But I'm basically thinking about Roberts. There have been cases sent there that had the stench of unconstitutional-ism all over them, which our boy has re-routed back down to some courts where Trump lawyers could keep the balls in the air with motions and appeals until the year 2525. - ThreadSky

russdibello.bsky.social • 27 days ago

But I'm basically thinking about Roberts. There have been cases sent there that had the stench of unconstitutional-ism all over them, which our boy has re-routed back down to some courts where Trump lawyers could keep the balls in the air with motions and appeals until the year 2525.

Comments

gavinfred.bsky.social•27 days ago

I completely disagree. Roberts, Uncle Tom & the rest of the corrupt 6 VIEW themselves as being in charge. They will NEVER support ANYTHING that curtails THEIR POWER. IF the Roberts court does NOT overturn this D lawmakers can ignore the courts as well.

russdibello.bsky.social•27 days ago

The case has to get to them first. I'm not a legal scholar... I'm not even an ambulance-chaser on late night TV... but I'm pretty sure Roberts can hijack an appeal before it gets to the Court and not allow them to accept it.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Although warning: I seldom am!😎

gavinfred.bsky.social•27 days ago

I definitely agree with you that Roberts could do that, that kangaroo court of bomb throwers does it ALL THE TIME. However IMO this is a direct challenge to THEIR authority and of course they'll declare it unconstitutional.

splatterthought.bsky.social•27 days ago

I'm w/u on this
SC will defend SC ultimate power, but...
Th Roberts crt provides a limited set of ideologically biased components & lowr RWcrts assemble Arduino circuits regulating vast powr, but w/narrowly focused, neatly confined limits (traps) on who controls them, how & when, to be decided by SC

gavinfred.bsky.social•27 days ago

According to that law change it's VERY clear that NOBODY can be held for contempt of court for failure to comply with an injunction or temporary restraining order. The end result of that will be anarchy. Yes this kangaroo court will attempt to "thread the needle" on this BS but it will fail.

splatterthought.bsky.social•26 days ago

I hear ya, and hope you're right.

But each precedent (threaded needle) is another completed, descrete tiny circuit, or, legal landmark, that operates independently, yet connects to a larger contraption designed to impregnate "VIKI" with Wilhoit's baby😂

gavinfred.bsky.social•26 days ago

Agreed. But I'm actually going to do a 180 here in how I now interpret this VERY POORLY written law: Why would a judge rule for a plaintiff or defendant that is refusing to abide by injunctions and restraining orders?

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply