Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Liberals Only Political Chat Room
‹
THE CONSERVATIVE COURTS - A Republican Assault Upon the Judiciary
"PROPRIETY? PROPRIETY!? WE DON'T NEED NO STEENKIN PROPRIETY."
Chief Justice John Roberts' ethics, or lack thereof, under the microscope again - Daily Kos At issue is the work of Roberts’ wife, Jane Sullivan Roberts, as a high-powered headhunter for lawyers, and the work she’s done placing lawyers in firms that have significant Supreme Court litigation.
This defines the Roberts Court: Chief justice's wife earns millions placing lawyers at firms that argue cases - Alternet
Justice John Roberts' Meeting With Christian Nationalist Raises Questions - Newsweek
Exclusive: Supreme Court justices used personal emails for work and burn bags were left open in hallways, sources say - CNN Politics
MEANWHILE, THE GOOD OL BOYS' KKANGAROO KOURT STRIKES AGAIN:
Wife-beating was legal when the Constitution was written, so wife-beaters can own guns - Daily Kos
A man beating his wife was legal across the United States until 1871, when Alabama and Massachusetts banned it. That fact has new relevance in today’s gun laws thanks to the Supreme Court.
Following the logic of Justice [unc] Thomas’ 2022 opinion in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a federal law banning the sale of guns to people subject to restraining orders in domestic violence cases.
Thomas explained that... if there was no such law in 1791, it’s unconstitutional now.
Which brings us back to how a man beating his wife was fully legal back then, so there were no laws saying that men who beat their wives (or kids) couldn’t have guns. And therefore, the Fifth Circuit ruled, following Thomas, there can’t be such laws now.
Yes, really.
Chief Justice John Roberts' ethics, or lack thereof, under the microscope again - Daily Kos At issue is the work of Roberts’ wife, Jane Sullivan Roberts, as a high-powered headhunter for lawyers, and the work she’s done placing lawyers in firms that have significant Supreme Court litigation.
This defines the Roberts Court: Chief justice's wife earns millions placing lawyers at firms that argue cases - Alternet
Justice John Roberts' Meeting With Christian Nationalist Raises Questions - Newsweek
Exclusive: Supreme Court justices used personal emails for work and burn bags were left open in hallways, sources say - CNN Politics
MEANWHILE, THE GOOD OL BOYS' KKANGAROO KOURT STRIKES AGAIN:
Wife-beating was legal when the Constitution was written, so wife-beaters can own guns - Daily Kos
A man beating his wife was legal across the United States until 1871, when Alabama and Massachusetts banned it. That fact has new relevance in today’s gun laws thanks to the Supreme Court.
Following the logic of Justice [unc] Thomas’ 2022 opinion in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a federal law banning the sale of guns to people subject to restraining orders in domestic violence cases.
Thomas explained that... if there was no such law in 1791, it’s unconstitutional now.
Which brings us back to how a man beating his wife was fully legal back then, so there were no laws saying that men who beat their wives (or kids) couldn’t have guns. And therefore, the Fifth Circuit ruled, following Thomas, there can’t be such laws now.
Yes, really.