Biggest US Supreme Court ruling of the year

[Genivaria]

From what I can tell everyone will get it. Even if Wheaton and little sister's win it just means the government will need to become flexible in how it receives notice of the objection. The problem is with for profits, the government will not offer the file an objection and have your insurer get tax credits. The reason being is then every possible for profit would find religion because it is always cheaper to get the government to pay for part of your program. And the government funding almost all women's contraception coverage would make the ACA very expensive.

yeah

there are lots of good legislative fixes for this but none that will get through congress. anything the president does today can be undone by the next president if she has a different opinion on it. (not all that likely for Hillary Clinton, very likely for rick santorum)

I don't think there's any chance of Santorum winning.
Seeing as how GOP can't show any sane candidates Hilary's victory is almost guaranteed.

[Ashmoria]

yeah

there are lots of good legislative fixes for this but none that will get through congress. anything the president does today can be undone by the next president if she has a different opinion on it. (not all that likely for Hillary Clinton, very likely for rick santorum)

I don't think there's any chance of Santorum winning.
Seeing as how GOP can't show any sane candidates Hilary's victory is almost guaranteed.

politics is a funny thing. who would have guessed that a loser like W could be president for 8 years?

[Genivaria]

I don't think there's any chance of Santorum winning.
Seeing as how GOP can't show any sane candidates Hilary's victory is almost guaranteed.

politics is a funny thing. who would have guessed that a loser like W could be president for 8 years?

Oh dear god please don't remind me.

[JesusOfNazareth]

I don't think there's any chance of Santorum winning.
Seeing as how GOP can't show any sane candidates Hilary's victory is almost guaranteed.

politics is a funny thing. who would have guessed that a loser like W could be president for 8 years?

Or Obama.

[Genivaria]

politics is a funny thing. who would have guessed that a loser like W could be president for 8 years?

Or Obama.

That wasn't a surprise actually.
Whatever your opinion of his performance it's easy to see why he was elected if you were paying attention.

[Ashmoria]

politics is a funny thing. who would have guessed that a loser like W could be president for 8 years?

Oh dear god please don't remind me.

you know, there is a show on nationalgeographic that is being advertised on the net on sites I frequent. the ad claims that the 90s were the last great decade. im thinking that that is because we all try to forget that the 00s ever happened.

[Ashmoria]

politics is a funny thing. who would have guessed that a loser like W could be president for 8 years?

Or Obama.

do you remember back in '07 when the campaigns seemed so irrelevant because the nominees were going to be Hillary Clinton and rudy giulianni?

you just never know.

[Greed and Death]

Or Obama.

do you remember back in '07 when the campaigns seemed so irrelevant because the nominees were going to be Hillary Clinton and rudy giulianni?

you just never know.

My guess is the nomination is not Hillary, the DNC tends to prefer people new to federal politics. Junior Senators See JFK and Obama(likely RFK if he had not been shot), and Governors see Clinton, FDR, and Carter.

The only exceptions have been Truman and LBJ and they got into the Presidency by other means.

[Ashmoria]

do you remember back in '07 when the campaigns seemed so irrelevant because the nominees were going to be Hillary Clinton and rudy giulianni?

you just never know.

My guess is the nomination is not Hillary, the DNC tends to prefer people new to federal politics. Junior Senators See JFK and Obama(likely RFK if he had not been shot), and Governors see Clinton, FDR, and Carter.

The only exceptions have been Truman and LBJ and they got into the Presidency by other means.

its not in the bag, for sure. but the support of Hillary was very shallow last time and it is much stronger this time. she'll have to work for it but I think she can do it.

of course if an actual sane candidate emerges from the republican field--I have no idea who that would be but there must be a few sane republicans left--she would also have to run a perfect general election campaign to win.

[Genivaria]

My guess is the nomination is not Hillary, the DNC tends to prefer people new to federal politics. Junior Senators See JFK and Obama(likely RFK if he had not been shot), and Governors see Clinton, FDR, and Carter.

The only exceptions have been Truman and LBJ and they got into the Presidency by other means.

its not in the bag, for sure. but the support of Hillary was very shallow last time and it is much stronger this time. she'll have to work for it but I think she can do it.

of course if an actual sane candidate emerges from the republican field--I have no idea who that would be but there must be a few sane republicans left--she would also have to run a perfect general election campaign to win.

The way I see it because the GOP is so fractured right now the Dems should put all their support behind one candidate from the get go.

[Greed and Death]

its not in the bag, for sure. but the support of Hillary was very shallow last time and it is much stronger this time. she'll have to work for it but I think she can do it.

of course if an actual sane candidate emerges from the republican field--I have no idea who that would be but there must be a few sane republicans left--she would also have to run a perfect general election campaign to win.

The way I see it because the GOP is so fractured right now the Dems should put all their support behind one candidate from the get go.

But I have hired the good idea fairy to convince others to run. Warren, Biden, and every junior Democratic Senator in the Senate.

[Ashmoria]

its not in the bag, for sure. but the support of Hillary was very shallow last time and it is much stronger this time. she'll have to work for it but I think she can do it.

of course if an actual sane candidate emerges from the republican field--I have no idea who that would be but there must be a few sane republicans left--she would also have to run a perfect general election campaign to win.

The way I see it because the GOP is so fractured right now the Dems should put all their support behind one candidate from the get go.

I suppose but the democrats benefitted greatly from the protracted nomination race. it let the democratic agenda be put forth far more often and more forcefully than ...whatever McCain was running on.

in the same way the republicans suffered greatly from their '12 protracted nomination race because it highlighted how crappy their ideas and beliefs were.

[Genivaria]

The way I see it because the GOP is so fractured right now the Dems should put all their support behind one candidate from the get go.

I suppose but the democrats benefitted greatly from the protracted nomination race. it let the democratic agenda be put forth far more often and more forcefully than ...whatever McCain was running on.

in the same way the republicans suffered greatly from their '12 protracted nomination race because it highlighted how crappy their ideas and beliefs were.

Yeah I've heard it said that Dems don't need to smear the GOP at all, just get them on stage and let them talk.

[Ashmoria]

I suppose but the democrats benefitted greatly from the protracted nomination race. it let the democratic agenda be put forth far more often and more forcefully than ...whatever McCain was running on.

in the same way the republicans suffered greatly from their '12 protracted nomination race because it highlighted how crappy their ideas and beliefs were.

Yeah I've heard it said that Dems don't need to smear the GOP at all, just get them on stage and let them talk.

which is why this year's big advice is to just shut up about stuff. ...which makes the hobbylobby ruling problematical for republicans running for office since it makes it fair to ask their opinion about it.

[Genivaria]

Democrats Introduce Bill that Could Lead to Impeachment for Justices Thomas and Scalia

On Thursday, a group of Democratic lawmakers proposed a law to establish a Code of Conduct for the Supreme Court.

It’s surely to have Supreme Court Justices Thomas and Scalia quaking in their Tea Party boots because it would mean they would actually have to be independent of political and other influences. They would also have to have the appearance of independence. They would have to stay away from political activity. That part would be really hard.

As it stands, this law would help guarantee that Supreme Court Justices are held to the same ethical standards we expect of other judges.

Democratic Congresswoman Louise Slaughter, joined by Senators Chris Murphy, Richard Blumenthal and Sheldon Whitehouse, introduced the bill. It would make ethics mandatory, rather than an option left to the discretion of Justices like Thomas and Scalia. It would mean all the Justices would have to live by the sort of ethical standards that Justice Kagan applied when she recused herself from Arizona’s “papers please” law because she was Solicitor General at the time the Federal government filed suit. She did the same thing in 24 other cases on the same grounds.

As Senator Blumenthal said:

This legislation’s goal is to preserve public trust and confidence – the lifeblood of the Supreme Court – after claims of questionable conduct by some Justices, No Justice, any more than a judge, should advance a partisan cause or sit on a case involving a personal friend or interest. There is no persuasive reason in law or logic why Supreme Court Justices should not be held to the same high standard as other federal judges.

http://www.politicususa.com/2013/08/03/ ... calia.html

[Maineiacs]

Democrats Introduce Bill that Could Lead to Impeachment for Justices Thomas and Scalia

On Thursday, a group of Democratic lawmakers proposed a law to establish a Code of Conduct for the Supreme Court.

It’s surely to have Supreme Court Justices Thomas and Scalia quaking in their Tea Party boots because it would mean they would actually have to be independent of political and other influences. They would also have to have the appearance of independence. They would have to stay away from political activity. That part would be really hard.

As it stands, this law would help guarantee that Supreme Court Justices are held to the same ethical standards we expect of other judges.

Democratic Congresswoman Louise Slaughter, joined by Senators Chris Murphy, Richard Blumenthal and Sheldon Whitehouse, introduced the bill. It would make ethics mandatory, rather than an option left to the discretion of Justices like Thomas and Scalia. It would mean all the Justices would have to live by the sort of ethical standards that Justice Kagan applied when she recused herself from Arizona’s “papers please” law because she was Solicitor General at the time the Federal government filed suit. She did the same thing in 24 other cases on the same grounds.

As Senator Blumenthal said:

This legislation’s goal is to preserve public trust and confidence – the lifeblood of the Supreme Court – after claims of questionable conduct by some Justices, No Justice, any more than a judge, should advance a partisan cause or sit on a case involving a personal friend or interest. There is no persuasive reason in law or logic why Supreme Court Justices should not be held to the same high standard as other federal judges.

http://www.politicususa.com/2013/08/03/ ... calia.html

Why does conflict of interest not apply to SCOTUS?

[Viritica]

yeah

there are lots of good legislative fixes for this but none that will get through congress. anything the president does today can be undone by the next president if she has a different opinion on it. (not all that likely for Hillary Clinton, very likely for rick santorum)

I don't think there's any chance of Santorum winning.
Seeing as how GOP can't show any sane candidates Hilary's victory is almost guaranteed.

Hillary's popularity has dropped. And she has literally nothing to run on. She hasn't made any great accomplishments.

[Viritica]

Democrats Introduce Bill that Could Lead to Impeachment for Justices Thomas and Scalia

On Thursday, a group of Democratic lawmakers proposed a law to establish a Code of Conduct for the Supreme Court.

It’s surely to have Supreme Court Justices Thomas and Scalia quaking in their Tea Party boots because it would mean they would actually have to be independent of political and other influences. They would also have to have the appearance of independence. They would have to stay away from political activity. That part would be really hard.

As it stands, this law would help guarantee that Supreme Court Justices are held to the same ethical standards we expect of other judges.

Democratic Congresswoman Louise Slaughter, joined by Senators Chris Murphy, Richard Blumenthal and Sheldon Whitehouse, introduced the bill. It would make ethics mandatory, rather than an option left to the discretion of Justices like Thomas and Scalia. It would mean all the Justices would have to live by the sort of ethical standards that Justice Kagan applied when she recused herself from Arizona’s “papers please” law because she was Solicitor General at the time the Federal government filed suit. She did the same thing in 24 other cases on the same grounds.

As Senator Blumenthal said:

This legislation’s goal is to preserve public trust and confidence – the lifeblood of the Supreme Court – after claims of questionable conduct by some Justices, No Justice, any more than a judge, should advance a partisan cause or sit on a case involving a personal friend or interest. There is no persuasive reason in law or logic why Supreme Court Justices should not be held to the same high standard as other federal judges.

http://www.politicususa.com/2013/08/03/ ... calia.html

The smell of butthurt Democrats is in the air.

[Greed and Death]

I don't think there's any chance of Santorum winning.
Seeing as how GOP can't show any sane candidates Hilary's victory is almost guaranteed.

Hillary's popularity has dropped. And she has literally nothing to run on. She hasn't made any great accomplishments.

That is why I suspect she is not even running, she pretty much exited politics, when she left the Sec of State position.

[Viritica]

Hillary's popularity has dropped. And she has literally nothing to run on. She hasn't made any great accomplishments.

That is why I suspect she is not even running, she pretty much exited politics, when she left the Sec of State position.

If I remember correctly sales of her books are also dropping drastically.

[Ashmoria]

Hillary's popularity has dropped. And she has literally nothing to run on. She hasn't made any great accomplishments.

That is why I suspect she is not even running, she pretty much exited politics, when she left the Sec of State position.

it makes no sense to normal people like us. she is a top level politician and I don't think she can resist the challenge. unless something bad happens to her she is going to run

[Viritica]

http://www.politicususa.com/2013/08/03/ ... calia.html

Why does conflict of interest not apply to SCOTUS?

Because SCOTUS didn't decide what the butthurt Dems wanted them to decide, obviously.

[Viritica]

That is why I suspect she is not even running, she pretty much exited politics, when she left the Sec of State position.

it makes no sense to normal people like us. she is a top level politician and I don't think she can resist the challenge. unless something bad happens to her she is going to run

Because her popularity has dropped, sales of her books have dropped, and she has nothing to run on.

[Ashmoria]

Why does conflict of interest not apply to SCOTUS?

Because SCOTUS didn't decide what the butthurt Dems wanted them to decide, obviously.

you need to stop with the politics and think about whether or not it is a good idea to pass this bill. ethics cuts all ways.

[Death Metal]

Because SCOTUS didn't decide what the butthurt Dems wanted them to decide, obviously.

you need to stop with the politics and think about whether or not it is a good idea to pass this bill. ethics cuts all ways.

But Democrats did it, so it's <insert strawman here>.