If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Scotus Blog)   The Supreme Court will make history today. Well..might make history. Well..at least there will be a thread to make Scalia jokes today. (Decisions at 10am Eastern)   (scotusblog.com) divider line 171
    More: Interesting, supreme courts, history  
•       •       •

4085 clicks; posted to Politics » on 24 Jun 2013 at 8:25 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



171 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-06-24 08:26:59 AM
SCOTUS will uphold DOMA and declare gays to be 3/5 people.
 
2013-06-24 08:27:14 AM
Two Scalias walk into a bar. The third one ducks.

/Subby didn't say they had to be funny.
 
2013-06-24 08:30:17 AM

Muta: SCOTUS will uphold DOMA and declare gays to be 3/5 people.


Please, 4/5 just because of the fabulousness
 
2013-06-24 08:33:26 AM

picturescrazy: /Subby didn't say they had to be funny.


Take my Scalia. Please.
 
2013-06-24 08:33:52 AM
Alito is making Scalia look reasonable these days.  That's where all the crazy is.
 
2013-06-24 08:34:14 AM
... That was no lady, that was my Scalia!
 
2013-06-24 08:35:12 AM
I had my Scalia removed when I was a kid, and got to eat ice cream for a week.
 
2013-06-24 08:35:28 AM
Prop 8 won't have standing
DOMA is illegal
 
2013-06-24 08:38:21 AM
When the Supreme Court rules it is legal to use lethal Defensive Force against the people and companies that pump poisons into our water, air, and food....that will be a historic day.
 
2013-06-24 08:40:54 AM
I'm half-expecting it all to go state's rights, IF the conservative majority holds to ...well... being conservative.

DOMA will get shiatcanned, while Prop 8 will be upheld (or stricken down only in the weakest sense).

IANACL, so I can't really say where stuff will fall in the spectrum between "upheld" and "stricken."  Judges and lawyers are tricksy.  So my predictions are a rough estimate.

bleh.
 
2013-06-24 08:42:21 AM
Any chance they might wimp out and push this back yet again?

I hope they do the right thing and then we will hear the teeth gnashing and lamentations of the conservatives. Civil rights should never be a "states' rights" issue.
 
2013-06-24 08:43:48 AM

xanadian: I'm half-expecting it all to go state's rights, IF the conservative majority holds to ...well... being conservative.

DOMA will get shiatcanned, while Prop 8 will be upheld (or stricken down only in the weakest sense).

IANACL, so I can't really say where stuff will fall in the spectrum between "upheld" and "stricken."  Judges and lawyers are tricksy.  So my predictions are a rough estimate.

bleh.


They will strike down DOMA, they will not rule one way or the other on Prop 8 letting the lower court rulings stand.
 
2013-06-24 08:44:01 AM
A lady goes to the vet.  He looks behind her but doesn't see a pet.  "It's about my husband, Anton Scalia... He refuses to eat anything but dog food."  She hands him an empty dog food can.  The doc reads the label.
"Hmm.  Meat, barley, meat by-products... It's not ideal, but it shouldn't hurt him."
A few months later, the vet encounters Mrs. Scalia in line at the grocery store.  He sees that she isn't buying any dog food.
"Is Justice Scalia feeling better now?"
"No, he's dead."
"Dead?  But surely it wasn't the dog food that killed him."
"No, he was licking his balls in the driveway, and I backed over him in the station wagon."
 
2013-06-24 08:44:44 AM
I would make a killing cornering the popcorn market today
 
2013-06-24 08:45:37 AM
...so I say "Do you love me?" and she says "No! But that's a really nice Scalia!"
 
2013-06-24 08:46:40 AM

Tom_Slick: They will strike down DOMA, they will not rule one way or the other on Prop 8 letting the lower court rulings stand.


As hard as they were trying there is enough room for standing to require a court ruling

Unless the court gets all Alzheimer's on us and goes Bush v Gore saying "Really this time and only this time, its a fluke never again can this be used"
 
2013-06-24 08:47:13 AM

loveblondieo: Any chance they might wimp out and push this back yet again?

I hope they do the right thing and then we will hear the teeth gnashing and lamentations of the conservatives. Civil rights should never be a "states' rights" issue.


Yeah, I'm more than a little annoyed that legislation that has been passed pretty much because of open bigotry is being protected because SCOTUS doesn't want to step on any toes.

/we'll almost certainly get a decision on both cases today but the conventional wisdom is that Prop 8 will be decided on States Rights or standing not based on the same sex marriage issue. I think pretty much everyone expects DOMA to be struck down.
 
2013-06-24 08:47:25 AM

soupafi: Prop 8 won't have standing
DOMA is illegal


and IIRC the former means that California remains fabulous but the decision is not binding anywhere else, while the latter means that all states must recognize gay marriages entered into where such entrance is already legal, correct?
 
2013-06-24 08:47:54 AM
According to the blog, at least one further decision day will occur next week. As such, I do not expect any rulings regarding Proposition 8 nor the Defense of Marriage Act today; the high court typically releases controversial, high-profile rulings last. Following the overturning of unreasonable bans on civilian handgun ownership in the District of Columbia and, later, Chicago, I have come to suspect that the members of the high court gain rare satisfaction from the resulting artificial creation of suspense.
 
2013-06-24 08:49:03 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: Tom_Slick: They will strike down DOMA, they will not rule one way or the other on Prop 8 letting the lower court rulings stand.

As hard as they were trying there is enough room for standing to require a court ruling

Unless the court gets all Alzheimer's on us and goes Bush v Gore saying "Really this time and only this time, its a fluke never again can this be used"


I just think they will wimp out on Prop 8 and duck making a ruling at all.
 
2013-06-24 08:49:49 AM
The conservatives will uphold DOMA using convoluted logic about how the judges shouldn't be the moral police and that elected representatives put that law in place, so they should remove it. States' rights and small government supporters of Scalia will give him a standing ovation causing heads to explode due to cognitive dissonance.
 
2013-06-24 08:50:41 AM
I had to use some weird cream to get rid of my Scalia.

Ok, in all seriousness, is this going to be on CSPAN or anything? I'm lucky enough to be home today.
 
2013-06-24 08:52:24 AM

Tom_Slick: IdBeCrazyIf: Tom_Slick: They will strike down DOMA, they will not rule one way or the other on Prop 8 letting the lower court rulings stand.

As hard as they were trying there is enough room for standing to require a court ruling

Unless the court gets all Alzheimer's on us and goes Bush v Gore saying "Really this time and only this time, its a fluke never again can this be used"

I just think they will wimp out on Prop 8 and duck making a ruling at all.


Nah, they'll go for lower court ruling standing and then we'll all be back here in 4 years when states that have banned gay marriage have people with standing sue under the equal protection because those states still must recognize other states marriages.

Basically the courts are desperately trying NOT to pull a Roe v Wade when in reality they just need to pull the trigger instead of slowly and painfully peeling this bandaid off.
 
2013-06-24 08:53:28 AM

tudorgurl: Ok, in all seriousness, is this going to be on CSPAN or anything? I'm lucky enough to be home today.


I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, SCOTUS does not allow cameras in the court room, and I think the findings are written, so other than the live shot outside the building there won't be much to show.
 
2013-06-24 08:53:56 AM

Dimensio: According to the blog, at least one further decision day will occur next week. As such, I do not expect any rulings regarding Proposition 8 nor the Defense of Marriage Act today; the high court typically releases controversial, high-profile rulings last. Following the overturning of unreasonable bans on civilian handgun ownership in the District of Columbia and, later, Chicago, I have come to suspect that the members of the high court gain rare satisfaction from the resulting artificial creation of suspense.


We still have four VERY high profile cases left for them to issue decisions on. At least a couple of them should come today.
 
2013-06-24 08:55:10 AM

tudorgurl: Ok, in all seriousness, is this going to be on CSPAN or anything? I'm lucky enough to be home today.


You can watch the 24/7 news agencies scramble to read the written decisions that were run out of the court room by lackeys
 
2013-06-24 08:56:05 AM

Tom_Slick: tudorgurl: Ok, in all seriousness, is this going to be on CSPAN or anything? I'm lucky enough to be home today.

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, SCOTUS does not allow cameras in the court room, and I think the findings are written, so other than the live shot outside the building there won't be much to show.


yeah no cameras in the court room. scotusblog usually blogs live about it though.
 
2013-06-24 08:56:56 AM

RminusQ: while the latter means that all states must recognize gay marriages entered into where such entrance is already legal, correct?


No -- that section of the DOMA currently isn't being litigated.

The only thing the supreme court is deciding re: DOMA is whether the federal government has to recognize a same-sex marriage made in those states that allow them.
 
2013-06-24 08:57:49 AM
Antonin Scalia has no nose.

How does he smell?

Like crap.
 
2013-06-24 08:59:47 AM

Tom_Slick: tudorgurl: Ok, in all seriousness, is this going to be on CSPAN or anything? I'm lucky enough to be home today.

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, SCOTUS does not allow cameras in the court room, and I think the findings are written, so other than the live shot outside the building there won't be much to show.


Correct.  They just hand out paper copies and the journalists all read it and report on it in real time.
 
2013-06-24 08:59:52 AM

bulldg4life: tudorgurl: Ok, in all seriousness, is this going to be on CSPAN or anything? I'm lucky enough to be home today.

You can watch the 24/7 news agencies scramble to read the written decisions that were run out of the court room by lackeys


And then you can laugh when CNN gets it wrong.

Voiceofreason01: We still have four VERY high profile cases left for them to issue decisions on. At least a couple of them should come today.


If we don't get Perry or Windsor, I'd definitely expect to get Fisher v. Austin come down today.
 
2013-06-24 09:00:23 AM
Scalia walks into a bar association with a big ship's wheel fastened to his pelvic region. Roberts (the bar tender) asks him "what's with the wheel?".  Scalia responds "I don't know, but it's drivin' me nuts!"
 
2013-06-24 09:01:15 AM
So the guy says, "Hey, what are you doing to that Scalia?".   So I said, "I'm just helping him up."
 
2013-06-24 09:01:23 AM
I would be a very happy woman if Scalia and Thomas would extricate themselves from the court. Neither bring any good to the office and actually hinder progress.
 
2013-06-24 09:02:53 AM
richardbrenneman.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-06-24 09:04:25 AM
Always amazes me How liberals ask the USSC to defer to Congress in all aspects... except for DOMA. That was your primary reasoning for ACA. At least try to be slightly consistent.
 
2013-06-24 09:06:40 AM

MyRandomName: Always amazes me How liberals ask the USSC to defer to Congress in all aspects... except for DOMA. That was your primary reasoning for ACA. At least try to be slightly consistent.


lolwut
 
2013-06-24 09:06:50 AM
Scalia strongly disfavors the Court's ruling in Miranda v. Arizona, which held that a confession by an arrested suspect who had not been advised of his rights was inadmissible in court, and voted to overrule Miranda in the 2000 case of Dickerson v. United States, but was in a minority of two with Justice Clarence Thomas. Calling the Miranda decision a "milestone of judicial overreaching"

Fark them.
 
2013-06-24 09:09:21 AM
DOMA will be upheld
Prop8 will be tossed

Thats what I am putting my money on
 
2013-06-24 09:11:48 AM
Scalia and a duck walk into a bar.

The bartender says, "Where'd you get the pig."

Scalia says, "That's not a pig, that's a duck."

He says, "I was talking to the duck."
 
2013-06-24 09:12:05 AM
Here is to hoping we can finally be done with this affirmative action crap...
 
2013-06-24 09:15:20 AM
Scalia walks into a bar with a toad on his head. 'What the hell is that?' asks the bartender. The toad replies, 'I don't know - it started as a wart on my ass and grew.'
 
2013-06-24 09:17:01 AM

Muta: SCOTUS will uphold DOMA and declare gays to be 3/5 people.


They already treat unmarried people (including the gheys) as 1/2 a person, so I guess that extra 1/10 would be a victory for the gays.  Rest of us still second class citizens though.
 
2013-06-24 09:18:18 AM
Another case I am looking forward to hearing the results on. This, I fear, will not go in the right direction.
 
2013-06-24 09:20:11 AM
Scalia, Thomas and Alito walk into a bar. The bartender says, "What is this, some kind of joke?"
 
2013-06-24 09:20:46 AM

MyRandomName: Always amazes me How liberals ask the USSC to defer to Congress in all aspects... except for DOMA. That was your primary reasoning for ACA. At least try to be slightly consistent.


Your criticism is interesting, but I believe that your established history of dishonesty diminishes your credibility.
 
2013-06-24 09:30:58 AM

loveblondieo: Another case I am looking forward to hearing the results on. This, I fear, will not go in the right direction.


I haven't heard of that one.  From reading the article, it sounds pretty shiatty for everyone involved.
 
2013-06-24 09:33:17 AM

MyRandomName: Always amazes me How liberals ask the USSC to defer to Congress in all aspects... except for DOMA. That was your primary reasoning for ACA. At least try to be slightly consistent.


What color is the sky  in your world?
 
2013-06-24 09:33:35 AM
Scalia calls home to his wife, and says, "I'm gonna be out with John all night, don't wait up." Scalia's wife hangs up the phone, turns to the guy next to her in bed and says, "It's all right, John, he says he's with you."
 
2013-06-24 09:37:35 AM

PanicMan: loveblondieo: Another case I am looking forward to hearing the results on. This, I fear, will not go in the right direction.

I haven't heard of that one.  From reading the article, it sounds pretty shiatty for everyone involved.


I am really rooting for the adopted parents. The biological "father" didn't want anything to do with Veronica initially.
 
2013-06-24 09:38:07 AM
 
2013-06-24 09:40:30 AM

loveblondieo: Another case I am looking forward to hearing the results on. This, I fear, will not go in the right direction.


FTA:The delay in notification was blamed on a clerical error: [Dusten] Brown's named was misspelled when Veronica's mother first filed the papers. But attorneys for Brown alleged that the mistake was purposeful.

When your name sounds like Dustin, but isn't spelled that way, you probably can't claim that any mistake is purposeful.

/not to be confused with his brother, Dust'n Brown, or sister, Dustyn Brown.
 
2013-06-24 09:41:41 AM

loveblondieo: Another case I am looking forward to hearing the results on. This, I fear, will not go in the right direction.


What would you consider the "right direction"?

/just curious
//I hate adoption cases when they end up like this
 
2013-06-24 09:43:12 AM
I challenge anyone here to read MacDonald and use it to demonstrate how anyone on the "liberal" side of the bench gives a fark about civil rights.  I'll give extra points to anyone who takes Thomas's concurring opinion to demonstrate he is the moron everyone says he is.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf
 
2013-06-24 09:48:03 AM

tudorgurl: What would you consider the "right direction"?


She should be with her legally adopted parents. Her biological mother even signed the rights over to them. He was not a part of their lives and refused to even give child support.
 
2013-06-24 09:49:18 AM

loveblondieo: tudorgurl: What would you consider the "right direction"?

She should be with her legally adopted parents. Her biological mother even signed the rights over to them. He was not a part of their lives and refused to even give child support.


Absolutely correct.
 
2013-06-24 09:50:35 AM

loveblondieo: PanicMan: loveblondieo: Another case I am looking forward to hearing the results on. This, I fear, will not go in the right direction.

I haven't heard of that one.  From reading the article, it sounds pretty shiatty for everyone involved.

I am really rooting for the adopted parents. The biological "father" didn't want anything to do with Veronica initially.


That's a tough one.  Was the father given a choice of custody of the child?

That particular article says "terminate parental rights or pay child support" were his only options.  If he had known that full custody was on the table, would he have taken it? If so, he should have gotten child support from the mother.

Could it be that the mother wanted to give up the baby for adoption and not give it to the father (save her money)?

The only thing that really gets me about this is the whole "ICWA" angle.  The child is 3/256th native.  What "culture" was she born into?  Why should that extremely small percentage take precedence over the rest of her DNA?
 
2013-06-24 09:51:50 AM
Why does Scalia wear cowboy boots under his robe?
- You can't fit that much shiat in a shoe!
 
2013-06-24 09:53:30 AM
Why was Scalia nominated to the SCOTUS?
- To keep the flies off the Justices!
 
2013-06-24 09:53:38 AM
My first car was a Scalia. Wasn't worth the maintenance.
 
2013-06-24 09:55:10 AM

loveblondieo: Another case I am looking forward to hearing the results on. This, I fear, will not go in the right direction.


Grrrr....regardless of outcome of the case, Daddy is pissing me off....
 
2013-06-24 09:55:16 AM

Muta: SCOTUS will uphold DOMA and declare gays to be 3/5 people.


I have been losing weight lately, but I thought that was because I was dieting and on an exercise routine. Who knew SCOTUS was responsible.
 
2013-06-24 09:55:27 AM
What's the proper procedure to ask the Court for a bathroom break?
- Excuse me Justices, I will see ya / Gonna give birth to another Scalia!
 
2013-06-24 09:56:40 AM

tudorgurl: Absolutely correct.


Whew! I did not want to hash it out in the middle of a nice light-hearted Scalia bashing thread.
 
2013-06-24 09:57:10 AM
Cert granted for a bunch o' cases, including NLRB v. Noel Canning with the specific note "The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. In addition to the questions presented by the petition, the parties are directed to brief and argue the following question: Whether the President's recess-appointment power may be exercised when the Senate is convening every three days in pro forma sessions."
 
2013-06-24 09:57:46 AM
I'm going to be glued to SCOTUSBLOG.com every day they announce decisions until this DOMA/Prop 8 thing is finally settled.
 
2013-06-24 09:58:12 AM

BizarreMan: That's a tough one. Was the father given a choice of custody of the child?


He probably coudn't get custody as active Military, especially since he was getting deployed 4 months after the birth.
 
2013-06-24 09:58:42 AM
It might be interesting to note that we here in South Carolina are rooting for the Capobiancos, while Oklahomans seem to be for Dusten Brown.
 
2013-06-24 10:00:08 AM
What's a Cleveland Scalia?
- You wrap a woman in cling wrap and shiat all over her civil rights.
 
2013-06-24 10:00:13 AM
We all tuned to CNN for the most accurate reporting on the outcome?
 
2013-06-24 10:01:25 AM
Naked blonde walks into a bar with Scalia under one arm, and a two-foot salami under the other. The bartender says, I guess you won't be needing a drink. The naked lady says...
 
2013-06-24 10:02:06 AM
How can you tell the new reporter on the Supreme Court beat?
- He doesn't know scat from Scalia!
 
2013-06-24 10:04:54 AM

RminusQ: Cert granted for a bunch o' cases, including NLRB v. Noel Canning with the specific note "The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. In addition to the questions presented by the petition, the parties are directed to brief and argue the following question: Whether the President's recess-appointment power may be exercised when the Senate is convening every three days in pro forma sessions."


That'll be lulzy.
 
2013-06-24 10:05:18 AM
What's the delay?
 
2013-06-24 10:05:33 AM
Why doesn't Scalia like the rodeo?
- People keep shoveling him.
 
2013-06-24 10:09:11 AM
Private! How tall are you?
- Sir! Five nine sir!
I didn't know you could stack Scalia that high!
 
2013-06-24 10:09:29 AM
I don't think we're getting it today.
 
2013-06-24 10:10:23 AM

cameroncrazy1984: I don't think we're getting it today.


But there's 2 "its"! At least one should come, or they are just assholes.
 
2013-06-24 10:10:35 AM
Civil liberties advocates often say: "Wish in one hand and Scalia in the other and see which fills up first."
 
2013-06-24 10:11:06 AM

DamnYankees: cameroncrazy1984: I don't think we're getting it today.

But there's 2 "its"! At least one should come, or they are just assholes.


I think they're just being assholes. There's no other explanation. That's really what I want to believe.
 
2013-06-24 10:11:13 AM

cameroncrazy1984: I don't think we're getting it today.


And they Supreme Court won't release any decisions either?
 
2013-06-24 10:11:57 AM
How can you tell your gay neighbor is a conservative?
- His dick tastes like Scalia!
 
2013-06-24 10:12:56 AM
From ScotusBlog: The first 2 decisions took up one of the three boxes of printouts.
 
2013-06-24 10:13:18 AM
Oh yeah, knock out the important ones first....
 
2013-06-24 10:13:23 AM

PanicMan: From ScotusBlog: The first 2 decisions took up one of the three boxes of printouts.


Third decision is out, and its more boring than the first two.
 
2013-06-24 10:13:37 AM
*sigh* Looks like it's back to waiting. Do they announce decisions every day for the rest of this week, or what? Anyone know how this works?
 
2013-06-24 10:15:05 AM
FISHER IS OUT. RESULTS BEING READ.
 
2013-06-24 10:15:05 AM
Why is anilingus like arguing before the SCOTUS?
- One slip of the tongue and you're in deep Scalia.
 
2013-06-24 10:16:13 AM
"The holding is because the Fifth Circuit did not hold the university to the demanding burden of strict scrutiny articulated in Grutter and Bakke, its decision afffiming the district court's grant of summary judgment was incorrect. "

Clear as day...
 
2013-06-24 10:16:29 AM
There's a report on Fisher v. UTA
 
2013-06-24 10:16:46 AM
Here I sit, just had to pee-a,
But paid my dime to take a Scalia.
 
2013-06-24 10:17:22 AM
7-1 ruling in Fisher, Ginsburg dissents, Kagan recuses.
 
2013-06-24 10:17:46 AM

loveblondieo: tudorgurl: Absolutely correct.

Whew! I did not want to hash it out in the middle of a nice light-hearted Scalia bashing thread.


LOL Sorry, I didn't mean to sound all teacher-y.
 
2013-06-24 10:17:47 AM
How can you tell the conservative wing of the Court is stuck up?
- They think their Scalia don't stink!
 
2013-06-24 10:17:54 AM

DamnYankees: PanicMan: From ScotusBlog: The first 2 decisions took up one of the three boxes of printouts.

Third decision is out, and its more boring than the first two.


Even a boring decision can be an interesting read.  But yeah, I'm just here for the big decisions.
 
2013-06-24 10:18:04 AM
I swear to god I'm literate....
 
2013-06-24 10:18:33 AM
I still have no idea what the ruling in Fisher means. And I'm a real life lawyer, I get paid for it and everything.
 
2013-06-24 10:18:43 AM
Sooo... as best I can tell. District court told Fisher to STFU, appeals court said "Yeah, seriously STFU" without hearings, and Supreme Court is now saying "Hey appeals court, might wanna have a hearing or two before you tell her to STFU"

Ginsburg apparently is the only dissenter (7-1 decision, Kagan recused). Thomas, of course, says he would overrule the entire concept of affirmative action.
 
2013-06-24 10:19:43 AM
Conservatives' opinions are like assholes. Every conservative has one, and most of 'em smell like Scalia.
 
2013-06-24 10:19:54 AM

DamnYankees: I still have no idea what the ruling in Fisher means. And I'm a real life lawyer, I get paid for it and everything.


Then I don't feel so bad. It seems "remanded" and "Vacated" are mutually exclusive.
 
2013-06-24 10:19:55 AM
Jonathan Chait  @jonathanchait
SCOTUS rules that affirmative action cannot be decided now in light of heavy news week. Journalists praise ruling.
 
2013-06-24 10:21:59 AM
From SCOTUSBlog: "The majority seems to reaffirm that diversity is a compelling interest if only because that rule was not challenged by the plaintiffs in the case. "
 
2013-06-24 10:22:16 AM
So we really have no closure on Fisher?
 
2013-06-24 10:22:29 AM
On cnn.com:  "Supreme Court issues ruling in affirmative action case from Texas. Details soon."

So either they're being cautious (having learned from the Obamacare snafu) or they have no idea either.
 
2013-06-24 10:22:32 AM
From SCOTUSBlog: "And so in terms of who could announce opinions, we could still get another one from Kennedy; we could also get one from Scalia or the Chief. "

There's no way those are good options.
 
2013-06-24 10:22:35 AM

tudorgurl: From SCOTUSBlog: "The majority seems to reaffirm that diversity is a compelling interest if only because that rule was not challenged by the plaintiffs in the case. "


That's for Fisher v UT
 
2013-06-24 10:22:50 AM
What a mess for Fisher. My guess is that the justices were deadlocked 4-4 for months, and because they couldn't come to an agreement, they just decided to whiff on it and let it have another go on the merry-go-round.

Way to waste everyone's time, guys.
 
2013-06-24 10:23:05 AM
We could still hear more from Kennedy, Scalia, or Roberts before the morning is finished.
 
2013-06-24 10:23:07 AM

R.A.Danny: So we really have no closure on Fisher?


Looks like that is the case. Not boding well for other decisions...
 
2013-06-24 10:23:13 AM

R.A.Danny: So we really have no closure on Fisher?


You think it would be hard to punt wearing those long robes...
 
2013-06-24 10:23:26 AM
Only if because....WTF?
 
2013-06-24 10:23:36 AM
So basically, as long as the university is using AA to ensure a diverse student pop, it's ok?
 
2013-06-24 10:24:25 AM
Dylan Matthews  @dylanmatt
This is like the SCOTUS equivalent of the Sopranos finale.
 
2013-06-24 10:24:38 AM

tudorgurl: So basically, as long as the university is using AA to ensure a diverse student pop, it's ok?


Until the actual use is argued which somehow it wasn't or something.
 
2013-06-24 10:24:46 AM

DamnYankees: Dylan Matthews  @dylanmatt
This is like the SCOTUS equivalent of the Sopranos finale.


Bwaahaaha----
 
2013-06-24 10:25:24 AM

tudorgurl: So basically, as long as the university is using AA to ensure a diverse student pop, it's ok?


That's what it looks like.
 
2013-06-24 10:25:40 AM

R.A.Danny: tudorgurl: So basically, as long as the university is using AA to ensure a diverse student pop, it's ok?

Until the actual use is argued which somehow it wasn't or something.


Interesting. From SCOTUSBlog for <i>Fisher v UT</i>: "Amy Howe: Here's the money quote: "The reviewing court must ultimately be satisfied that no workable race-neutral alternatives would produce the educational benefits of diversity."
 
2013-06-24 10:25:46 AM

R.A.Danny: tudorgurl: So basically, as long as the university is using AA to ensure a diverse student pop, it's ok?

Until the actual use is argued which somehow it wasn't or something.


So, are they like, avoiding making concrete decisions on technicalities here, or something? That would seem a bit cowardly.
 
2013-06-24 10:25:51 AM
And we're done for the day. We officially got absolutely nothing.
 
2013-06-24 10:26:04 AM
Damnit!!!   the saga must now continue.   they are sending affirmative action back down the the lower court with a verdict of "I cant believe you wrote this"
 
2013-06-24 10:26:31 AM
Wow...so no DOMA/PROP 8 ruling? What are they doing!?!?!
 
2013-06-24 10:27:05 AM

tudorgurl: Wow...so no DOMA/PROP 8 ruling? What are they doing!?!?!


Trying to fark with my head.
 
2013-06-24 10:27:16 AM
No Voting Rights Act??
 
2013-06-24 10:27:33 AM

DamnYankees: From SCOTUSBlog: "And so in terms of who could announce opinions, we could still get another one from Kennedy; we could also get one from Scalia or the Chief. "

There's no way those are good options.


Kennedy could be either side of a 5-4 decision, and given PPACA it's entirely possible Roberts could be, too. Regardless, another employer-happy decision, in UTSW v. Nassar, is apparently the last word of the day.
 
2013-06-24 10:27:40 AM

DamnYankees: Dylan Matthews  @dylanmatt
This is like the SCOTUS equivalent of the Sopranos finale.


Unfortunately the asshole here doesn't die in the end
 
2013-06-24 10:28:07 AM

tudorgurl: R.A.Danny: tudorgurl: So basically, as long as the university is using AA to ensure a diverse student pop, it's ok?

Until the actual use is argued which somehow it wasn't or something.

Interesting. From SCOTUSBlog for <i>Fisher v UT</i>: "Amy Howe: Here's the money quote: "The reviewing court must ultimately be satisfied that no workable race-neutral alternatives would produce the educational benefits of diversity."


Sounds a lot like "You can't say minorities are too stupid to compete on their own merits until it is proven that they are then they can".

Not my thoughts, just what I'm deciphering.
 
2013-06-24 10:28:09 AM
Farking cowards! They're too farking afraid to say their decision.
 
2013-06-24 10:28:10 AM

tudorgurl: Wow...so no DOMA/PROP 8 ruling? What are they doing!?!?!


Damn.  So now what?
 
2013-06-24 10:28:12 AM

DamnYankees: Dylan Matthews  @dylanmatt
This is like the SCOTUS equivalent of the Sopranos finale.


Heh heh heh
 
2013-06-24 10:28:12 AM
sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2013-06-24 10:28:24 AM

Cythraul: tudorgurl: Wow...so no DOMA/PROP 8 ruling? What are they doing!?!?!

Trying to fark with my head.


No kidding! This is ridiculous!

UT Southwestern vs Nassar (retaliation claims case) : Here is our page for Nassar, the retaliation claims case: http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/university-of-texas-southw e stern-medical-center-v-nassar/
 
2013-06-24 10:28:42 AM

tudorgurl: Wow...so no DOMA/PROP 8 ruling? What are they doing!?!?!


Waiting until later in the week, which isn't that surprising. Everyone expected that they wouldn't address ALL the major cases today, so it was to be expected that some of them would be pushed back until probably Thursday.
 
2013-06-24 10:28:45 AM

tudorgurl: Wow...so no DOMA/PROP 8 ruling? What are they doing!?!?!


Nothing on the Voting Rights Act, either. That's the one I'm anxious about. Depending on how that is decided, it could have a huge impact on who making laws in the future.
 
2013-06-24 10:28:52 AM

tudorgurl: Wow...so no DOMA/PROP 8 ruling? What are they doing!?!?!


stalling like a motherfarker. Also no VRA §5 ruling.
 
2013-06-24 10:29:02 AM

DamnYankees: From SCOTUSBlog: "And so in terms of who could announce opinions, we could still get another one from Kennedy; we could also get one from Scalia or the Chief. "

There's no way those are good options.


Well, Windsor and Perry didn't come out today, so in my opinion, that's the best we could have hoped for given the remaining judges.
 
2013-06-24 10:29:45 AM
What? They can't finish now, it's not even noon. To drag this out is cruel.
 
2013-06-24 10:30:07 AM

NeoCortex42: tudorgurl: Wow...so no DOMA/PROP 8 ruling? What are they doing!?!?!

Nothing on the Voting Rights Act, either. That's the one I'm anxious about. Depending on how that is decided, it could have a huge impact on who making laws in the future.


I'm not that worried about that one. I doubt they could fark up that ruling. They wouldn't fark up that ruling. Would they?
 
2013-06-24 10:32:36 AM

Cythraul: NeoCortex42: tudorgurl: Wow...so no DOMA/PROP 8 ruling? What are they doing!?!?!

Nothing on the Voting Rights Act, either. That's the one I'm anxious about. Depending on how that is decided, it could have a huge impact on who making laws in the future.

I'm not that worried about that one. I doubt they could fark up that ruling. They wouldn't fark up that ruling. Would they?


I really hope not. Just look at the crap that was attempted this past election.
 
2013-06-24 10:32:50 AM
This is more drawn out than Return of the King.
 
2013-06-24 10:33:18 AM

Rincewind53: tudorgurl: Wow...so no DOMA/PROP 8 ruling? What are they doing!?!?!

Waiting until later in the week, which isn't that surprising. Everyone expected that they wouldn't address ALL the major cases today, so it was to be expected that some of them would be pushed back until probably Thursday.


They can't do that! I won't be able to follow it on Thursday!

Stupid Supreme Court!
 
2013-06-24 10:33:54 AM

JerseyTim: This is more drawn out than Return of the King.


With fifteen different endings because they just can't decide which one to use!
 
2013-06-24 10:34:53 AM

Cythraul: NeoCortex42: tudorgurl: Wow...so no DOMA/PROP 8 ruling? What are they doing!?!?!

Nothing on the Voting Rights Act, either. That's the one I'm anxious about. Depending on how that is decided, it could have a huge impact on who making laws in the future.

I'm not that worried about that one. I doubt they could fark up that ruling. They wouldn't fark up that ruling. Would they?


Seriously?
 
2013-06-24 10:36:33 AM
Great.  Now I don't have any excuse for not doing work.
 
2013-06-24 10:37:16 AM

tudorgurl: Wow...so no DOMA/PROP 8 ruling? What are they doing!?!?!


As I stated earlier, the court always releases rulings regarding their currently most high profile and controversial cases last. A ruling regarding the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8 should not be expected until the last day of rulings, and only as the last ruling released. The court did this when overturning the unreasonable ban on civilian handgun ownership in the District of Columbia, and then again when overturning the same unreasonable ban in Chicago. I expect no differently for this equally high-profile and controversial case.
 
2013-06-24 10:39:59 AM
SCOTUS says see you tomorrow, same bat time, same bat channel
 
2013-06-24 10:40:08 AM
SCOTUS back tomorrow at 10am.
 
2013-06-24 10:42:49 AM
Lazy asses work an hour and 45 minutes a day.
 
2013-06-24 10:43:58 AM

Dimensio: tudorgurl: Wow...so no DOMA/PROP 8 ruling? What are they doing!?!?!

As I stated earlier, the court always releases rulings regarding their currently most high profile and controversial cases last. A ruling regarding the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8 should not be expected until the last day of rulings, and only as the last ruling released. The court did this when overturning the unreasonable ban on civilian handgun ownership in the District of Columbia, and then again when overturning the same unreasonable ban in Chicago. I expect no differently for this equally high-profile and controversial case.


Well, no, not really. The opinions are released each day in order of seniority, so a major decision written by Kagan would come before a minor decision written by Scalia, for example.

And your major point is just wrong. The court tends to issue major decisions late in the term mainly because they take the most time to write and get consensus on, not for media reasons. The court generally doesn't give a hoot about the media.
 
2013-06-24 10:46:17 AM

JerseyTim: Lazy asses work an hour and 45 minutes a day.


You know that they have to do a lot more than just show up in court, right?
 
2013-06-24 10:48:09 AM

Rincewind53: JerseyTim: Lazy asses work an hour and 45 minutes a day.

You know that they have to do a lot more than just show up in court, right?


I don't count hair and makeup preparation as work.
 
2013-06-24 10:48:47 AM

tudorgurl: SCOTUS back tomorrow at 10am.


So is there actually a chance of getting the bigger decisions tomorrow?  Or is SCOTUS just going to hold the rest until the last day?
 
2013-06-24 10:53:08 AM
Is it Tuesday already?
 
2013-06-24 10:57:21 AM

JerseyTim: Rincewind53: JerseyTim: Lazy asses work an hour and 45 minutes a day.

You know that they have to do a lot more than just show up in court, right?

I don't count hair and makeup preparation as work.


Now you just trollin'
 
2013-06-24 10:57:27 AM

JerseyTim: Lazy asses work an hour and 45 minutes a day.


Their average age is like 110.  If they don't get nap and tapioca, the rulings get a lot more harsh.
 
2013-06-24 10:59:33 AM
But what about Earth v. Zoidberg? I want to know if we can string up that flag-eating lobster!
 
2013-06-24 11:06:59 AM

calm like a bomb: JerseyTim: Lazy asses work an hour and 45 minutes a day.

Their average age is like 110.  If they don't get nap and tapioca, the rulings get a lot more harsh.


And their Matlock reruns
 
2013-06-24 11:19:12 AM
You're getting Scalia in my Santorum!
 
2013-06-24 11:57:17 AM

MyRandomName: Always amazes me How liberals ask the USSC to defer to Congress in all aspects... except for DOMA. That was your primary reasoning for ACA. At least try to be slightly consistent.


It always amazes me that you think the voices in your head represent actual liberals.  SCOTUS is a check on Congress' power - nobody should expect or desire complete deference from the highest court in the land.  If Congress passed an unconstitutional law, I expect SCOTUS to strike it down in some fashion; if Congress passed a constitutional law, I expect SCOTUS to leave it alone.
 
2013-06-24 12:11:49 PM
tudorgurl:

No offense meant, but I keep wacky-parsing that as "turbogurl" or even "turdogurl." And the Tudors were a disastrous dynasty with a very shaky claim.

Be that as it may, you're right on the adoption thing. That one's so simple and obvious I don't see how it made it all the way up there. "You sir are a sperm supplier, not a father."
 
2013-06-24 12:29:38 PM

cman: DOMA will be upheld
Prop8 will be tossed

Thats what I am putting my money on


If you can suggest a method for placing this bet on DOMA, I would be thrilled to take your money.
 
2013-06-24 12:35:34 PM

tudorgurl: Wow...so no DOMA/PROP 8 ruling? What are they doing!?!?!


That's the big closer. Don't expect it until all other decisions have been handed out.
 
2013-06-24 01:35:44 PM
Scalia, a pedophile, and a rapist walk into a bar.  He orders a drink.

How does Scalia know his wife is having a period?  His son's dick tastes funny.

How do you make Scalia scream twice during sex?  You fark him in the ass, then wipe your dick on his judicial robes.
 
2013-06-24 02:06:49 PM

RminusQ: soupafi: Prop 8 won't have standing
DOMA is illegal

and IIRC the former means that California remains fabulous but the decision is not binding anywhere else, while the latter means that all states must recognize gay marriages entered into where such entrance is already legal, correct?


No, the impact of DOMA is entirely at the Federal level. It will extend to any Federal money handed out by the States, so there will be a great deal of whining.
 
2013-06-24 03:26:41 PM

Aquapope: Scalia, a pedophile, and a rapist walk into a bar.  He orders a drink.

How does Scalia know his wife is having a period?  His son's dick tastes funny.

How do you make Scalia scream twice during sex?  You fark him in the ass, then wipe your dick on his judicial robes.


OK, now I'm less worried that my Scalia licking himself joke will get me booted.
 
2013-06-24 04:41:25 PM
 
2013-06-24 08:58:15 PM
Scalia!!! "Slowly I turned...step by step...inch by inch...,"
 
2013-06-24 11:36:56 PM

Tired_of_the_BS: Scalia!!! "Slowly I turned...step by step...inch by inch...,"


A Susquehanna Hat Company reference?  I am impressed.  I would have gone with the Seinfeld "Scalia!" (aka: Neumann) reference just to keep it recent, but you went all the way back to the 30s! (they did it in Vaudeville before the Movie)  Kudos to you!

By the way, I'm old.  Lawn!!!
 
2013-06-24 11:41:59 PM
By the way: "Susquehanna Hat Company"  This is the stuff that cracked me up in the 70s after Bugs and SuperFriends.
 
2013-06-25 09:39:37 AM

Aquapope: Tired_of_the_BS: Scalia!!! "Slowly I turned...step by step...inch by inch...,"

A Susquehanna Hat Company reference?  I am impressed.  I would have gone with the Seinfeld "Scalia!" (aka: Neumann) reference just to keep it recent, but you went all the way back to the 30s! (they did it in Vaudeville before the Movie)  Kudos to you!

By the way, I'm old.  Lawn!!!


I think you're confusing "Susquehanna Hat Company" with the "Niagra Falls" skit.  Similar, but still quite different.
 
2013-06-25 10:11:57 AM
Are we back here again for Day 2: Gay Marriage Boogaloo?

Shelby ruling: Section 4 (?) of the VRA is unconstitutional. Sadface.
 
2013-06-25 02:02:04 PM

NeoCortex42: I think you're confusing "Susquehanna Hat Company" with the "Niagra Falls" skit.  Similar, but still quite different.


No, both are old Vaudeville gags.  Abbot and Costello did Susquehanna in their vaudaville stuff before doing it in a movie in 1944 and later in their regular TV show in '55.  Niagara falls is the same skirt,... but done by different people.

The whole deal is guy 1 says something that makes guy 2 lose his mind.  In some versions, after guy 2 is talked down off the cliff, guy 3 comes in and re-ignights him, so guy 1 has to talk him down again....
 
Displayed 171 of 171 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report