- Joined
- Mar 16, 2019
So SCOTUS went for the Civil War scenario. Didn't think they had it in them.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So SCOTUS went for the Civil War scenario. Didn't think they had it in them.
You know it's bad when even Clarence Thomas thinks this was poorly constructed.
> It'll get laughed out of courts
> It'll never get to the SC
> They'll laugh this one out like all the others.
> You're the REAL fraudsters
Where oh where will we backstep to next. Scream louder.
Offering no remedy is possibly the worst decision possible. Even hearing it then rejecting it would have been a better outcome than refusing to hear it altogether.So SCOTUS went for the Civil War scenario. Didn't think they had it in them.
lol hahahahahahahhahahahahhahahaSo SCOTUS went for the Civil War scenario. Didn't think they had it in them.
I dunno man, I doubt right-wingers have the backbone outside isolated incidents that get used as bludgeons to take away more people's rights. Soy golems and niggers have more of a backbone than rednecks.So SCOTUS went for the Civil War scenario. Didn't think they had it in them.
Maybe SCOTUS wants the watch the U.S burn.Offering no remedy is possibly the worst decision possible. Even hearing it then rejecting it would have been a better outcome than refusing to hear it altogether.
I was more talking about how they don't seem to realize they're just a small yappy dog that's quietly tolerated at the moment.
The sheer arrogance of those types never fails to astound that's all.
They really think they won't be discarded and replaced like the fundies and hippies were.
Offering no remedy is possibly the worst decision possible. Even hearing it then rejecting it would have been a better outcome than refusing to hear it altogether.
In most cases? Civil War.If the Supreme Court can't settle suits between states, then what else is left?