Author Topic: Court packing  (Read 3196 times)

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11215
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Court packing
« Reply #120 on: March 09, 2024, 07:37:25 pm »

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11215
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Court packing
« Reply #121 on: March 19, 2024, 06:06:29 pm »
https://us.yahoo.com/gma/supreme-court-allows-strict-texas-183703254.html

Quote
Supreme Court allows strict Texas SB4 immigration law to take effect for now
...
The law would authorize local and state law enforcement to arrest migrants they suspect crossed into the state illegally. It would also also give judges the power to order migrants to be transported to a port of entry and returned to Mexico regardless of their country of origin.

The Biden administration has argued that immigration law is solely the responsibility of the federal government, and not local jurisdictions, as laid out in the Constitution.
...
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in a dissent joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, said Tuesday the decision "invites further chaos and crisis in immigration enforcement."

"Texas can now immediately enforce its own law imposing criminal liability on thousands of noncitizens and requiring their removal to Mexico," Sotomayor wrote. "This law will disrupt sensitive foreign relations, frustrate the protection of individuals fleeing persecution, hamper active federal enforcement efforts, undermine federal agencies' ability to detect and monitor imminent security threats, and deter noncitizens from reporting abuse or trafficking."

"The Court gives a green light to a law that will upend the longstanding federal-state balance of power and sow chaos, when the only court to consider the law concluded that it is likely unconstitutional," she continued. "This law implicates serious issues that are subject to ongoing political debate, and Texas's novel scheme requires careful and reasoned consideration in the courts to determine which provisions may be unconstitutional. Although the Court today expresses no view on whether Texas's law is constitutional, and instead defers to a lower court's management of its docket, the Court of Appeals abused its discretion by entering an unreasoned and indefinite administrative stay that altered the status quo. This Court stands idle. Because I cannot, I dissent."
...
All six of the court's conservative justices agreed with the decision to allow SB 4 to take effect for now.
...
Immigrant advocates swiftly condemned the decision. Immigration Hub Deputy Director Beatriz Lopez called it "awful and disturbing."

"The Court just gave Abbott the green light to make targets out of immigrants and American citizens alike," Lopez said in a statement to ABC News. "This doesn't do anything to fix our immigration system or make Texas safer. It only serves to codify hate and empower an already unhinged governor."

The ACLU said it will continue to challenge SB 4 in court.

"#SB4 allows police to arrest people over suspicions about their immigration status, threatening Texans who are citizens and noncitizens alike," the ACLU of Texas said in a post on X, calling it an "extreme anti-immigrant law."

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11215
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Court packing
« Reply #122 on: March 20, 2024, 07:34:48 pm »

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11215
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Court packing
« Reply #123 on: March 24, 2024, 08:27:59 pm »


But Cousins still isn't calling for the Second Amendment to be applied.....

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11215
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Court packing
« Reply #124 on: April 16, 2024, 05:17:42 pm »
No surprises:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-casts-doubt-obstruction-161548743.html

Quote
Supreme Court casts doubt on obstruction charges against hundreds of Jan. 6 rioters
...
The Supreme Court cast doubt Tuesday on the legality of obstruction charges lodged against some 300 rioters arrested for breaking into the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
...
While the court's three liberals appeared to agree with prosecutors that law can be read broadly, the six conservatives sounded skeptical.

A ruling that limits the obstruction law could also undercut the prosecution of former President Trump. Two of the four criminal charges against him are based on the obstruction law.

Woke comments:

Quote
Who are these conservative justices bluffing? When it suits their Trumpian agenda, they call themselves "textualists" who decide cases based on the words of the laws. However, while ruling on Trump's disqualification from the ballot in Colorado, why didn't they stick to the text of Section 3 of 14th Amendment that clearly forbids an insurrectionist like Trump from running for office: "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same..." These justices are a disgrace for undermining the integrity of SCOTUS. Shame on them!

Quote
Can you imagine? If January 6th had been perpetuated by black people? The minions would be singing a different tune.  They truly believe they can do ANYTHING they want because most are white.

Quote
This corrupt, conservative majority will do anything to help TheRump and the MAGA insurrectionists. Whether we sit here and allow it to happen is up to us.