Skip to content
 
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.

(Law and Crime)   Holy shiat SCOTUS did something right, what's the catch? Seriously what's the catch Subby isn't a law talking guy and there has to be a catch, especially since this is an unanimous decision   (lawandcrime.com) divider line
    More: Murica, Supreme Court of the United States, district court, U.S. Supreme Court, Eighth Circuit, legal proceedings, Morgan v, former Taco Bell employee, support of an arbitration-specific waiver rule  
•       •       •

5628 clicks; posted to Politics » on 23 May 2022 at 5:01 PM (11 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-05-23 3:09:14 PM  
It's a pretty narrow victory if you read it. It just says the courts can't create a policy to favor arbitration over litigation. It doesn't even necessarily guarantee the employees in  this case a right to litigation. It just threw the decision back and said you can't rule in a way that specifically favors arbitration, so go back and look at all the other factors and decide using some other legal standard.

However, on the same day Thomas just cut down 6A protection in a devastating manner in a 6 - 3 decision.
This court doesn't support even explicit rights.
 
2022-05-23 3:49:31 PM  
Notably, the victory for Morgan, et, al. is somewhat limited-all the Supreme Court is saying is that the Eighth Circuit (and seven other circuits) have been using the wrong framework to dispense with such claims. On remand, the court has to approach the issue differently.

They ruled you can still steal wages, and get out o any accountability for that by going to forced, biased arbitration, but you have to do it properly.
 
2022-05-23 4:02:32 PM  
What's odd to me, is that isn't this really a criminal case?  It's a crime to not pay people for time worked.  How can you force a crime into arbitration?
 
2022-05-23 4:06:38 PM  

labman: What's odd to me, is that isn't this really a criminal case?  It's a crime to not pay people for time worked.  How can you force a crime into arbitration?


Because the workers signed a contract that said so.  it's not uncommon, especially for lower-paying jobs.  The employer coonts on the fact that their labor pool is not as well educated and not as likely to give up a chance to get a job.
 
2022-05-23 4:28:52 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: labman: What's odd to me, is that isn't this really a criminal case?  It's a crime to not pay people for time worked.  How can you force a crime into arbitration?

Because the workers signed a contract that said so.  it's not uncommon, especially for lower-paying jobs.  The employer coonts on the fact that their labor pool is not as well educated and not as likely to give up a chance to get a job.


Also...sometimes even buying a car with the 'contract' gives up your right to sue for flaws in the car. And it would go to arbitration.
 
2022-05-23 5:06:31 PM  
That reminds me, it's Taco Tuesday!
I know today is Monday, but we have Taco Tuesday on Monday at my house. My wife calls it "Maco Monday" but I prefer to call it "Taco Tuesday on Monday" because it sounds more exciting and special and what the hell is a "maco" anyway?
 
2022-05-23 5:07:56 PM  
I could really go for a Bell Beefer right now.
 
2022-05-23 5:08:32 PM  
SCOTUS: "Please define your ruling ijn such a way that it's far less obvious to the Plebians that they are losing their right to litigate. Everyone knows there's so much more steady money in arbitration and our stupid law school drop out relatives need that cheddar."
 
2022-05-23 5:09:05 PM  
It's what society gets in return for taking away womens' Healthcare rights - some concession on minimum wage sector wage theft.
 
2022-05-23 5:10:23 PM  
It is less about wage theft and more about arbitration. So don't be too proud of SCOTUS.
 
2022-05-23 5:10:37 PM  
Probably because Kavanaugh doesn't want someone serving him a cooked rat.
 
2022-05-23 5:11:56 PM  

special20: SCOTUS: "Please define your ruling ijn such a way that it's far less obvious to the Plebians that they are losing their right to litigate. Everyone knows there's so much more steady money in arbitration and our stupid law school drop out relatives need that cheddar."


Arbitrators are retired attorneys, people that couldn't handle the stress of practicing law, or just attorneys moonlighting for extra cash.
 
2022-05-23 5:12:03 PM  

labman: What's odd to me, is that isn't this really a criminal case?  It's a crime to not pay people for time worked.  How can you force a crime into arbitration?


Is it a crime, though?
 
2022-05-23 5:12:19 PM  

culebra: I could really go for a Bell Beefer right now.


Good news for you then.

The Bell Beefer was a hamburger bun based meal on Taco Bell's menu from the mid 1970s to the mid 1990s, with a short comeback in the early 2010s as an update to the Bellburger. Recently brought back as a short addition to the dollar menu in select restaurants in 2012, it had been very popular in the San Francisco metropolitan area. Disgruntled fans of the Beefer held restaurant sit-ins known as "Stank Festivals", a commentary on Taco Bell's reputation, in protest after its cancellation. Originally created by executives John "Johnny" C. Hoba and Douglas "Doug" O. Hoba to combat items offered at hamburger chains, the Bell Beefer was a bun with meat, diced onions, shredded lettuce and mild border sauce. A Bell Beefer Supreme was also offered, which added diced tomatoes and grated cheese. A few select restaurants offered the Bell Beefer Surf and Turf Deluxe, which added fried shrimp and a scoop of tuna on top of the Beefer's lettuce, as well as a line of Taco Tartar Sauce. More like a Sloppy Joe than a hamburger, it was well-liked early on, but declined in popularity during the late 1980s. It had a resurgence in popularity in the early 2010s, although that was only for a short while.
Because combination KFC/Taco Bells carry hamburger buns, one is often able to order a replica Bell Beefer "off menu" if you ask the cashier nicely and explain to the line workers how it is assembled. The Bell Beefer is rumored to make a full return in mid 2023, although many debate the authenticity of that statement.

Fark user imageView Full Size

(hork)
 
2022-05-23 5:13:15 PM  

madgonad: special20: SCOTUS: "Please define your ruling ijn such a way that it's far less obvious to the Plebians that they are losing their right to litigate. Everyone knows there's so much more steady money in arbitration and our stupid law school drop out relatives need that cheddar."

Arbitrators are retired attorneys, people that couldn't handle the stress of practicing law, or just attorneys moonlighting for extra cash.


irate4x4.comView Full Size

I ain't no law talkin guy like you.
 
2022-05-23 5:13:48 PM  
 
2022-05-23 5:14:56 PM  
"As of 2012, wage theft committed by business owners was the leading form of theft in the United States-surpassing all other thefts, including robberies, burglaries, auto theft, and larcenies by at least a measure of 3-1 "

See, if Job CreatorsTM could get a tax cut, they wouldn't be forced to steal in order to survive.

/vote Republican
 
2022-05-23 5:15:12 PM  

Colour_out_of_Space: That reminds me, it's Taco Tuesday!
I know today is Monday, but we have Taco Tuesday on Monday at my house. My wife calls it "Maco Monday" but I prefer to call it "Taco Tuesday on Monday" because it sounds more exciting and special and what the hell is a "maco" anyway?


Redshirts in camo

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Military_Assault_Command_Operations

blog.trekcore.comView Full Size
 
2022-05-23 5:15:12 PM  

wademh: It's a pretty narrow victory if you read it. It just says the courts can't create a policy to favor arbitration over litigation. It doesn't even necessarily guarantee the employees in  this case a right to litigation. It just threw the decision back and said you can't rule in a way that specifically favors arbitration, so go back and look at all the other factors and decide using some other legal standard.

However, on the same day Thomas just cut down 6A protection in a devastating manner in a 6 - 3 decision.
This court doesn't support even explicit rights.


Link?  I apparently suck at Google
 
2022-05-23 5:15:13 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: labman: What's odd to me, is that isn't this really a criminal case?  It's a crime to not pay people for time worked.  How can you force a crime into arbitration?

Because the workers signed a contract that said so.  it's not uncommon, especially for lower-paying jobs.  The employer coonts on the fact that their labor pool is not as well educated and not as likely to give up a chance to get desperate for a job.


If they could (take the time to) find work that didn't have arbitration clauses, they likely would. Although I suspect most people don't care ...right up until they do, like if their employer steals a bunch of their wages. Also, I'm relatively sure that the terms of my employment (at a cushy tech job where I can fark off for long periods of time) also specify that disputes be taken to arbitration first. So it's not just the bottom end of the scale - basically, if you're not ownership (or a public employee, or in a labor union), labor law increasingly can't reach you.

Your cell phone provider and ISP, your credit card company, your health insurance providers - EVERYONE is putting forced arbitration clauses in there, because paying the arbitrators is far easier and more reliable than paying judges, and it's 100% legal to just do out in the open and not play games with secret societies or PACs or the FEC.
 
2022-05-23 5:16:54 PM  
Taco Supreme Court
 
2022-05-23 5:22:03 PM  

labman: What's odd to me, is that isn't this really a criminal case?  It's a crime to not pay people for time worked.  How can you force a crime into arbitration?


It wasn't a criminal case because it wasn't persecuted as one, for whatever reasons. That left the employees with a civil car which they were forced to arbitrate. Had it been a criminal case, it wouldn't have ended up in arbitration.
 
2022-05-23 5:22:11 PM  

Bovine Diarrhea Virus: wademh: It's a pretty narrow victory if you read it. It just says the courts can't create a policy to favor arbitration over litigation. It doesn't even necessarily guarantee the employees in  this case a right to litigation. It just threw the decision back and said you can't rule in a way that specifically favors arbitration, so go back and look at all the other factors and decide using some other legal standard.

However, on the same day Thomas just cut down 6A protection in a devastating manner in a 6 - 3 decision.
This court doesn't support even explicit rights.

Link?  I apparently suck at Google


https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/shinn-v-ramirez/

https://lawandcrime.com/supreme-court/scotus-rules-two-death-row-inmates-cannot-show-evidence-of-their-lawyers-ineffectiveness/
 
2022-05-23 5:22:33 PM  
As of 2012, wage theft committed by business owners was the leading form of theft in the United States-surpassing all other thefts, including robberies, burglaries, auto theft, and larcenies by at least a measure of 3-1,
 
2022-05-23 5:22:59 PM  

ukexpat: labman: What's odd to me, is that isn't this really a criminal case?  It's a crime to not pay people for time worked.  How can you force a crime into arbitration?

It wasn't a criminal case because it wasn't persecuted as one, for whatever reasons. That left the employees with a civil car which they were forced to arbitrate. Had it been a criminal case, it wouldn't have ended up in arbitration.


*case, goddamnitsomuch
 
2022-05-23 5:24:18 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-05-23 5:25:56 PM  
It's because Congress actually passed a law called the Federal Arbitration Act, and SCOTUS can refer to it. As opposed to some items Congress prefers not to act upon, hoping SCOTUS or an executive order from the president will do it in their place.
 
2022-05-23 5:26:01 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-05-23 5:26:02 PM  
You have to eat or work at taco bell.
 
2022-05-23 5:26:03 PM  

labman: What's odd to me, is that isn't this really a criminal case?  It's a crime to not pay people for time worked.  How can you force a crime into arbitration?


Bribe fascists?
 
2022-05-23 5:28:08 PM  

whidbey: Probably because Kavanaugh doesn't want someone serving him a cooked rat.


Yeah, he really does seem like the type to eat them raw.
 
2022-05-23 5:29:01 PM  

RasIanI: It's what society gets in return for taking away womens' Healthcare rights - some concession on minimum wage sector wage theft.


And thus we see the value of compromise, just like the Democratic mainstream said!
 
2022-05-23 5:29:36 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: labman: What's odd to me, is that isn't this really a criminal case?  It's a crime to not pay people for time worked.  How can you force a crime into arbitration?

Because the workers signed a contract that said so.  it's not uncommon, especially for lower-paying jobs.  The employer coonts on the fact that their labor pool is not as well educated and not as likely to give up a chance to get a job.


and those who are educated usually don't have any choice except for forced arbitration at any job.

Forced Arbitration needs to be made illegal
 
2022-05-23 5:42:11 PM  

Abox: Taco Supreme Court


Comes with sour cream so as to make sure it's as white as possible?
 
2022-05-23 5:42:28 PM  

Parthenogenetic: Bovine Diarrhea Virus: wademh: It's a pretty narrow victory if you read it. It just says the courts can't create a policy to favor arbitration over litigation. It doesn't even necessarily guarantee the employees in  this case a right to litigation. It just threw the decision back and said you can't rule in a way that specifically favors arbitration, so go back and look at all the other factors and decide using some other legal standard.

However, on the same day Thomas just cut down 6A protection in a devastating manner in a 6 - 3 decision.
This court doesn't support even explicit rights.

Link?  I apparently suck at Google

https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/shinn-v-ramirez/

https://lawandcrime.com/supreme-court/scotus-rules-two-death-row-inmates-cannot-show-evidence-of-their-lawyers-ineffectiveness/


Thank you.
Christ, is Thomas a scumbag. Starting off his opinion by restating the crimes committed is a joke.  I guarantee that if you explained the merits of this case without the visceral reaction to the crimes committed, most people would side with the minority.
However, including the crimes in the majority opinion almost certainly biases people in favor of the majority. It's manipulative.  It's disgusting.
 
2022-05-23 5:48:50 PM  

Bovine Diarrhea Virus: Thank you.
Christ, is Thomas a scumbag. Starting off his opinion by restating the crimes committed is a joke.  I guarantee that if you explained the merits of this case without the visceral reaction to the crimes committed, most people would side with the minority.
However, including the crimes in the majority opinion almost certainly biases people in favor of the majority. It's manipulative.  It's disgusting.


Sotomayor called Thomas out to his zeal in recounting the crime. It's absolutely stinks of "they're bad people so they don't deserve rights."
 
2022-05-23 5:49:36 PM  
 
2022-05-23 5:50:26 PM  
"SCOTUS did something right"? Yeah, that doesn't sound correct.

Did they at least mention something about the founding fathers or state's rights?
 
2022-05-23 5:51:59 PM  
I had the same thing happen to me as a kid working for Little Caesars. I just quit. They would clock me out and then ask me to clean while waiting for my ride to pick me up.
 
2022-05-23 5:52:33 PM  

Bovine Diarrhea Virus: Parthenogenetic: Bovine Diarrhea Virus: wademh: It's a pretty narrow victory if you read it. It just says the courts can't create a policy to favor arbitration over litigation. It doesn't even necessarily guarantee the employees in  this case a right to litigation. It just threw the decision back and said you can't rule in a way that specifically favors arbitration, so go back and look at all the other factors and decide using some other legal standard.

However, on the same day Thomas just cut down 6A protection in a devastating manner in a 6 - 3 decision.
This court doesn't support even explicit rights.

Link?  I apparently suck at Google

https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/shinn-v-ramirez/

https://lawandcrime.com/supreme-court/scotus-rules-two-death-row-inmates-cannot-show-evidence-of-their-lawyers-ineffectiveness/

Thank you.
Christ, is Thomas a scumbag. Starting off his opinion by restating the crimes committed is a joke.  I guarantee that if you explained the merits of this case without the visceral reaction to the crimes committed, most people would side with the minority.
However, including the crimes in the majority opinion almost certainly biases people in favor of the majority. It's manipulative.  It's disgusting.


Derp, there's already a Fark thread, I overlooked it

https://m.fark.com/comments/12362217
 
2022-05-23 5:52:46 PM  

Bovine Diarrhea Virus: Parthenogenetic: Bovine Diarrhea Virus: wademh: It's a pretty narrow victory if you read it. It just says the courts can't create a policy to favor arbitration over litigation. It doesn't even necessarily guarantee the employees in  this case a right to litigation. It just threw the decision back and said you can't rule in a way that specifically favors arbitration, so go back and look at all the other factors and decide using some other legal standard.

However, on the same day Thomas just cut down 6A protection in a devastating manner in a 6 - 3 decision.
This court doesn't support even explicit rights.

Link?  I apparently suck at Google

https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/shinn-v-ramirez/

https://lawandcrime.com/supreme-court/scotus-rules-two-death-row-inmates-cannot-show-evidence-of-their-lawyers-ineffectiveness/

Thank you.
Christ, is Thomas a scumbag. Starting off his opinion by restating the crimes committed is a joke.  I guarantee that if you explained the merits of this case without the visceral reaction to the crimes committed, most people would side with the minority.
However, including the crimes in the majority opinion almost certainly biases people in favor of the majority. It's manipulative.  It's disgusting.


In Thomas' mind - and to most conservatives - conviction is proof-positive of guilt, and "stall tactics" fatally wound the swift execution (pun intended) of justice. "Better a hundred innocent men be hanged than a single guilty one go free", right?

Of course it's manipulative. If the goal is to defend the US justice system against any suggestion that it is imperfect, you'll need to shiat up that opinion pool as early and as hard as possible.

// that, libs, is called "originalism"
 
2022-05-23 5:55:43 PM  

Colour_out_of_Space: That reminds me, it's Taco Tuesday!
I know today is Monday, but we have Taco Tuesday on Monday at my house. My wife calls it "Maco Monday" but I prefer to call it "Taco Tuesday on Monday" because it sounds more exciting and special and what the hell is a "maco" anyway?


It's pronounced "mako" and it's the life energy of the planet, you dolt
 
2022-05-23 5:56:33 PM  
The fact that such a blatant fark you to the employees had to reach the supreme court is pretty telling how farked we are as a society.
 
2022-05-23 5:58:48 PM  
i.imgflip.comView Full Size

Logorama full 15 min movie  (2009)
https://www.artupon.com/logorama-2009/
 
2022-05-23 5:59:34 PM  
Forgot to add, NSFW
 
2022-05-23 6:14:16 PM  

Kazan: Benevolent Misanthrope: labman: What's odd to me, is that isn't this really a criminal case?  It's a crime to not pay people for time worked.  How can you force a crime into arbitration?

Because the workers signed a contract that said so.  it's not uncommon, especially for lower-paying jobs.  The employer coonts on the fact that their labor pool is not as well educated and not as likely to give up a chance to get a job.

and those who are educated usually don't have any choice except for forced arbitration at any job.

Forced Arbitration needs to be made illegal


True enough.  I was being elitist.  Employers write those clauses into all kinds of jobs.
 
2022-05-23 6:20:16 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: labman: What's odd to me, is that isn't this really a criminal case?  It's a crime to not pay people for time worked.  How can you force a crime into arbitration?

Because the workers signed a contract that said so.  it's not uncommon, especially for lower-paying jobs.  The employer coonts on the fact that their labor pool is not as well educated and not as likely to give up a chance to get a job.


Yeah, my hospital includes an arbitration clause to sign in the consent for treatment forms. I refuse to even give that page to patients. It's bullshiat.
 
2022-05-23 6:40:47 PM  

whidbey: Probably because Kavanaugh doesn't want someone serving him a cooked rat.


Something tells me Justice "I like beer!" likes his rats raw and wriggling.

c.tenor.comView Full Size
 
2022-05-23 7:03:48 PM  

Kazan: Benevolent Misanthrope: labman: What's odd to me, is that isn't this really a criminal case?  It's a crime to not pay people for time worked.  How can you force a crime into arbitration?

Because the workers signed a contract that said so.  it's not uncommon, especially for lower-paying jobs.  The employer coonts on the fact that their labor pool is not as well educated and not as likely to give up a chance to get a job.

and those who are educated usually don't have any choice except for forced arbitration at any job.

Forced Arbitration needs to be made illegal


Or at least restricted to contractual parties who have equal bargaining power.
 
2022-05-23 7:11:40 PM  

blondambition: whidbey: Probably because Kavanaugh doesn't want someone serving him a cooked rat.

Something tells me Justice "I like beer!" likes his rats raw and wriggling.

[c.tenor.com image 220x292] [View Full Size image _x_]


Hard to even consider disagreeing with that.
 
Displayed 50 of 57 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.