20 Sep 2026 9:27 am
Blackvegetable » 19 Sep 2026, 8:14 am » wrote: ↑Just run away because you will not defend it.Huey » 19 Sep 2026, 8:01 am » wrote: ↑ I don't think I will, ****. You come here, ranting and raving like a madman, misusing the word ponce, and saying the numbers in the post are wrong.
With no proof. You get the **** out of here with that whiny **** or YOU bring some numbers to refute it, Balless Wonder.
Blackvegetable » 19 Sep 2026, 8:26 am » wrote: ↑It's not that you will actually commit to defending this drivel, it is that you will sit idly by while I pose the necessary questions...which you will then demand I answer.Huey » 19 Sep 2026, 8:16 am » wrote: ↑ Tell you what Balless Wonder, go back to the Supreme Court thread I started and post proof
SC, DD
Blackvegetable » 19 Sep 2026, 10:21 am » wrote: ↑you fail to understand that the question is not about signed decisions - where it is a matter of WHICH decisions...Huey » 19 Sep 2026, 8:37 am » wrote: ↑ I take ot you have nothing to prove the article wrong. Got it. Looks I have nothing to say on your thread.
It's about the use of the shadow docket.
Cases clearly stated.Huey » 20 Sep 2026, 8:26 am » wrote: ↑Waiting on those numbers, not questions, Askholio. If you don't have them, just say so, Asshole.Blackvegetable » 19 Sep 2026, 2:39 pm » wrote: ↑You're a **** idiot...Huey » 19 Sep 2026, 2:37 pm » wrote: ↑ You haven't disproven ****. Endlessly reframing the point just shows everyone you brought nothing to the table.
Were there more unsigned than signed cases in 2025?
And stapled shut.