NegativeNull@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world · 1 year ago“Is Fish Meat?” One Justice’s Answer Shows Why the Supreme Court Is So Broken.slate.comexternal-linkmessage-square116fedilinkarrow-up1366arrow-down117
arrow-up1349arrow-down1external-link“Is Fish Meat?” One Justice’s Answer Shows Why the Supreme Court Is So Broken.slate.comNegativeNull@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world · 1 year agomessage-square116fedilink
minus-squarepostmateDumbass@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up24arrow-down2·1 year ago Justice Scalia Scalia has been dead for 7 years. All the current shit going on with the SC, and they pick this to write about?
minus-squaresomeguy3linkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up17·edit-21 year agoIt’s not about Scalia, it’s explaining the concept of justices making rulings based on their own identity and beliefs instead of facts and logic. To, you know, explain “All the current shit going on with the SC”.
minus-squarepostmateDumbass@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down1·1 year agoBribery, corrruption, and buying court decisions are the issues of today. Personal identity and beliefs don’t factor in when its already bought and paid for.
minus-squaresomeguy3linkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·1 year agoPoints to Roe v wade, EPA “major decisions”, etc.
minus-squarepostmateDumbass@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 year agoBought and paid for. These SC justices are employees of the people that bribe them.
minus-squaresomeguy3linkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·1 year agoBribery in many forms exists, but they are making decisions based on their identity. Something tells me you didn’t read the article, you should.
minus-squarepostmateDumbass@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down1·1 year agoScallia may have, but it got him killed in the end.
minus-squareZippy@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down2·1 year agoIf they have to go back 7 years to being up an example, that would indicate it is very rare they use only their identity to determine rulings. I don’t doubt they often ignore science but this article indicates that is not the case. Is there not something recent they could refer to?
minus-squareZanz@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6·1 year agoClerks don’t talk about justices that are serving or about the court while the clerk is serving.
minus-squareAlien Nathan Edward@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 year agoIf you think this is about justice Scalia you didn’t read it
Scalia has been dead for 7 years.
All the current shit going on with the SC, and they pick this to write about?
It’s not about Scalia, it’s explaining the concept of justices making rulings based on their own identity and beliefs instead of facts and logic. To, you know, explain “All the current shit going on with the SC”.
Bribery, corrruption, and buying court decisions are the issues of today.
Personal identity and beliefs don’t factor in when its already bought and paid for.
Points to Roe v wade, EPA “major decisions”, etc.
Bought and paid for.
These SC justices are employees of the people that bribe them.
Bribery in many forms exists, but they are making decisions based on their identity. Something tells me you didn’t read the article, you should.
Scallia may have, but it got him killed in the end.
If they have to go back 7 years to being up an example, that would indicate it is very rare they use only their identity to determine rulings.
I don’t doubt they often ignore science but this article indicates that is not the case. Is there not something recent they could refer to?
Clerks don’t talk about justices that are serving or about the court while the clerk is serving.
If you think this is about justice Scalia you didn’t read it