My contention was that they are all radicals. Not that the three are conservative leaning.
The fact that it doesn’t always line up left right doesn’t change the fact that these did.
Unless you consider Gorsuch, Thomas, and Roberts left wing those three didn’t. Which I consider you don’t given this comment. 30% of the time opinions are 9-0. If you think most of the cases fit a partisan line go through the cases count how many follow partisan lines. They list them all here.
If you group the justices in two partisan groups Thomas and RBG & Roberts and Sotomayor certainly wouldn’t be on the same sides.
I’m not even sure why you’re bringing it up.
I explained this in the first sentence of my comment.
On most of these cases, the left side has voted one way and the right the other.
Inorder as above:
NG, JR, RBG, SB, SS, & EK v SA, CT, & BK
NG, RBG, SB, SS, & EK v JR, SA, BK, & CT
NG, RBG, SB, SS, BK, & CT v SA, JR, & EK
That’d only be true if you consider Gorsuch, Roberts (for him fair), and Thomas as swing votes siding with the left.
I don’t think characterizing them as all being far right hacks is very accurate. Gorsuch for example wrote Bostock v Clayton County (Stopping people from being from being fired for sexual identity or orientation), McGirt v Oklahoma (Upholding a long ignored treaty with the Creek nation), and Ramos v Louisiana (Killing a Jim Crow law designed to disadvantage minorities in criminal trials). They just abide a different judicial doctrine.
I think their alluding to a California Bee interpretation another commenter mentioned and perhaps Sackett v EPA for the one after that. For the switching one I read that probably referring to multiple cases but the BATFE pistol brace interpretation has gone through multiple instances, several implicating hundreds of thousands into felons. For the making up rules I’d guess they were talking about the recent court decision where the agency decided they could hold fishers accountable for compliance officer’s salaries despite the law not state that they could do that.
It absolutely the least democratic, they aren’t representatives they’re judges. They side with the laws enacted by the people, not the people. And all federal judges are appointed.
That power has been with the judicial branch for 180+ years before it was given by the Court to the agency in the 80s to prop up a Reagan interpretation of the Clean Air Act.
Think you meant non elected.
But the point is that policy decisions aren’t to be made by courts or agencies. They are to be made by an elected legislature, informed by the Congregational Research Services. To ensure the separation of powers.
Then the Executive agencies are to be tasked with enforce of the law. And if conflict should arise in the understanding of the law the judiciary is to interpret the law. And while judges are not experts in everything they are the experts in statutory interpretation.
My perspective having known about Chevron before Friday is that while this is a big development for admin law people seem to be overstating the impact it will likely have. Agencies like the EPA, FDA, etc can still make rules as before now courts just have to judge arguments on interpretation impartially, like they did before the SCOTUS made the doctrine in the 80s aiding Reagan. The SCOTUS hasn’t even applied it since 2016.
This is an odd characterization of the Stop the Bleed program. Largely I’ve seen it targeted at adult and people in industries at particular risk, rather than children in particular.
That said I could get behind a CPR/AED/StB program being standardized for a high school course level. These types of programs tend to take a little amount of time to teach and can buy enough time for EMS to arrive. Although 8-9 yr olds seems like a bit young.
I feel bad for Suno’s lawyer.
That part of Boston still looks like that.
That looks like Old North Church on the left for anyone who wants to google maps it to compare to modern day.
I’d argue Steam is probably the among the most competitive digital marketplaces. No games are sold above their MSRP, there are frequent deals that drastically cut the prices, and the UI is clear & comprehensive.
From my understanding 30% was the industry standard rate for some time.
The subtext is Todd is too afraid to remake that porn studio in Fallout 2, that was there for some reason.
M1 isn’t a bad pick. I feel like if the list gets filled out more the AR will become like the cardinal is for state birds.
It is definitely too low poly. The DMC-12 did it right. Then the Cyber truck tried to copy it without understanding why it worked aesthetically.
It’s about the context in which you wear it.
It decidedly is not.
I didn’t contend that if you follow a linear political view they’d be on the right side. I argued with the notion that all of the 3 justices were far right.