After Biden v. Nebraska, any reliance on the standing doctrine is purely political.
For those not familiar, Biden v Nebraska is the student loan case in which John Roberts and the Fash Five struck down the effort to help struggling student loan debtors. Several states sued, The lower courts dismissed for lack of standing. That was right, because no state had any actual injury.
The six frauds held that Missouri had standing because it had chartered a student loan processing corporation which had refused to participate in the iltigation. The frauds that Missouri was damaged because if loans were cancelled the student loan company wouldn't collect as much money, and that might mean that Missouri would not get a bit of money if the student loan company ever paid anything. In other words, no actual tangible injury.
That's ridiculous. I actually own stock in corporations that actually pay dividends, but that doesn't give me standing to sue if the government cuts funding to one of them, and Missouri didn't even own stock. The explanation for why the plan was unconstitutional is ever more stupid.
Precedence gone. Equality gone. The current Supreme Court is composed almost entirely of DEI hires - women, a Jew, a Latina, five Catholics, two African Americans. - eats itself.
Angry white male frat bro Kavanaugh finally shows not only his sexist credentials (see confirmation hearings) but now his racist core is on full display.
A reminder that Kavanaugh, Alito, and their ilk interpret the Constitution in a way such that "The Founding Fathers" obviously meant it from their point of view. I'm sure they will find nd away around birthright citizenship once that eventually makes its way to SCOTUS.
They are biased and unhinged. They have been indoctrinated from the start of their careers. As much as the right wing decries liberal activism by the courts, their own side is more radical. They prefer to strip away our rights because they "know" what the authors meant. It's such BS.
Also, in some ways the fash five (love that term) are correct. Justice has always accepted racism in the courts. The country was partly founded on that principle, so these "traditionalist" interpreters of the Constitution will read it as "whites only." POC weren't included from the beginning, so any amendments and rulings which came afterwards are most likely null and void in their puny minds.
Amendments to legal documents can't be considered null and void because of the original document. An amendment always supersedes whatever it amended. So it's MORE important that our Constitution was amended to prohibit discrimination "on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude" (Amendment XV) or "on account of sex" (Amendment XIX) or on account of wealth (inability "to pay any poll tax or other tax" (Amendment XXIV)).
Again, the Founding Fathers would NEVER countenance a court like this - women, Negroes, Roman Catholics, a “Jewess” - so how can SCOTUS honestly make this claim?
I used to believe that putting term limits, with emerita standing, and expanding the court was not the way to go. I then read Elie Mystal's book, Allow Me to Retort, and began to question my previous reasoning. Now, I'm all in for term limits, expanding the court and instituting a mandatory ethics code on this court. Justice Robert's legacy will be that of heading up the most corrupt, racist and political courts in history.
Thanks Aaron, for the great reporting. I’m reading retired Judge Michael Luttig every chance I can for truth and value. Ya know, Sometimes I wonder if any of the Six are in the Epstein files. They are such creeps.
It is real danger for the democracy when SCOTUS hands FELON one legal victory after the other. All honour to the lower courts for doing their job. Hope they continue this good work, and they need all the support that one can muster. Take care of yourself and each other.🥰
SCOTUS - in it’s “wisdom” - paves the way for Justice Sotomayor to be detained. Next up, Jewish women … then black women over fifty … force Thomas to retire, Barrett to obey her husband, and we have Nine White Men again.
This is what happens when people don’t vote and leave it up to crass politicians to bring people like Kavanaugh into the court. When we watched his confirmation hearings and saw him shed tears we knew he was a phony. But being a phony doesn’t have anything to do with politicians who vote the party line. And further, consider that Trump, with the help of Mitch McConnell, got three nominations to the court, all of whom pretty much sailed through. So, fellow citizens, it’s time to ensure that as many people vote as possible and as few as possible sit out in upcoming elections. It’s possible that the only way to neutralize the vile and loathsome six would be to pack the court. And while some fear this isn’t a good idea, I challenge you all to find a better one.
Day by day, ruling by ruling, they chip away at their legitimacy and any last bit of respect accorded them by a large percentage of the public. That they feel compelled, like Barret did, to proclaim that public opinion doesn't matter to them tells you it absolutely does matter to them.
After Biden v. Nebraska, any reliance on the standing doctrine is purely political.
For those not familiar, Biden v Nebraska is the student loan case in which John Roberts and the Fash Five struck down the effort to help struggling student loan debtors. Several states sued, The lower courts dismissed for lack of standing. That was right, because no state had any actual injury.
The six frauds held that Missouri had standing because it had chartered a student loan processing corporation which had refused to participate in the iltigation. The frauds that Missouri was damaged because if loans were cancelled the student loan company wouldn't collect as much money, and that might mean that Missouri would not get a bit of money if the student loan company ever paid anything. In other words, no actual tangible injury.
That's ridiculous. I actually own stock in corporations that actually pay dividends, but that doesn't give me standing to sue if the government cuts funding to one of them, and Missouri didn't even own stock. The explanation for why the plan was unconstitutional is ever more stupid.
Precedence gone. Equality gone. The current Supreme Court is composed almost entirely of DEI hires - women, a Jew, a Latina, five Catholics, two African Americans. - eats itself.
Brilliant and insightful as always. I love reading your pieces in PN!
Angry white male frat bro Kavanaugh finally shows not only his sexist credentials (see confirmation hearings) but now his racist core is on full display.
A reminder that Kavanaugh, Alito, and their ilk interpret the Constitution in a way such that "The Founding Fathers" obviously meant it from their point of view. I'm sure they will find nd away around birthright citizenship once that eventually makes its way to SCOTUS.
They are biased and unhinged. They have been indoctrinated from the start of their careers. As much as the right wing decries liberal activism by the courts, their own side is more radical. They prefer to strip away our rights because they "know" what the authors meant. It's such BS.
Also, in some ways the fash five (love that term) are correct. Justice has always accepted racism in the courts. The country was partly founded on that principle, so these "traditionalist" interpreters of the Constitution will read it as "whites only." POC weren't included from the beginning, so any amendments and rulings which came afterwards are most likely null and void in their puny minds.
Amendments to legal documents can't be considered null and void because of the original document. An amendment always supersedes whatever it amended. So it's MORE important that our Constitution was amended to prohibit discrimination "on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude" (Amendment XV) or "on account of sex" (Amendment XIX) or on account of wealth (inability "to pay any poll tax or other tax" (Amendment XXIV)).
Again, the Founding Fathers would NEVER countenance a court like this - women, Negroes, Roman Catholics, a “Jewess” - so how can SCOTUS honestly make this claim?
I used to believe that putting term limits, with emerita standing, and expanding the court was not the way to go. I then read Elie Mystal's book, Allow Me to Retort, and began to question my previous reasoning. Now, I'm all in for term limits, expanding the court and instituting a mandatory ethics code on this court. Justice Robert's legacy will be that of heading up the most corrupt, racist and political courts in history.
Giving that Taney Court a run for its money (which, SCOTUS previously ruled, is legit “gratuity.”
The Shadow Docket not only allows them to be Fascists without owning it, it lets them be lazy. They get paid not to work.
Once a creep, always a creep.
Being brown or black in America right now is entirely unsafe.
With a side order of Islam and Judaism. AND misogyny.
We need Court reform - including term limits & expansion
Why do I continue to be shocked? Because I need to believe there’s a foundation to our laws. But it sure is getting hard.
Thanks for this. Exceedingly well-done.
Thanks Aaron, for the great reporting. I’m reading retired Judge Michael Luttig every chance I can for truth and value. Ya know, Sometimes I wonder if any of the Six are in the Epstein files. They are such creeps.
An excellent article but just sickening that the 5 conservative SCJ have lived up to the criticism they were so indignant of back in 2021.
It is real danger for the democracy when SCOTUS hands FELON one legal victory after the other. All honour to the lower courts for doing their job. Hope they continue this good work, and they need all the support that one can muster. Take care of yourself and each other.🥰
SCOTUS - in it’s “wisdom” - paves the way for Justice Sotomayor to be detained. Next up, Jewish women … then black women over fifty … force Thomas to retire, Barrett to obey her husband, and we have Nine White Men again.
This is what happens when people don’t vote and leave it up to crass politicians to bring people like Kavanaugh into the court. When we watched his confirmation hearings and saw him shed tears we knew he was a phony. But being a phony doesn’t have anything to do with politicians who vote the party line. And further, consider that Trump, with the help of Mitch McConnell, got three nominations to the court, all of whom pretty much sailed through. So, fellow citizens, it’s time to ensure that as many people vote as possible and as few as possible sit out in upcoming elections. It’s possible that the only way to neutralize the vile and loathsome six would be to pack the court. And while some fear this isn’t a good idea, I challenge you all to find a better one.
Day by day, ruling by ruling, they chip away at their legitimacy and any last bit of respect accorded them by a large percentage of the public. That they feel compelled, like Barret did, to proclaim that public opinion doesn't matter to them tells you it absolutely does matter to them.