So if a law will potentially negatively affect you, you have to sue; you can't rely on others suing. That makes it much harder to get justice but sounds like good business for lawyers.
This supreme court blows up stuff, and then whines about being asked to deal with the consequences. If SCOTUS weren't repeatedly threatening human rights a…
So if a law will potentially negatively affect you, you have to sue; you can't rely on others suing. That makes it much harder to get justice but sounds like good business for lawyers.
This supreme court blows up stuff, and then whines about being asked to deal with the consequences. If SCOTUS weren't repeatedly threatening human rights and indeed very lives, by the way it enables and encourages the very worst from politicians, then judges wouldn't have to issue universal injunctions. If you want less drama you need to lower the stakes. This court does the opposite and then blames everybody else. It looks an awful lot like gaslighting to me.
So if a law will potentially negatively affect you, you have to sue; you can't rely on others suing. That makes it much harder to get justice but sounds like good business for lawyers.
This supreme court blows up stuff, and then whines about being asked to deal with the consequences. If SCOTUS weren't repeatedly threatening human rights and indeed very lives, by the way it enables and encourages the very worst from politicians, then judges wouldn't have to issue universal injunctions. If you want less drama you need to lower the stakes. This court does the opposite and then blames everybody else. It looks an awful lot like gaslighting to me.