Sotomayor is behind the times.

They're not "bribes" anymore, they're "donations" now.

Impeachment is a process for determining wrongdoing, which isn't the same as determining legal guilt.

Or to phrase it differently: there are things you could do that would get you fired from your job, but aren't illegal.

I wonder how long it takes for DT to set in.

Is Bannon gonna be turning tricks for toilet wine by Friday?

Someone pointed out to me that the majority of what we consider "good" SCOTUS decisions came from the Warren court. Nearly every other case you could name you only know because of its detrimental effect on American progress. In that light, Roberts is just course-correcting SCOTUS: a branch of the government that historically keeps citizens from being too free.

"Now I'm not much for blaspheming, but that last one made me laugh."

4 in 10 Americans say SCOTUS makes decisions based on ideology instead of the law, but they're cool with that because it's their ideology too.

In a civilized country, this would not be a political question, but, rather, a medical one.

You're talking about abortion, right?

No, it's birth control, isn't it?

No, I've got it this time- you're talking about trans care!

This is still bullshit.

"Emergency abortions" still give the forced-birthers too much leeway to decide when the mother's life is at risk. A woman should not literally be septic and her organs shutting down before she gets the care she needs.

with an even more evil “Nancy” in his ear “guiding” him everyday (and to essential be running the country while keeping Trump’s decline on the DL).

That sound you just heard was Stephen Miller getting a boner thinking about putting all non-whites into camps.

Seem?

Do.

Panem et circenses, baby!

As long as people are kept fed and entertained, they will tolerate a lot of bullshit.

Yes, yes I did. That doesn't change anything I said. You've only repeated his claims (which his complaint can say literally anything), we don't have Mozilla's side, and he shouldn't be saying a word about this suit to the press.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember hearing once that even if this were to happen, Congress can't hold him longer than the end of this Congressional term.

More political grandstanding from the party that is bereft of any ideals beyond give the rich more money and worship Trump.

Re: 1, the concept of church/state separation is espoused by the First Amendment, if not explicitly stated as such. But as has been made clear, Roberts' SCOTUS has yet to miss a case dismantling that wall.

Re: 2, SCOTUS has held that amendments only apply to Congress unless they have been incorporated via the 14th out to the states. The First Amendment's restriction on state-endorsed religion was incorporated in a case from 1947 called Everson vs. Board of Education which means that if Congress can't create an official government religion, state legislatures can't either. Of course, what one SCOTUS decides another can overturn, so it's not out of the realm of possibility for Roberts' activist Court to remove the concept of incorporation altogether.

Any decent lawyer will tell you to shut the fuck up once you've filed a suit, so as I see it there are three possible scenarios here:

1. He's too stupid to listen to his lawyers.
2. His lawyers are too stupid to advise him to shut up.
3. They're trying a public pressure campaign against Mozilla to get Mozilla to capitulate before their case goes too far. They're hoping that the headlines of "Mozilla hates cancer patients!" will cause enough bad press that Mozilla will want to get the case over with quicker by settling sooner, especially if Teixiera doesn't have a very strong case.

Yeah, I'm gonna wait a bit before bringing out the pitchforks.

A plaintiff in a civil suit can allege anything they want, but that doesn't mean they're being 100% truthful. Any lawyer will slant the facts as much as possible to make their client look as injured as they can to garner the most sympathy- that's just lawyering 101. We have his version of events but don't have Mozilla's, but the fact that he's publicly shit-talking the company (rather than let the legal process play out) doesn't cast him in a good light IMO.

So if

1. Conservatives think that abortion is murder

2. and there are more infants dying

3. but fewer abortions being performed

Doesn't that mean they should consider their infant mortality rate exactly the same as before?

edit: Cause, if the above is true, but their infant mortality rate is going up, we can draw a straight line between the decrease of abortions and the increase of infant deaths. Of course, Conservative feelings don't care about facts.

"Dissolution" is the word you're looking for.

I would have taught Google everything they wanted to know about Reddit and Redditors for only $30 million.

What are they gonna do, vote for a Democrat!?