Justice Alito dissents, along with Thomas, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. 4 votes for "fuck you I do what I want." Hanging on by a thread here. - ThreadSky | a Reddit-style client for Bluesky

socio-steve.bsky.social • 3 days ago

Justice Alito dissents, along with Thomas, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.

4 votes for "fuck you I do what I want." Hanging on by a thread here.

Reposted from Steven Mazie

BREAKING: Supreme Court DENIES President Trump‘s emergency bid to cancel nearly $2 billion in USAID spending. The vote is 5-4.

Comments

northcarolinats.bsky.social•3 days ago

Now, the question that shouldn’t be live but nonetheless is: Will Trump and Elon obey the ruling?

socio-steve.bsky.social•3 days ago

In some other cases they have backed down when ruled against. In others they have tried to find clever ways around it. I guess we'll see.

clearcutcontempt.bsky.social•3 days ago

What will happen when those cuts are made anyway? The Trump administration does not give a shit about following the Constitution, why would they even give lip service to this decision?

daranglenn.bsky.social•3 days ago

We are so done. Long long gone. It was fun while it lasted

macdhomnuill.bsky.social•3 days ago

I am kind of surprised by Gorsuch. When it comes to business and government honoring its contracts he seemed like more of a centrist than a right wing partisan which is on almost everything else.

dmvjjvmd.bsky.social•3 days ago

Fucked are we. Totally fucked.

beatorganizer.bsky.social•3 days ago

"fuck you, pay me" vs "fuck you, I do what I want" a tale as old as time

class-wars.bsky.social•3 days ago

Who are they going to feed first to the mob ACB or Roberts?

offset-term.bsky.social•3 days ago

Four votes for king!

paulschmitz1.bsky.social•3 days ago

Best analysis I’ve seen

schimelsal.bsky.social•3 days ago

Fast forward in a collective daydream: Alito, Gorsuch, Thomas, Kavanaugh each charged w judicial corruption & acceptance of bribes, treason. Impeach the Justices, criminal trials by juries, pending verdicts: hang them. Defying the Constitution for $ or “cause” is a fatal judicial error.

dungeoncrawler13.bsky.social•3 days ago

THEY CAN IGNORE THE ORDER WITH NO CONSEQUENCES

clearcutcontempt.bsky.social•3 days ago

That’s what I’m saying. I’m just counting down the minutes until Musk or Trump quotes Andrew Jackson.

swgeneralmills.bsky.social•3 days ago

All 4 are unfit partisan hacks hiding in black robes.

soashworth.bsky.social•3 days ago

They’re so ready to greenlight some better crafted impoundments.

infinitelyloopy.bsky.social•3 days ago

They’re going to legalize impoundment. JFC.

nightafternight.bsky.social•3 days ago

At this point I'm inclined to put "Justice" in scare quotes…

cutterjohn.bsky.social•3 days ago

That would have been fair for this entire century so far.

socio-steve.bsky.social•3 days ago

Someone is going to come by and argue that they were actually dissenting to the nature of the remedy and blah blah blah they will say whatever they want to empower the king so stop pretending like there is any principle at work here.

dkuehn.bsky.social•3 days ago

Yep. Reasons and rationale are often two different things even in every day life. They’re even more frequently two different things when lawyers are involved.

sentientpotato.bsky.social•3 days ago

I think it's a mistake to assume that any rationale they offer is a lie and that they only want to empower the mad king

This is not saying they deeply care about the law and principles that we care about, but I'm talking about *INFORMED* realism rather than reflexive uninformed realism

dkuehn.bsky.social•3 days ago

I agree it’s a mistake to assume that “any rationale they offer is a lie”.

sentientpotato.bsky.social•3 days ago

I think almost everyone On Here, y'all two included, are very very far from optimal on that dimension

I'd rather err on the side of pessimism in prediction, sure, but I'd also rather be right

socio-steve.bsky.social•3 days ago

Perhaps as a general statement, "all law is just word games" is incorrect. There is this whole repeat game where exercising forbearance and anchoring yourself to the words in some way that seems legitimate to everyone else playing the game while still getting as much as you can within that space...

socio-steve.bsky.social•3 days ago

is the way it has generally worked. However I think it is quite easy to dispense of that notion for the conservatives on the supreme court who display open contempt for rule of law, who regularly contradict themselves across rulings, and who were chosen specifically for this purpose.

sentientpotato.bsky.social•3 days ago

I think you have completely missed my point

If you are ONLY looking at realism, and not at "law", it makes more sense for the justices to be relatively honest in their opinions. This isn't saying it's law working as intended or as always. I'm saying that...

sentientpotato.bsky.social•3 days ago

Remember, opinions are ALSO how the Court and the justices tell lower court judges and other governmental actors what they mean. It actually behooves them to be (somewhat) honest in their opinions, because it will get them more compliance!

sentientpotato.bsky.social•3 days ago

The justices also have their own preferences. They often AGREE with Trump & Co, but that is VERY different to wanting to empower Trump as Trump

(Example: Even every single Trump appointee ruling against every single one of Trump's election challenges)

moreanonhandle.bsky.social•3 days ago

Yeah I’m sure they’ll follow that logic the next time Kacsmaryk does something insane in ND Tex that they like

thefaultinmyarse.bsky.social•3 days ago

I think you articulated the principle at play perfectly: fuck you I do what I want

fleerultra.bsky.social•3 days ago

same people who insisted leaving the texas bounty law in place was purely procedural and did not telegraph the overruling of roe v wade 8 months later. archetypal fell for it again award winners

buchman.bsky.social•3 days ago

The same people who needed more than four years to sort out if congress has subpoena power? Or more than a presidential term to figure out if the president can take money from foreign governments?

sporkredfox.bsky.social•3 days ago

I get why 5-4 has been hesitant to slam on the emergency podcast button...but like? This is "didn't even make it past the preamble" stuff

iplayguitarbad.bsky.social•3 days ago

Probably also not great that the dissent writes like an angry right-wing twitter account.

oowooooo.bsky.social•3 days ago

Coincidentally, the same justices who have received lavish bribes

enriquebedlam.bsky.social•3 days ago

You heard it here folks, Alito said you don't have to do what some judge(s) say if it obviously violates the law and hurts the American Public.

badgeredwitness.bsky.social•3 days ago

Rumor is that when the constitution is hanging by a thread the Mormons are supposed to swoop in. Somebody tell Mitt to tell the Mormons they've missed their cue several times now (FRFR https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Horse_Prophecy lol I know of which I speak)

badgeredwitness.bsky.social•3 days ago

None of this is funny I just have no further energy to be mad. The only energy I have left is absurdity. My apologies

jimwimmers.bsky.social•3 days ago

In other news, trump issues Executive Order that states 5-4 decisions are not legally binding.