Although the opinions focused on the ongoing debate over "universal injunctions," it's trans kids who will face the consequences of Monday's high court order.
Gormless cowards. Intellectualizing harsh treatment of vulnerable children and then pretending to be only interested in the legal aspects. Completely indifferent to the harm they're causing because they're in their own ivory tower.
Oh, and this is a good time to remind folks how many of the Justices are Catholic, and the Pope's demand for adherence to religious doctrine on gender dysphoria.
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.
I propose a nationwide injunction against describing the lopsided majority of the "justices" sitting in D.C. as constituting our "supreme" court. Thanks to the twice impeached and quadruply indicted Former Guy, and the Peter Principle, this ridiculous, fractured, shadowy decision should make clear that at least five of them have risen to their highest level of incompetence.and are, if anything, a "supreme" MESS!
"it is notable that neither Gorsuch nor Kavanaugh even acknowledged this element of the district court’s justification for the injunction"
The five justices who joined the two concurrences blathered on a lot but ultimately, I am inclined to agree with Jackson (no shock, I know) that given the nuances (not present in many injunction cases as far as I can tell) of the case, this was not a good case to inject themselves like this.
I don't believe in the neutrality of how all five choose when to care about injunctions. Limited as this is, this comes off as shadow docket monkey business yet again.
Winmill and the Ninth Circuit are the antipode of Kaczmaryk and the Fifth Circuit Presumably any additional plaintiffs who get before him will also get their own injunctions.
Gormless cowards. Intellectualizing harsh treatment of vulnerable children and then pretending to be only interested in the legal aspects. Completely indifferent to the harm they're causing because they're in their own ivory tower.
Oh, and this is a good time to remind folks how many of the Justices are Catholic, and the Pope's demand for adherence to religious doctrine on gender dysphoria.
…. E.g. EMTALA being argued soon). I will also bet that next time Idaho’s hired gun lawyers will contest the merits too.
And, yes, the Ninth Circuit has fewer lunatic judges than the Fifth but it’s still pretty predictable.
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.
I propose a nationwide injunction against describing the lopsided majority of the "justices" sitting in D.C. as constituting our "supreme" court. Thanks to the twice impeached and quadruply indicted Former Guy, and the Peter Principle, this ridiculous, fractured, shadowy decision should make clear that at least five of them have risen to their highest level of incompetence.and are, if anything, a "supreme" MESS!
Fuckers🤬😢💔
So does this allow Texas’s ban to go into effect?
Classic Kavanaugh, begging for scraps of attention with a completely useless concurrence
"it is notable that neither Gorsuch nor Kavanaugh even acknowledged this element of the district court’s justification for the injunction"
The five justices who joined the two concurrences blathered on a lot but ultimately, I am inclined to agree with Jackson (no shock, I know) that given the nuances (not present in many injunction cases as far as I can tell) of the case, this was not a good case to inject themselves like this.
I don't believe in the neutrality of how all five choose when to care about injunctions. Limited as this is, this comes off as shadow docket monkey business yet again.
Talk about a terrible gem for brief writing: “But this Court is responsible for resolving questions of national importance..” (Kavanaugh)
Winmill and the Ninth Circuit are the antipode of Kaczmaryk and the Fifth Circuit Presumably any additional plaintiffs who get before him will also get their own injunctions.