SCOTUS

[All-American]

Does BYU accept Title VI Federal funding?

Yes, especially in the form of funding for student financial aid.

[Bo Diddley]

I like the way BBC puts it.

It all boils down to what’s called the “major questions doctrine” – a conservative legal theory that holds that when it comes to issues of major political or economic significance, Congress has to explicitly approve the policy.

Presidents can’t use unusual or new interpretations of existing laws to enact major policy objectives through what the court views as a legal back door.

And I love seeing the legislative reign in the executive.

[Copelius]

I like the way BBC puts it.



And I love seeing the legislative reign in the executive.

Actually, the Court specifically stated that it was not applying the major questions doctrine as the principal reason for its ruling, but "the statutory text alone precludes the Secretary’s program. [The invocation of MQD] simply reflects this Court’s familiar practice of providing multiple grounds to support its conclusions."

The BBC reporter appears to have read the dissent and based his reporting on it. Barrett wrote a whole concurrence on the MQD, even applying the oft used tactic of BYU Religion professors by quoting her own published works as authority, but the Court was very clear as shown above that MQD was not the deciding factor.

[MartyFunkhouser]

I'm just glad that this SCOTUS again punted on the issue of what level of scrutiny we apply to discrimination based on sexual orientation and instead put in the box of the First Amendment. However, it is just a matter of time when this Court is going to make it legal to discriminate based on sexual orientation.

[Bo Diddley]

Actually, the Court specifically stated that it was not applying the major questions doctrine as the principal reason for its ruling, but "the statutory text alone precludes the Secretary’s program. [The invocation of MQD] simply reflects this Court’s familiar practice of providing multiple grounds to support its conclusions."

The BBC reporter appears to have read the dissent and based his reporting on it. Barrett wrote a whole concurrence on the MQD, even applying the oft used tactic of BYU Religion professors by quoting her own published works as authority, but the Court was very clear as shown above that MQD was not the deciding factor.

That's lazy reporting!

[Moliere]

I'm just glad that this SCOTUS again punted on the issue of what level of scrutiny we apply to discrimination based on sexual orientation and instead put in the box of the First Amendment. However, it is just a matter of time when this Court is going to make it legal to discriminate based on sexual orientation.

I disagree. This court seems to think it's illegal to discriminate as shown in their elimination of affirmative action. I bet they'd hold the same view when it comes to sexual orientation.

[Commando]

Re student loan forgiveness:

It looks like they found at least Missouri had standing and overturned the forgiveness by a 6-3 vote. I guess President Biden got the election booth benefit of vote buying without having to foot the half-a-trillion-dollar cost - or, perhaps more accurately, adding that to the bill our children and grandchildren will already be inheriting.

Thank goodness! Now our children can focus on being chiefly responsible for the consequences our long standing love affair with corporate welfare and fake 'trickle-down' theories!

[LVAllen]

Interesting twist. The person who supposedly asked the Colorado designer to make a gay wedding website says he never did?!?

https://newrepublic.com/article/1739...-supreme-court

The website deisgner who claims she wanted an injunction to protect herself never designed websites, so it tracks.

[tooblue]

Thank goodness! Now our children can focus on being chiefly responsible for the consequences our long standing love affair with corporate welfare and fake 'trickle-down' theories!

Don't know if this linked story belongs here, but your comment made me think of this:

Super-rich warned of ‘pitchforks and torches’ unless they tackle inequality

https://www.theguardian.com/news/202...s-they-do-more

"Global elite told at London’s Savoy hotel of real risk of ‘civil disruption’ if more is not done to help struggling millions"

[Northwestcoug]

The ruling on the loan forgiveness plan is the first step to Trump winning the presidency (well, if he doesn't go to jail first ). Woke young'uns like my daughter are very cool to Biden without his forgiveness program, so they may just sit this next election out. Step two is Biden having either a health scare or embarrassing media moment so the independents sit out.

[Bo Diddley]

The ruling on the loan forgiveness plan is the first step to Trump winning the presidency (well, if he doesn't go to jail first ). Woke young'uns like my daughter are very cool to Biden without his forgiveness program, so they may just sit this next election out. Step two is Biden having either a health scare or embarrassing media moment so the independents sit out.

I'm not buying it. Trump is a train wreck.

[Northwestcoug]

I'm not buying it. Trump is a train wreck.

I still think a win is unlikely. But it is by no means out of the realm of possibility.

[MartyFunkhouser]

I disagree. This court seems to think it's illegal to discriminate as shown in their elimination of affirmative action. I bet they'd hold the same view when it comes to sexual orientation.

There is basically zero chance this court applies strict scrutiny to discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Not happening. You really think you get the same result if the case involved the website designer having a religious objection to interracial marriages?

[Jeff Lebowski]

There is basically zero chance this court applies strict scrutiny to discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Not happening. You really think you get the same result if the case involved the website designer having a religious objection to interracial marriages?

Yes

[Commando]

I'm not buying it. Trump is a train wreck.

Me neither. That was not a make or break proposition, and frankly the least of Biden's failings. He can answer to me for a few things regarding Title 42 and his seemingly cowardly immigration policy trying to give little secret favors under the table to Trump supporters as a political concession that only hurts immigrants, not voters, as per the usual Democratic Party Playbook. Now that's an example of a legitimate criticism. The GOP is so fucked up at this point it doesn't even merit criticism-- just annihilation. That's the difference. Trump will have substantially less support than he had in his last gasp bid at reelection. Had he salvaged his dignity on election day, I might be more worried.