Gotta love that SCOTUS says yeah it's ok to ban specific apps for this purpose. Even though if the ban was on all Chinese apps and websites for the same reasoning... that likely wouldn't be constitutional. I don't even think that was ever brought up in argument but it probably should have been?
This basically sets the precedent that the government can just target whatever app or website it wants if it uses this logic, and that's not a good precedent to have.
Why is it OK for the courts to submit unsigned opinions. I looked it up, and it is a per curiam opinion which means by the court. I, however, think we need to know who actually wrote the opinion. It might not matter in this particular case, but could matter in others.
Probably because PeggyJo would insult it if it were written by one jurist but praise it if it was written by another. "I need to know who wrote it to know if I should be mad or not"
“In short … certainly not final.” I wonder if that’s not the point. SCOTUS seems concerned mostly with curtailing the rights of women and people of color … and passing off other considerations to other people—in this case, their master Trump.
Ok, I'm an Old Fart(ess) but I really can't feel too sorry for those 170 million TikTokkers--there are certainly a lot of places they can go without having China collect god knows what data on our kids. I feel even less sorry for the "influencers" who are just basically commercials.
Oh, Trump (and MAGA) has enriched our vocabulary so! Hypocrisy, “fake” everything, China China China. SCOTUS seems to assume China hates Americans and is willing to spy on 170 million. X only reserves its scorn for Jews, people of color, Muslims, women—that’s fair, isn’t it?
Gotta love that SCOTUS says yeah it's ok to ban specific apps for this purpose. Even though if the ban was on all Chinese apps and websites for the same reasoning... that likely wouldn't be constitutional. I don't even think that was ever brought up in argument but it probably should have been?
This basically sets the precedent that the government can just target whatever app or website it wants if it uses this logic, and that's not a good precedent to have.
What about banning Facebook … which was, in 2015-16, partially funded by Russia.
Why is it OK for the courts to submit unsigned opinions. I looked it up, and it is a per curiam opinion which means by the court. I, however, think we need to know who actually wrote the opinion. It might not matter in this particular case, but could matter in others.
The Supreme Court is proud to avoid appearances … unless it’s a matter of denying rights to minorities.
Probably because PeggyJo would insult it if it were written by one jurist but praise it if it was written by another. "I need to know who wrote it to know if I should be mad or not"
Nobody here but us chickens …
I suspect there is a wolf in the hen house
Alito and Thomas had nothing to say individually.
Interesting
Nor ever.
“In short … certainly not final.” I wonder if that’s not the point. SCOTUS seems concerned mostly with curtailing the rights of women and people of color … and passing off other considerations to other people—in this case, their master Trump.
Ok, I'm an Old Fart(ess) but I really can't feel too sorry for those 170 million TikTokkers--there are certainly a lot of places they can go without having China collect god knows what data on our kids. I feel even less sorry for the "influencers" who are just basically commercials.
Oh, Trump (and MAGA) has enriched our vocabulary so! Hypocrisy, “fake” everything, China China China. SCOTUS seems to assume China hates Americans and is willing to spy on 170 million. X only reserves its scorn for Jews, people of color, Muslims, women—that’s fair, isn’t it?
🤲
🤲