Judge upholds $83m E Jean Carroll defamation verdict against Trump - eviltoast
  • prole@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 个月前

    I literally just gave you an example though. Federal elections are run by the states. The US Supreme Court ruled against the North Carolina Supreme Court regarding that state’s running of elections. They may be federal elections, but it’s completely a state issue.

    Or we could talk about their history with state gerrymandering cases?

    Especially with this current court, it’s quite the claim to say with such certainty that they will or will not do something. But, historically speaking, you’re wrong.

    • stoly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 个月前

      And I also gave examples. I’m not really sure what you’re going on about. Just walk away.

      • prole@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 个月前

        You gave me an example of…? Your claim is that (with a strange amount of certainty) that the US Supreme Court doesn’t do X. I gave you evidence that they have and will do X. That’s all I needed to do in order to support my claim.

        You can’t really prove a negative with examples so I’m not sure what you mean when you say that you also gave examples? Examples of what???

        Is every SCOTUS case ever (that isn’t one I mentioned) an example?