|
Quinta Jurecic@qjurecic.bsky.social |
I will take the L here. I absolutely did not think the Court was going to do this. You may mock me now
35 replies 21 reposts 411 likes
|
Grudgie the Whale
@grudgie.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I don’t think you deserve mockery. You just underestimated how utterly lawless these court conservatives are. It’s beyond anything I’ve ever seen
1 replies 0 reposts 20 likes
|
Convolver
@convolver.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I agreed with the conventional wisdom: up to six Justices /may/ have been helping Trump run out the clock, but when push came to shove the jurists would, surely, side with juridical precedence. … I was not expecting them to give the man the powers of the office without concomitant responsibility.
0 replies 0 reposts 13 likes
|
rone
@ennui.org
[ View ] |
Not a chance. You do a great job and I saw nobody predict this seriously.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
@saschavykos.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I will take you up on that. Please stop being such fucking pollyannas now. Now please move to the next ste. Trump is going to steal the election and scotus will rubber stamp whatever he does. If Biden does not use his new found power to kneecap the courts, we are toast.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
J
@jnkc.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Same boat. Endless contempt for the Conservative 6. But I never imagined they'd murder the basic constitutional order to render Donald fucking Trump a King above the law
1 replies 0 reposts 12 likes
|
kkmortier
@kkmortier.bsky.social
[ View ] |
The part that really chaps is that if THIS is what they were going to do, sending it back down with the stupid decide if it’s an official act or not idea, they could’ve delivered it ages ago like the CO decision. 13 circuits, 13 justices NOW.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
@purkmonkey.bsky.social
[ View ] |
You're in good company. It does seem weird that they didn't really think "what could go wrong with this decision" before publishing it.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Muscle Mouse Mike
@mouse98277.bsky.social
[ View ] |
And you write about law 🤷🏻♂️🙄
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Rich Puchalsky ⚑
@richpuchalsky.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Thank you for honesty admitting a wrong expectation rather than the inverse (being very angry at people who post some variation of "you should not have been surprised by this")
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Ralf W
@raflw.bsky.social
[ View ] |
John Roberts was thinking "Power corrupts ... and I like how it makes me feel."
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
VenomousGoatTV
@venomousgoat.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Not referring to you here but I hope that members of the DC commentariat who still bought the idea that SCOTUS isn't a wholly political body will be disabused of that notion now. Between this and tolerating bribery in their own ranks I don't know what shoe could possibly be left to drop
1 replies 0 reposts 20 likes
|
The Next Day
@incompetusrex.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I’ve grown very cynical in the Trump era, but this is still genuinely shocking.
0 replies 0 reposts 11 likes
|
Lee Rowan
@leerowan.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I'd say Roberts was thinking about his bank account.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Pwnallthethings
@pwnallthethings.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Same.
6 replies 1 reposts 76 likes
|
Flying Pace
@flyingpace.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I have no interest in mocking, but I'd ask you, and everyone else who clung to threads of false hope, to start amplifying those of us who HAVE been consistently prescient and clear-eyed about this Court. Notice this post is 2 months old. There are many more like it.
bsky.app/profile/flyi...
0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
@cnm.bsky.social
[ View ] |
your mother was a hamster and your father smells of elderberries
0 replies 0 reposts 10 likes
|
Wevy
@wevy.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Wouldn't dare
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
SatelliteOfLove
@sattelliteoflove.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Dying a broken man Not that its any consolation, but im notoriously good at predicting things that dont benefit me one bit.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Tycho Softworks
@tychosoft.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Indeed, I did not think they would jump the shark and go this far down this path, either.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Go Deep, I'll Look for You
@godeep.bsky.social
[ View ] |
He was thinking “I don’t want my family murdered.”
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Brent J. Arnold
@cyberlawyeryyz.bsky.social
[ View ] |
As a Canadian I can only hope that globalism and exposure to free markets will cause America to embrace democracy one day.
1 replies 1 reposts 3 likes
|
🚲aksfjh👖
@db-user.bsky.social
[ View ] |
i thought they wouldn't be stupid enough to undue Chevron
0 replies 0 reposts 5 likes
|
Tad Suiter
@retius.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Just never assume anything but the worst. You'll be good
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Paddyboy
@hodag1977.bsky.social
[ View ] |
The scary thing is, why go out on a limb like this if you didn’t already know that Trump is going to “win” in November, no matter what?
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Redback
@redback.bsky.social
[ View ] |
So many people taken by surprise by this. The court really went all in with this one. What does that tell us? (seriously looking for answers here) Did they look at this case land on their desks and were like... 'FINALLY.......'
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
JP
@lojikul.bsky.social
[ View ] |
No thanks
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Avishay Ben-Sasson-Gordis
@avishaybsg.bsky.social
[ View ] |
NJ, it's useful for experts to recognize mistakes. Makes you better at what you do
0 replies 0 reposts 8 likes
|
deadmoney
@deadmoney.bsky.social
[ View ] |
You're not alone. They're going all-in because they think they have the best hand and their opponent is weak. They're spot-on with the latter, at least.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
@jiminnh.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I don't think anyone who's ever given an ounce of thought to the Supreme Court or its history would ever have seen this disaster coming. It's not just a terrible outcome but it provides little to no meaningful guidance on how it is to be applied in the future. It's a complete train wreck.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Erik Bryan
@erikonymous.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I also believed they would show *some* restraint here, at least gum up the works so they wouldn’t have to rule on the case before the election, but nope: 6 unequivocal votes for outright fascism. They’re done playing coy.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Sean
@publichealth.bsky.social
[ View ] |
i have been so much more wrong than you i’m genuinely shocked i haven’t been muted yet
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
@fleezlow.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I thought they'd be happy enough to delay things
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Chuck Grassley's goat
@chuckgoat.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Your main problem was knowing what you're talking about. Those of us who don't study courts for a living just suppose 5 or 6 conservatives on the court will wonder "What would Ted Cruz do?" and go with that. We haven't been wrong in a while.
0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
whetstone
@whetstone.bsky.social
[ View ] |
yes i thought it was going to be a delay tactic, to push the trials back until after the election nothing so blatant as this
1 replies 0 reposts 13 likes
|
Jennifer Van Goethem
@jennvg.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I thought Barrett’s concurrence would be the thing. This is bonkers.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes