View in: Desktop
Copyright @2024 TigerDroppings.com. All rights reserved.
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Posted by
Message
Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"
Posted by AdamsHouseCat on 6/4/18 at 3:23 pm1824
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by Pettifogger on 6/4/18 at 3:24 pm to AdamsHouseCat
It's a narrow ruling in the sense of its application to other situations.
It's not narrow in justices, and the original reporting (largely AP) was worded in a way to make it seem like they meant the latter (# of justices) rather than the former (scope of decision).
It's not narrow in justices, and the original reporting (largely AP) was worded in a way to make it seem like they meant the latter (# of justices) rather than the former (scope of decision).
This post was edited on 6/4 at 3:25 pm
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by Fun Bunch on 6/4/18 at 3:24 pm to AdamsHouseCat
The actual decision was "narrow" in scope.
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by rbWarEagle on 6/4/18 at 3:25 pm to AdamsHouseCat
The ruling was a narrow one in that it is strictly applied to the present scenario and is not meant to set precedent broadly. It has nothing to do with the decision split.
Love how I said essentially the same thing as the first two and have a majority downvote. That's why I love this board.
Love how I said essentially the same thing as the first two and have a majority downvote. That's why I love this board.
This post was edited on 6/4 at 3:46 pm
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by RockyMtnTigerWDE on 6/4/18 at 3:25 pm to AdamsHouseCat
Because the vote was cast in a small chamber
This post was edited on 6/4 at 3:26 pm
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by CorporateTiger on 6/4/18 at 3:26 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
It's a narrow ruling in the sense of its application to other situations.
Specifically the Court couched a lot of the decision as being based upon facts specific to this case. As a result, it is unclear whether the other similar cases will be decided the same way.
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by TigerTroll11 on 6/4/18 at 3:27 pm to AdamsHouseCat
"The vote was narrow not because of the number of justices for and against, but because of the slim precedent it sets"
literally the 3rd bullet point
literally the 3rd bullet point
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by League Champs on 6/4/18 at 3:33 pm to AdamsHouseCat
It's only narrow because the left has to hold onto hope.
But if you're in the wedding business, you can now claim that your religion is expressed ONLY through the union of a man to a woman. And that you put your heart and soul into making that religious statement, whenever you agree to work for a traditional wedding. And that you don't feel that you can put the creative force behind something that you are spiritually opposed to. The blueprint has now been set, by a sizable majority.
/gays forcing Christians to do stuff
But if you're in the wedding business, you can now claim that your religion is expressed ONLY through the union of a man to a woman. And that you put your heart and soul into making that religious statement, whenever you agree to work for a traditional wedding. And that you don't feel that you can put the creative force behind something that you are spiritually opposed to. The blueprint has now been set, by a sizable majority.
/gays forcing Christians to do stuff
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by Jack Daniel on 6/4/18 at 4:18 pm to AdamsHouseCat
MSM gonna MSM
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by TheHarahanian on 6/4/18 at 4:23 pm to AdamsHouseCat
Well, they were only 2 votes away from being a 1-vote margin.
TD SponsorTD Fan
USA
Member since 2001
USA
Member since 2001
Thank you for supporting our sponsors Posted by Site Sponsor to Everyone
Advertisement
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by BigJim on 6/4/18 at 5:00 pm to CorporateTiger
quote:
Specifically the Court couched a lot of the decision as being based upon facts specific to this case. As a result, it is unclear whether the other similar cases will be decided the same way.
This is correct.
But to clarify, it basically said IF you have a rule like CO did, you cannot be hostile toward religion when you interpret it.
One of the examples they pointed to in establishing hostility (besides the quotes of the ruling commission) was that they basically held bakers did not have to comply with orders to make cakes with anti-gay writing.
So this would seem to cut against rules that just target (in law or practice) Christian beliefs. Or really Muslim or Jewish or whatever.
At first I was a little miffed at the narrow label, but if you look at the ruling (as opposed to the press coverage) it seems pretty good to me.
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by CorporateTiger on 6/4/18 at 5:04 pm to BigJim
It was pretty clear they did not want to create a large precedent out of a case with such horrible facts. The CCRC comments were fricking amateur hour bullshite.
There are still other cases on this topic in various stages. We will see how the lower courts respond to this. If we don’t get a circuit split, the Court May decline to grant cert on any of those... regardless of who wins.
There are still other cases on this topic in various stages. We will see how the lower courts respond to this. If we don’t get a circuit split, the Court May decline to grant cert on any of those... regardless of who wins.
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by BigJim on 6/4/18 at 5:10 pm to CorporateTiger
quote:
It was pretty clear they did not want to create a large precedent out of a case with such horrible facts. The CCRC comments were fricking amateur hour bullshite.
Agree, that's why I really love this "narrow" decision. It's a slap at the anti-christian SJWs out there. Play stupid games, get thumped in a 7-2 decision by the Supreme Court.
They aren't going to say "You can never, ever tell a christian baker what to do or not do" Indeed they said hanging signs that said "gays not welcome" would be a problem.
You are right, there is a lot to be worked out still, but I like this first bite at the apple.
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by CorporateTiger on 6/4/18 at 5:15 pm to BigJim
Also looking at one or two of the other state law cases pending, some of them have statements that tend to echo the same sentiment of the CCRC.
So part of this seems to be a “get your shite in order” decision. We will see if how these state commissions proceed.
So part of this seems to be a “get your shite in order” decision. We will see if how these state commissions proceed.
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by Antonio Moss on 6/4/18 at 7:37 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
The actual decision was "narrow" in scope.
Correct. Journalists tend to be terrible lawyers and, apparantly, awful writers.
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by Lima Whiskey on 6/4/18 at 7:54 pm to Antonio Moss
If they were talented writers, they wouldn’t be journalists.
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by BamaGradinTn on 6/4/18 at 8:50 pm to CorporateTiger
quote:
Specifically the Court couched a lot of the decision as being based upon facts specific to this case.
Such as drawing analogies to Nazi Germany by one of two of the commissioners. They displayed blatant hostility toward the baker's religious freedom, as opposed to neutrality, according to the majority.
The state law was not thrown out as being unconstitutional.
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by Crimson1st on 6/4/18 at 9:11 pm to rbWarEagle
Your reputation precedes you bro... that's mostly your doing though, can't blame the board for that.
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by Joshjrn on 6/4/18 at 9:27 pm to AdamsHouseCat
If you want the Cliff's Notes on a Supreme Court case, you should avoid the entirety of the media, national and local. They are abjectly terrible.
Just hit SCOTUS Blog: LINK /
Just hit SCOTUS Blog: LINK /
re: Why is 7-2 Supreme Court Decision considered "Narrowly?"Posted by matthew25 on 6/4/18 at 11:23 pm to BamaGradinTn
The state law still stands? Homosexuals are protected under the state law, right?
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News