Supreme Court restores Trump to ballot, rejecting state attempts to ban him over Capitol attack - eviltoast
  • Funderpants @lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    The majority position doesn’t have to make sense, they just needed to be the majority. This is the legal phase of fascism, they won’t be held accountable. In the majority, 3 of them were appointed by Trump, 1 has an insurrectionist wife, this outcome was really never in doubt.

    • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      They couldn’t get Barret to sign on with the majority on this one, but they still managed to squeeze it through. Guess it left too much of a bad taste in her mouth.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        10 months ago

        Barrett’s concurring opinion is just “I agree with everything they said, and also I’m so glad we could all agree on this”. The concurring opinion from Sotomayor/Kagen/Jackson has actual substance to it.

        • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Oh I read it. It was more like “I don’t agree with their reasoning, but can’t we all just get along.” As in, she wouldn’t even touch what she didn’t agree with even though it’s obvious. She writes incredibly shitty opinions.