And in one fell swoop, while people are consumed in the debate, a conservative SCOTUS, brought to you by Trump, says 1) criminalizing homelessness does not violate the 8th amendment, and 2) Chevron deference is scrapped.
And in one fell swoop, while people are consumed in the debate, a conservative SCOTUS, brought to you by Trump, says 1) criminalizing homelessness does not violate the 8th amendment, and 2) Chevron deference is scrapped.
With this judicial power grab, conservative courts will now get to decide which "experts" to trust in every regulatory review case. Gee, those industry experts sound really convincing vs the (insert agency)'s in-house scientists/experts.Chevron is gonna be a fiasco. Give it time and it'll be second only to "Citizens United" in terms of overall impact.
Yup. I find it odd that on one hand the homeless ruling was based on the idea that homelessness policy is complex and the courts are not in a position to judge what should be done or to make solutions yet for the other ruling they are saying all federal agency policies are not complex and the courts are in perfect position to judge how they should operate.With this judicial power grab, conservative courts will now get to decide which "experts" to trust in every regulatory review case. Gee, those industry experts sound really convincing vs the (insert agency)'s in-house scientists/experts.
Yup. I find it odd that on one hand the homeless ruling was based on the idea that homelessness policy is complex and the courts are not in a position to judge what should be done or to make solutions yet for the other ruling they are saying all federal agency policies are not complex and the courts are in perfect position to judge how they should operate.
Just comical. It's literally talking out of both sides of your mouth shamelessly.
This is it exactly. I have dog turds in my garbage can I would vote for before I vote for Trump, but damn Biden looked bad last night.I don't have any choice now. FFS why could they not put forward a better candidate?
To quote Joe himself " come on, man"
Every meaningful regulation will now be challenged in a single member judicial district with a friendly judge who will now how enormous latitude to invalidate it. They don't even need to ouija board back to 1789 here like with gun cases, just need some hack to write a paper in support of whatever position they want to hold.Between this and the civil fines jury trial ruling the judicial branch is going to essentially cease to function under the load. There will be tsunamis of litigation gumming it up.
Every meaningful regulation will now be challenged in a single member judicial district with a friendly judge who will now how enormous latitude to invalidate it. They don't even need to ouija board back to 1789 here like with gun cases, just need some hack to write a paper in support of whatever position they want to hold.
Looking forward to a Bruen-esque situation where a few years down the line after chaos has erupted they will issue a new ruling saying 'no no no, not like that!'.I think we're going to see a lot of end runs around this by individual states in both directions. The regulatory landscape in the US could become wildly uneven with major repercussions.
Looking forward to a Bruen-esque situation where a few years down the line after chaos has erupted they will issue a new ruling saying 'no no no, not like that!'.
And in one fell swoop, while people are consumed in the debate, a conservative SCOTUS, brought to you by Trump, says 1) criminalizing homelessness does not violate the 8th amendment, and 2) Chevron deference is scrapped.
but at some point even Republicans won't be able to ignore the issues.
I don't see how Congress could get around this ruling and court even if they wanted to. Just look at student loan forgiveness - Congress wrote the most explicitly worded statute you could ever hope for and SCOTUS was like 'nah - still not good enough'.- Bad short term decisions, good long term decisions. I've come around to the "if you want things to change, people need to actually feel the consequences of their vote" and there are a lot of layers of admin state that keep things working without people realizing it.
Part of the reason we're in this culture war non-sense, a lot of people really aren't directly affected by Congress' ineptitude and inability to pass laws. It'll be bad at first, but at some point even Republicans won't be able to ignore the issues.
/Glass half full
Or maybe they go to Biden to begin with and ask him to support the notion of standing aside, then provided that he agrees then they're all on the same page. My point wasn't originally about how it should happen, it was about that it's time for Biden to stand aside."The Party" did pick a candidate via primary: Joe Biden. But if "The Party" chose a separate candidate via some backroom process, that would go over like a lead balloon. The Party isn't some all powerful entity that can replace people on a whim. They are largely prevented from doing that by rules enacted decades ago to reduce the backroom dealing and allow a more democratic process for nominating.
Do we not remember all the screaming when "The Party", through the primary process, nominated one candidate over another in 2016 and 2020? Could you imagine the uproar if they tried to step in and usurp the primary process through the actions of political insiders?
Or maybe they go to Biden to begin with and ask him to support the notion of standing aside, then provided that he agrees then they're all on the same page. My point wasn't originally about how it should happen, it was about that it's time for Biden to stand aside.
I don't think stepping aside is worth it, given the party infighting that would result much closer to the election, the loss of name recognition, and incumbency advantage. Democrats would be better off publicly ignoring the suggestion of stepping aside. Stop shooting yourself in the dick and call on Republicans to clean their house, call on compromised SCOTUS justices to resign or be investigated. Now is the time to push back on the fascists, not act like everything is fine and only look inwardly.Or maybe they go to Biden to begin with and ask him to support the notion of standing aside, then provided that he agrees then they're all on the same page. My point wasn't originally about how it should happen, it was about that it's time for Biden to stand aside.
While I never watch debates because I think they are stupid it seems the consensus is that Trump won because while he was frequently incoherent and constantly lying he did so in a confident manner and Biden lost because he was truthful but also sometimes incoherent but not in a confident way.
And…this is why I don’t watch the debates.
Clean up on aisle 3 and an emergency dispatch from the distribution center!Not a great look for either but Biden literally couldn't even make it down the steps from the stage. Will he even make it to November?
He needs to step aside or it's brokered convention time. The momentum for the latter will grow with every passing week.
I've seen some cherry picked clips of Biden and it wasn't a great look, but he's not Trump and he's not the Republican party
so even though Biden looks like a grandpa that should be enjoying retirement, to me a second term of Biden means 4 years of of the GOP not controlling Supreme Court nominations, a President that supports Ukraine, federal appointments that don't sabotage their agency (Dejoy), someone that values country over self in times of crisis (COVID), etc
and hopefully, after a 2nd term of Biden, Trump & MAGA will be weakened to the point of no longer having an outsized influence over the Republican party