Nothing about the Alito recordings?
- Thread starter BelemNole
- Start date
The SCOTUS majority believes in Christian Sharia Law. They have abandoned the Constitution and the ideals behind it for their vision of all Americans living by their personal religious views.
Roberts is such a laughable loser at this point. His court will go down as one of the worst in American history. Christian nationalists creating law, guys on the take...
Roberts is such a laughable loser at this point. His court will go down as one of the worst in American history. Christian nationalists creating law, guys on the take...
Christian conservatives are aghast at "Sharia Law" in non-Christian countries.
And too stupid to understand that they are trying to do this same thing in America....
And too ignorant to remember that escaping suffocating religious edicts is why the first Europeans even immigrated to America....
There is a difference IMO between picking between people with different judicial philosophies as to how to interpret law and picking between people to represent political values.
Roberts is more of a example of a jurist who's decisions are based on a judicial philosophy even though many would disagree with that judicial philosophy. A philosophy is a basis for making decisions that doesn't change based on the particular case being brought up and not who's bringing it. A judicial philosophy might tend to favor one side or the other ideologically but it's also at least somewhat fair in that it doesn't change no matter who you are.
Alito is pretty much the example of a nakedly political player. His line of questioning in the Donald Trump immunity case is freaking disturbing which it sounds like he's very willing to hand Donald Trump immunity. Thomas is very similar to Alito in that he's nakedly a political player in the courts. These are two people who's views will shift based who is involved and not just the facts in the case. If Bill Clinton or Obama or Biden was asking for immunity, Alito wouldn't give it the time of day. Trump asks for it and not only gets a hearing but also might get a ruling that he's immune.
I say thank you, as we have learned we, as a country can't trust this garbage SCOTUS to provide us with the truth. So now we know what to expect in the future.
My question for Alito is which God qualifies as return to Godliness.
Also was interesting to read Justice Robert’s from the same event. Saying our job isn’t to be moral guides. Leave that for elected leaders. Our job is to look at cases and determine if they follow the law.
Also was interesting to read Justice Robert’s from the same event. Saying our job isn’t to be moral guides. Leave that for elected leaders. Our job is to look at cases and determine if they follow the law.
Last edited:
That she actually voiced those opinions. And that her husband serves on the Supreme Court. And shares some same views.
Otherwise:
Have to wait for them to die. Obviously Crooked Clarence is not going to retire as long as his billionaire "friends" keep buying him trips and pouring money in his pockets.
Alito? Well Alito - he's to damn dumb to figure out it's time to leave and, yes, won't leave until he dies.
We're stuck. I'm somewhat older than either of them and still in pretty good shape. I don't plan on croaking any time soon so don't hold your breath.
Isn’t that something that the neighbor who called Mrs. Alito a see you next Tuesday was actually paying her a compliment. She’s much worse than that.
Hoping Karma eventually stomps a mud hole in her fat ass.
Hoping Karma eventually stomps a mud hole in her fat ass.
Last edited:
On what effing planet is a SC justices spouse voicing personal opinions in any way objectionable?That she actually voiced those opinions. And that her husband serves on the Supreme Court. And shares some same views.
Otherwise:
Double especially in a (supposed) private conversation?
There’s no gotcha here. Sorry.
A deluded world where you feel that her spouse’s opinions don’t mirror her own.
But thanks for playing.
I anxiously await your list of allowed/disallowed SC Justice spousal opinions.
And fwiw, spouses can have differing opinions on stuff. So, not really sure that leap is valid...but even if it were, SC Justices can have opinions on politics and social issues. So, I'm not seeing a problem there either.
You just don't like the opinions.
Supreme court justices are people, different people will have different opinions on multiple topics, this is normal, acceptable, and allowed,.. Scalia and Ginsburg were both great justices.
The constant attacks on our judiciary and other institutions by the left are alarming.
Both of of them gave valid reasons for their legal opinions. You may not agree with them. But they both had well thought out logical arguments.
Alito and Thomas rarely seem to have either.
I'd say that supporting an insurrection trying to overturn democracy in the US would go over that line.
As well as supporting Nazis or white-supremacists. None of those folks have core American values that should be anywhere near any of our courts.
Don't expect anything different as long as the country has to put up this crap.. They are getting no respect or deserve it. Their approval is about as high as the House's.The constant attacks on our judiciary and other institutions by the left are alarming.
Last edited:
That's funny, until they come for you. It's always funny when it's just the homos and the gypsies being targeted.The constant attacks on our judiciary and other institutions by the left are alarming.
I was assured when Dobbs came down that it was just about that one thing. Turns out we have people on the SCOTUS who don't care so much about the law, they want their religion to guide your life.
I heard the audio on CNN.
Judge Alito was basically repeating what the undercover woman was saying to him. She was clearly baiting him.
I don't think Alito was as outrageous as he is being portrayed.
Cuz a SC justice cannot have opinions other than what someone says to him.... 🙄
My problem with the current conservative SC judges is how radically they're interpreting precedents that have stood for years/decades, based on really twisted originalist interpretations.
but it's totally ok for Trump to attack any judge/ruling he doesn't like? or Republicans attacking his conviction but praising Hunters?The constant attacks on our judiciary and other institutions by the left are alarming.
You attacked the left for attacking the judiciary, while forgetting to mention the GOP was doing just that not even a month ago.
If you’re going to accuse one side of being hypocrites while knowing the other side is as guilty if not more, I’d argue it is.
That's bothsidesbins for you 🤷♀️
He was nominated because he was ultra conservative. He was approved because the Senate could trust at that ringers, ala Gorsuch, Barret and Kavaughn would not be submitted.
Of course, it's equally fair to say the Senate was duped by these lying POS's of shit.
It's fair game these days in the Orange Turd's world of "who cares what is real. I don't like you anyway".
