MAGAThread XIV: All persons born or naturalized ...

[Petrasylvania]

Daily reminder that Kavanaugh has literally written a book about stare decisis and why it's important lol

They also proposed mandatory health insurance but ditched that when the Dirty Illegal Kenyan Muslim Usurper Obama touched it and gave it AIDS.

[Triassica]

That she believes someone nominated, vetted and belonging to party that hates Roe V Wade who tells her that Roe V Wade is safe.

Judge individuals by their own word, not by their party's.

He was vetted by the Federalist society. They hate Roe v Wade. He was nominated by someone who vowed to overturn Roe.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Daily reminder that Kavanaugh has literally written a book about stare decisis and why it's important lol

They also proposed mandatory health insurance but ditched that when the Dirty Illegal Kenyan Muslim Usurper Obama touched it and gave it AIDS.

I don't think they ever intended that to be a federal thing but I could be wrong.

[Valgora]

I must ask... what exactly about this article shows that Collins is the most naïve senator in Congress?

That she believes someone nominated, vetted and belonging to party that hates Roe V Wade that Roe V Wade is safe.

To be honest, usually Supreme Court justices will use a precedent instead of overturning a previous ruling.
That's not to say Supreme Court justices haven't overturned previous rulings, but it's not easy to do that since they just tend to go with precedent.

[Triassica]

That she believes someone nominated, vetted and belonging to party that hates Roe V Wade that Roe V Wade is safe.

To be honest, usually Supreme Court justices will use a precedent instead of overturning a previous ruling.
That's not to say Supreme Court justices haven't overturned previous rulings, but it's not easy to do that since they just tend to go with precedent.

They just overturned 40 years of work rights with the Janis ruling. Why should I believe them not to go after Roe in order to pander to the Dominonist Evangelicals?

[Northern Davincia]

Judge individuals by their own word, not by their party's.

He was vetted by the Federalist society. They hate Roe v Wade. He was nominated by someone who vowed to overturn Roe.

Yet Kavanaugh has not made any serious indications himself as to what he will do.

[Valgora]

To be honest, usually Supreme Court justices will use a precedent instead of overturning a previous ruling.
That's not to say Supreme Court justices haven't overturned previous rulings, but it's not easy to do that since they just tend to go with precedent.

They just overturned 40 years of work rights with the Janis ruling. Why should I believe them not to go after Roe in order to pander to the Dominonist Evangelicals?

I'm not saying you should believe them or anything.
I'm just pointing out the thing about precedent.

[Washington Resistance Army]

To be honest, usually Supreme Court justices will use a precedent instead of overturning a previous ruling.
That's not to say Supreme Court justices haven't overturned previous rulings, but it's not easy to do that since they just tend to go with precedent.

They just overturned 40 years of work rights with the Janis ruling. Why should I believe them not to go after Roe in order to pander to the Dominonist Evangelicals?

Janis was correctly decided and was going to happen no matter what.

It actually was about to happen in 2016 but Scalia died so they went 4-4 and punted the case.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

I don't think you appreciate how hard it would be to restore the public's faith in the Presidency if Trump goes down in flames. If Pence fails to distance his adminstration from Trump's (which would be extremely likely) he'd find public opinion heavily slanted against him from the start with none of the cult of personality Trump currently enjoys. As such, he'd also struggle finding allies in Congress since hardly anyone would want to go out as the guy who's bill was supported by that icky guy from the Trump administration.

So, Ford then. Trump isn't likely to be removed from office, because the Dems will likely not control the Senate, but if he were removed, would Pence pardon him?

If the Reps turn on Trump, they could get Mike Pence into office, who would be able to be re-elected twice. America has a very high reelection rate.

Yeah, and that is what is scary. He could actually work together with Congress to get through certain legislation, chief among which being voter ID laws and pro-discrimination legislation.

I don't think you appreciate how hard it would be to restore the public's faith in the Presidency if Trump goes down in flames. If Pence fails to distance his adminstration from Trump's (which would be extremely likely) he'd find public opinion heavily slanted against him from the start with none of the cult of personality Trump currently enjoys. As such, he'd also struggle finding allies in Congress since hardly anyone would want to go out as the guy who's bill was supported by that icky guy from the Trump administration.

If Pence gets the position after the midterms he won't need public support.

Daily reminder that Kavanaugh has literally written a book about stare decisis and why it's important lol

Stare decisis doesn't mean a court ruling cannot be overturned by a later court.

[Triassica]

They just overturned 40 years of work rights with the Janis ruling. Why should I believe them not to go after Roe in order to pander to the Dominonist Evangelicals?

I'm not saying you should believe them or anything.
I'm just pointing out the thing about precedent.

And again precident is meaningless in the Republican Court....

[Valgora]

I'm not saying you should believe them or anything.
I'm just pointing out the thing about precedent.

And again precident is meaningless in the Republican Court....

Not really.
I bet there are many precedents that having meaning in the current Supreme Court.

[Triassica]

And again precident is meaningless in the Republican Court....

Not really.
I bet there are many precedents that having meaning in the current Supreme Court.

It's no longer the Supreme Court though. It is nothing more than an extra arm of the Republican Party to enact their extreme right wing agenda and cripple the Democratic Party till they themselves pack the court.

[Valgora]

Not really.
I bet there are many precedents that having meaning in the current Supreme Court.

It's no longer the Supreme Court though. It is nothing more than an extra arm of the Republican Party to enact their extreme right wing agenda and cripple the Democratic Party till they themselves pack the court.

Whether or not you believe it is an extra arm of the Republican Party doesn't make it not the Supreme Court.

[Northern Davincia]

Not really.
I bet there are many precedents that having meaning in the current Supreme Court.

It's no longer the Supreme Court though. It is nothing more than an extra arm of the Republican Party to enact their extreme right wing agenda and cripple the Democratic Party till they themselves pack the court.

Are you implying you don't want the Supreme Court to be your personal ideological rubberstamp?

[Triassica]

It's no longer the Supreme Court though. It is nothing more than an extra arm of the Republican Party to enact their extreme right wing agenda and cripple the Democratic Party till they themselves pack the court.

Whether or not you believe it is an extra arm of the Republican Party doesn't make it not the Supreme Court.

It has lost It's ligitmancy, esepically if they overturn the likes of Roe, Obergfell and Griswold

[Corrian]

Cost of New Coal Rules: Up to 1,400 More Deaths a Year

The Trump administration on Tuesday made public the details of its new pollution rules governing coal-burning power plants, and the fine print includes an acknowledgment that the plan would increase carbon emissions and lead to up to 1,400 premature deaths annually.

The analysis also includes a section called “foregone” climate and human health benefits. That is, instead of listing the health gains of the Trump plan — preventing premature deaths, for example, or avoiding a certain number of increased emergency room visits from asthma attacks — it is instead describing the effect of the Trump plan as benefits lost.

The proposal lays out several possible pathways that individual states might use for regulating coal-fired power plants, and what the consequences would be for pollution and human health in each case. In the scenario the E.P.A. has pegged as the most likely to occur, the health effects would be significant.

In that scenario, the Trump E.P.A. predicts its plan will see between 470 and 1,400 premature deaths annually by 2030 because of increased rates of microscopic airborne particulates known as PM 2.5, which are dangerous because of their link to heart and lung disease as well as their ability to trigger chronic problems like asthma and bronchitis.

[Northern Davincia]

Whether or not you believe it is an extra arm of the Republican Party doesn't make it not the Supreme Court.

It has lost It's ligitmancy, esepically if they overturn the likes of Roe, Obergfell and Griswold

The Constitution is where legitimacy is derived from, not your own views.

[Triassica]

It's no longer the Supreme Court though. It is nothing more than an extra arm of the Republican Party to enact their extreme right wing agenda and cripple the Democratic Party till they themselves pack the court.

Are you implying you don't want the Supreme Court to be your personal ideological rubberstamp?

At least my ideology is objective fact In reality.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Are you implying you don't want the Supreme Court to be your personal ideological rubberstamp?

At least my ideology is objective fact In reality.

lol

[Valgora]

Whether or not you believe it is an extra arm of the Republican Party doesn't make it not the Supreme Court.

It has lost It's ligitmancy, esepically if they overturn the likes of Roe, Obergfell and Griswold

If you thought of it as an extra arm of the Democratic Party to enact their "extreme left" (I couldn't type that with a straight face) wing agenda, would the Supreme Court still have its "legitimacy"?

[Petrasylvania]

Cost of New Coal Rules: Up to 1,400 More Deaths a Year

The Trump administration on Tuesday made public the details of its new pollution rules governing coal-burning power plants, and the fine print includes an acknowledgment that the plan would increase carbon emissions and lead to up to 1,400 premature deaths annually.

The analysis also includes a section called “foregone” climate and human health benefits. That is, instead of listing the health gains of the Trump plan — preventing premature deaths, for example, or avoiding a certain number of increased emergency room visits from asthma attacks — it is instead describing the effect of the Trump plan as benefits lost.

The proposal lays out several possible pathways that individual states might use for regulating coal-fired power plants, and what the consequences would be for pollution and human health in each case. In the scenario the E.P.A. has pegged as the most likely to occur, the health effects would be significant.

In that scenario, the Trump E.P.A. predicts its plan will see between 470 and 1,400 premature deaths annually by 2030 because of increased rates of microscopic airborne particulates known as PM 2.5, which are dangerous because of their link to heart and lung disease as well as their ability to trigger chronic problems like asthma and bronchitis.

Those 1400 were probably Democratic voters anyways. Coal dust and asbestos fibers for Murica! /s

[Triassica]

It has lost It's ligitmancy, esepically if they overturn the likes of Roe, Obergfell and Griswold

The Constitution is where legitimacy is derived from, not your own views.

The Constitution is only convenient till It's used for left wing purpose and reality has a left wing bias.

[Northern Davincia]

Are you implying you don't want the Supreme Court to be your personal ideological rubberstamp?

At least my ideology is objective fact In reality.

That's not how ideology works, nor reality.

[Freezic Vast]

Are you implying you don't want the Supreme Court to be your personal ideological rubberstamp?

At least my ideology is objective fact In reality.

No it isn't, maybe in your dystopian worldview, but in the real world no it wouldn't.

[Telconi]

To be honest, usually Supreme Court justices will use a precedent instead of overturning a previous ruling.
That's not to say Supreme Court justices haven't overturned previous rulings, but it's not easy to do that since they just tend to go with precedent.

They just overturned 40 years of work rights with the Janis ruling. Why should I believe them not to go after Roe in order to pander to the Dominonist Evangelicals?

They robbed thosr poor workers of the right to be threatened with your job if you don't join a political group? How awful?