

We shouldn't be judging students based on race when we're deciding who gets into what schools. I think that your previous guest is mistaken in this regard because I believe that by getting rid of affirmative action, we can now look at the individual student and what they've accomplished.

Shieh argued that under such a system, students were often viewed as representatives of larger racial groups. However, with the elimination of affirmative action, universities now have the opportunity to consider applicants on a more personal level, taking into account the obstacles they have overcome.
...
According to the court, universities may still take into account an applicant's discussion of how race has influenced their life, as long as it is linked to a specific quality of character or unique ability that the applicant can contribute to the university.
...
Shieh acknowledges that race can play a role in how individuals experience the world but also emphasizes that it affects different people in different ways. He explains that allowing students the option to express the significance of race in their personal essays provides them with greater freedom to articulate their unique perspectives.

[houndawg]

Watch: Asian American student defends his stance against affirmative action in interview

We shouldn't be judging students based on race when we're deciding who gets into what schools. I think that your previous guest is mistaken in this regard because I believe that by getting rid of affirmative action, we can now look at the individual student and what they've accomplished.

Shieh argued that under such a system, students were often viewed as representatives of larger racial groups. However, with the elimination of affirmative action, universities now have the opportunity to consider applicants on a more personal level, taking into account the obstacles they have overcome.
...
According to the court, universities may still take into account an applicant's discussion of how race has influenced their life, as long as it is linked to a specific quality of character or unique ability that the applicant can contribute to the university.
...
Shieh acknowledges that race can play a role in how individuals experience the world but also emphasizes that it affects different people in different ways. He explains that allowing students the option to express the significance of race in their personal essays provides them with greater freedom to articulate their unique perspectives.

I don't see what the big deal is with college admissions - if colleges think diversity is important they don't need the imprimatur of the government to make it happen

[SeattleGriz]

Watch: Asian American student defends his stance against affirmative action in interview

I don't see what the big deal is with college admissions - if colleges think diversity is important they don't need the imprimatur of the government to make it happen

While I don't think too highly of Jonathan Turley, he was spot on in his analysis of the schools affected. For years they touted that race had very little to do with admission, as it was a small part of the overall process, but now they are wailing it is going to devastate minority admissions.

[UNI88]

Watch: Asian American student defends his stance against affirmative action in interview

I don't see what the big deal is with college admissions - if colleges think diversity is important they don't need the imprimatur of the government to make it happen

Diversity at colleges and universities is a good thing. SCOTUS has just said they can’t discriminate to achieve it so now they need to find other ways to make it happen. Lack of wealth and overcoming obstacles would actually be better factors than race.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[houndawg]

I don't see what the big deal is with college admissions - if colleges think diversity is important they don't need the imprimatur of the government to make it happen

Diversity at colleges and universities is a good thing. SCOTUS has just said they can’t discriminate to achieve it so now they need to find other ways to make it happen. Lack of wealth and overcoming obstacles would actually be better factors than race.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BDKJMU]

I don't see what the big deal is with college admissions - if colleges think diversity is important they don't need the imprimatur of the government to make it happen

Diversity at colleges and universities is a good thing. SCOTUS has just said they can’t discriminate to achieve it so now they need to find other ways to make it happen. Lack of wealth and overcoming obstacles would actually be better factors than race.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree on the socio economic to a very linited extent. You shouldn’t propel people into colleges they’re not academically qualified for.

Besides discriminatory, affirmative action has had large groups of people going to the colleges that they weren’t
academically qualified for and didn’t have the best chance of success at. If you’re admitting people that are 200,300,400 points on the SAT (or equivalent on the ACT) below the rest, then you are just setting them up for failure.

Race shouldn’t be a factor at all. Because then you get into a whole pandora’s box:
-With blacks were their ancestors here before slavery ended/were slaves, or did they arrive after slavery ended but before Jim Crow ended, or have they been more recent arrivals in the late 20th or early 21st century. The below show 21% of black Americans 1st or 2nd gen)
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads ... n-the-u-s/
and there’s lots on the interwebs about black immigrants doing better financially tham native born. So for those who’s parents immigrated in the last couple of decades, do you score them differently than those who’s ancestors were slaves or were here before Jim Crow ended?

What about those more recent immigrants from Africa and who’s ancestors took part in African slave trade (19th century and/or owned slaves (Kamala Harris)..How do you score them differently than those who’s ancestors were slaves or were here before Jim Crow ended?

What about those immigrants from North Africa who are ‘African Americans’ who don’t look black but look more like Team Brown.

What about white ‘African Americans’?

Then you get into what about Hispanics, and how do you score them vs blacks, and how do you score Asians vs both?

Then you get into the mixed race. If someone is half white/half black, does the white half cancel out the black half? If not when does the racial preference stop? At 3/8 black? 1/4? 1/8? How do people prove that? Geneology test results with their college admissions?

To sum up my JSOesque post, the easiest answer- quit using race as a factor at all.

[BDKJMU]

Before someone brings up:
-Legacy preferences: don’t agree with those, they should be eliminated IMHOP.
-Prefernces for athletes: I don’t necessarily agree with those either, but that cat is out of the bag. The avg Div I scholly football player has way lower HS GPA and SAT scores what 250? below the student body avg. I’m sure its even worse for Div I mens’ basketball. P5 and mens’ major Div I basketball is nothing more than university sponsored semi professional ‘student athletes’ in name only, but that is a whole another can of worms.

[UNI88]

Diversity at colleges and universities is a good thing. SCOTUS has just said they can’t discriminate to achieve it so now they need to find other ways to make it happen. Lack of wealth and overcoming obstacles would actually be better factors than race.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree on the socio economic to a very linited extent. You shouldn’t propel people into colleges they’re not academically qualified for.

Besides discriminatory, affirmative action has had large groups of people going to the colleges that they weren’t
academically qualified for and didn’t have the best chance of success at. If you’re admitting people that are 200,300,400 points on the SAT (or equivalent on the ACT) below the rest, then you are just setting them up for failure.

Race shouldn’t be a factor at all. Because then you get into a whole pandora’s box:
-With blacks were their ancestors here before slavery ended/were slaves, or did they arrive after slavery ended but before Jim Crow ended, or have they been more recent arrivals in the late 20th or early 21st century. The below show 21% of black Americans 1st or 2nd gen)
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads ... n-the-u-s/
and there’s lots on the interwebs about black immigrants doing better financially tham native born. So for those who’s parents immigrated in the last couple of decades, do you score them differently than those who’s ancestors were slaves or were here before Jim Crow ended?

What about those more recent immigrants from Africa and who’s ancestors took part in African slave trade (19th century and/or owned slaves (Kamala Harris)..How do you score them differently than those who’s ancestors were slaves or were here before Jim Crow ended?

What about those immigrants from North Africa who are ‘African Americans’ who don’t look black but look more like Team Brown.

What about white ‘African Americans’?

Then you get into what about Hispanics, and how do you score them vs blacks, and how do you score Asians vs both?

Then you get into the mixed race. If someone is half white/half black, does the white half cancel out the black half? If not when does the racial preference stop? At 3/8 black? 1/4? 1/8? How do people prove that? Geneology test results with their college admissions?

To sum up my JSOesque post, the easiest answer- quit using race as a factor at all.

I think a school could take a go-getter who isn’t academically qualified and give them the support structure to succeed.

Some kid from the Chicago projects who gets up way early and takes 3 different buses to go to a better HS has the ability and work ethic to overcome adversity.

Some of those kids will go on to do great things and make the world a better place . All they need is an opportunity and investing in them is worth it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SeattleGriz]

Did you know having a black physician more than doubles the chance of survival for high risk newborns? From 99.8% to 199.6%

Amazing.

[BDKJMU]

Did you know having a black physician more than doubles the chance of survival for high risk newborns? From 99.8% to 199.6%

Amazing.

I don’t knkw what a woman is. I’m not a biologist. Dur..

[LeadBolt]

Did you know having a black physician more than doubles the chance of survival for high risk newborns? From 99.8% to 199.6%

Amazing.

I don’t knkw what a woman is. I’m not a biologist. Dur..

Hmm…, if you need to be a biologist to know what a woman is, wouldn’t that imply it is a matter of biology and not other factors? Inquiring minds want to know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

I don’t knkw what a woman is. I’m not a biologist. Dur..

Hmm…, if you need to be a biologist to know what a woman is, wouldn’t that imply it is a matter of biology and not other factors? Inquiring minds want to know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Gender or sex?

[LeadBolt]

Hmm…, if you need to be a biologist to know what a woman is, wouldn’t that imply it is a matter of biology and not other factors? Inquiring minds want to know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Gender or sex?

If I’m not confused, that was not specified in the original question which was asked in the hearing where the judge chose to answer the question as one of biology rather than otherwise.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

FDA approves OTC contraceptive pill. This might ruffle a few feathers although I can’t imagine why.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... tid=Zxz2cZ

[GannonFan]

FDA approves OTC contraceptive pill. This might ruffle a few feathers although I can’t imagine why.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... tid=Zxz2cZ

People who are against this are truly nuts. All this one does is prevent fertilization of the egg - so there's no conception at all. Basically a medical version of a condom. Should have these available over the counter, and any others like it, as soon as we can.

[kalm]

FDA approves OTC contraceptive pill. This might ruffle a few feathers although I can’t imagine why.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... tid=Zxz2cZ

People who are against this are truly nuts. All this one does is prevent fertilization of the egg - so there's no conception at all. Basically a medical version of a condom. Should have these available over the counter, and any others like it, as soon as we can.

Yes that’s a good take. For anyone to object in this instance is just about control.

[GannonFan]

People who are against this are truly nuts. All this one does is prevent fertilization of the egg - so there's no conception at all. Basically a medical version of a condom. Should have these available over the counter, and any others like it, as soon as we can.

Yes that’s a good take. For anyone to object in this instance is just about control.

And that's the thing, even in the Pro-Life movement there is a spectrum: there are those who see a fertilized egg as the start of human life technically from a science standpoint, there are those that come at it from a religious standpoint in their view of life, and then there are a smaller group, but not insignificant, who are really just misogynist control freaks who want to dominate women because they just do. The Pro-Life movement needs to continue to do everything and everything to keep the misogynistic control freaks out of the discussion.

[UNI88]

The Congressional Black Caucus says they’ll oppose the Senate Judiciary Committee’s consideration of two judges unless the “blue slip” process is changed.

Asks: He said they’d oppose the nominees unless Durbin would “act boldly” to make the following procedural changes:

• Eliminate blue slips for U.S. marshal and U.S. attorney nominees
• Require only one blue slip to be returned for other judicial nominees
• Require senators to state their reason for a blue slip to ensure their opposition does not stem from discrimination
• Create a process to consult Black caucus members with a jurisdictional interest in the nomination on the process

...
Black Caucus members have stressed their concerns are generally not about the nominees or their credentials themselves and instead come from the potential real-life impacts of judges’ rulings. It’s most acutely felt by Black Caucus members from blue districts in red states who have groused about the need to secure support from conservative senators to get judges confirmed — and the impact of conservative rulings on Black communities.

[SeattleGriz]

The Congressional Black Caucus says they’ll oppose the Senate Judiciary Committee’s consideration of two judges unless the “blue slip” process is changed.

Asks: He said they’d oppose the nominees unless Durbin would “act boldly” to make the following procedural changes:

• Eliminate blue slips for U.S. marshal and U.S. attorney nominees
• Require only one blue slip to be returned for other judicial nominees
• Require senators to state their reason for a blue slip to ensure their opposition does not stem from discrimination
• Create a process to consult Black caucus members with a jurisdictional interest in the nomination on the process

...
Black Caucus members have stressed their concerns are generally not about the nominees or their credentials themselves and instead come from the potential real-life impacts of judges’ rulings. It’s most acutely felt by Black Caucus members from blue districts in red states who have groused about the need to secure support from conservative senators to get judges confirmed — and the impact of conservative rulings on Black communities.

Whatever you're getting at...no!

[UNI88]

The Congressional Black Caucus says they’ll oppose the Senate Judiciary Committee’s consideration of two judges unless the “blue slip” process is changed.

Whatever you're getting at...no!

Explain to me how giving a conservative white senator the ability to enter a blue slip without giving a reason for a judicial nominee in a majority black district with no input from that district's representative(s) isn't the conservative version of woke (i.e. forcing your beliefs on others who disagree with them).