- 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
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 6/29/26 at 2:05 pm to Jack Daniel
quote:
Didn’t Trump nominate 3 of them?
I wouldn't care if were Reagan, Bush I, Bush II, etc. who nominated the current sitting justices, it appears there are at least 5 justices who will allow the incremental destruction of the US.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 2:10 pm to Ag Zwin
Tell me you know nothing about how SCOTUS works without telling me.
The Chief Justice doesn’t need to have 5 justices wholly in agreement to construct a majority. He just needs to take bits and pieces from different opinions to do so. Justices don’t always sign on to one majority opinion and one dissenting opinion. They will often file separate concurrences where they agree or disagree with one of the two opinions but for different reasons. They will often concur with some parts and dissent with others. When multiple justices file concurring opinions, the Chief Justice can sometimes pick and chooses parts to get a “majority opinion” despite only having 3 other justices fully on board.
The Chief Justice doesn’t need to have 5 justices wholly in agreement to construct a majority. He just needs to take bits and pieces from different opinions to do so. Justices don’t always sign on to one majority opinion and one dissenting opinion. They will often file separate concurrences where they agree or disagree with one of the two opinions but for different reasons. They will often concur with some parts and dissent with others. When multiple justices file concurring opinions, the Chief Justice can sometimes pick and chooses parts to get a “majority opinion” despite only having 3 other justices fully on board.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 2:11 pm to Gravitiger
quote:
"If they do it it's evil, so I hope we do it first"
Damn skippy bitch. I believe your Harry Reid already fricked with the filibuster during his time as majority leader, no?
Posted on 6/29/26 at 2:13 pm to tigeraddict
quote:
and the mail-in voting date, only allowed ballots to be received up to 5 days after "voting date" ONLY if the ballot has a voting day post mark or earlier.....
And ACB laid out exactly how Congress can fix it, just like Kav did in the tariff case for the admin, and if they punt on the merits of the birthright citizenship case tomorrow how they will lay it out for them there I'm sure.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 2:15 pm to hogcard1964
quote:
However ACB is extremely left wing/Marxist.
Good lord.
For many, many years I accused the left of having a virtual monopoly on the low-curiosity, buzzword belching, categorical activists that let their emotions dictate their thoughts.
The last few years, I have learned just how much more level that playing field actually is these days.
This post was edited on 6/29/26 at 5:54 pm
Posted on 6/29/26 at 2:20 pm to JellyRoll
quote:Maybe damn skippy for you bitch. Not my Harry Reid. fricking corrupt a-hole (and I say this as someone whose father was a gaming executive in Nevada). But feel free to make more unfounded assumptions, just because you think I have TDS.
Damn skippy bitch. I believe your Harry Reid already fricked with the filibuster during his time as majority leader, no?
This post was edited on 6/29/26 at 2:41 pm
Posted on 6/29/26 at 2:21 pm to Gravitiger
quote:
Because they think SCOTUS is a political body
It is interesting how often the USSC Judges vote down party lines isn't it?
Posted on 6/29/26 at 2:28 pm to hogcard1964
quote:
However ACB is extremely left wing/Marxist.
Jesus Christ.
You nut jobs are turning the “Marxist” label into the new “racist”. Anything I don’t like is “Marxist”.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 2:38 pm to imjustafatkid
quote:
Trump did absolutely nothing to E Jean Carroll.
Hmm, a jury found him liable after seeing all the evidence and defense provided. Or your leader tells you otherwise.
And you will just continue to just believe whatever Trump says no matter what. Do you even hear yourself sometimes?
Posted on 6/29/26 at 2:46 pm to Jack Daniel
quote:
Didn’t Trump nominate 3 of them?
Doesn’t mean that his “picks” didn’t lie straight to his face, and the faces of his Senate confirmation committee —- and then turn over the correct face of who they really were.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 2:48 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
You nut jobs are turning the “Marxist” label into the new “racist”. Anything I don’t like is “Marxist”.
Most don’t know the meaning. I see “commie nazi” a lot too.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 2:50 pm to i am dan
quote:
It is interesting how often the USSC Judges vote down party lines isn't it?
They vote 9-0 40-45% of the time, and 6-3 down party lines only 15-20% of the time.
Even assuming the numbers were flipped, would it be surprising that 6 people with very similar views vote the same as each other as opposed to the 3 with very different views?
Posted on 6/29/26 at 2:51 pm to Jack Daniel
I think I'm too rational for your question to make sense, so I'm not sure how we proceed from here.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 3:28 pm to Tigers0918
quote:
Hmm, a jury found him liable after seeing all the evidence and defense provided. Or your leader tells you otherwise.
No, they said he defamed her for calling her a liar.
She is, in fact, a liar.
ETA: Imagine being a man and still believing what this dude said.
This post was edited on 6/29/26 at 3:32 pm
Posted on 6/29/26 at 4:02 pm to imjustafatkid
quote:
ETA: Imagine being a man and still believing what this dude said.
Imagine simping so hard for an 80 year old man.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 4:34 pm to Tigers0918
quote:
Imagine simping so hard for the truth.
FIFY. I will always "simp" for the truth.
This post was edited on 6/29/26 at 4:35 pm
Posted on 6/29/26 at 5:32 pm to Snipe
quote:
Conservatives are way behind in the game and kind of clumsy in trying to catch up.
This is a blatant lie. If you don’t know better, do not assume this assertion is correct. Conservatives have been planning and executing a decades long takeover of the courts. When Bill Clinton was President nearly all of his judicial nominations never were given a hearing in committee. I’m thinking thirty years ago was not part of this mythical “catching up” you espouse.
And for those claiming Justice Barrett is left wing, do us all a favor and stop opining on things where you have no knowledge.
For anybody that downvotes this, enlighten yourself first before doing so and show me where I am wrong with facts.
Posted on 6/29/26 at 7:11 pm to casualobserver
quote:
Conservatives have been planning and executing a decades long takeover of the courts.
They've failed miserably. Most of the courts are liberal activists and those that are not are nurtured and afraid to challenge partisan political attacks from the bench. at least from my vantage point.
This post was edited on 6/29/26 at 7:14 pm
Page 3 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News