[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vip /vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | Home]
4Archive logo
RIP Big Tony Scalia
If images are not shown try to refresh the page. If you like this website, please disable any AdBlock software!

You are currently reading a thread in /pol/ - Politically Incorrect

Thread replies: 1015
Thread images: 132
File: Untitled.png (531 KB, 1351x770) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Untitled.png
531 KB, 1351x770
Pay homage to this based god of the supreme court.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/us-world/article/Senior-Associate-Justice-Antonin-Scalia-found-6828930.php?cmpid=twitter-desktop
>>
Fuck yea. The cancerous conservatard of limited vision and accolyte for a randian dystopia of butt fucking guntards without a clue dies in the land of libertarian fuckwits and racist trailer trash. The universe is a bit brighter today.Fuck you all and welcome to the liberal court.
>>
>>64058494
The homosexual agenda is real and you are part of it. There are absolutely no bad consequences whatsoever flowing from the prohibition of sodomy and everything Scalia says in that opinion is 100% true.
>>
>>64058214
>First Black Women on the Court
If the GOP block it, they will probably be bludgeoned to death by November.
>>
i don't dislike gays and they can do whatever but i don't agree with gay marriage

i thought this stance was fairly common but this all seems to have been very polarized lately
>>
>>64061996
Hell yeah.
>>
I don't get it, who is this guy? What'd he do that was so good?
>>
well about time for another chosen justice
>3 jews
>6 goys
what a holocaust that ratio was
>>
File: liberal_paradise.webm (2 MB, 360x640) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
liberal_paradise.webm
2 MB, 360x640
>>64061996
>welcome to the liberal court
>>
>>64042063
Conservatives, since the beginning of time.
Leftists are degenerates. Degenerates by definition do not care about morality of action.
QED
>>
I thought John Kasich was also running? Why isnt everyone getting the same amount of time?
>>
anybody sad about this is a fucking idiot.
>>
>>64062715
see
>>64043644
>>
hi fags

I wrote a blog post on an opinion delivered by Scalia that I've always liked.

http://aporeticvoice.com/2016/02/14/rip-justice-scalia/

read it or don't, I don't make a habit of shilling, please don't bully
>>
>>64062458
>6 goys

You mean 6 catholics, how come nobody finds this odd - not a single agnostic or protestant
>>
>>64062715
>>
Did Carson just say $200 trillion?
>>
Do most Americans know who the supreme court judges are? I could name loads of MPs, but not a single serving British judge. I think in my parents' lifetimes they (and I) could name exactly ONE judge.
>>
>>64043417
Ah boston fag.
>>
>>64041599
>Snowden
>NSA shill

How do you fuck up this badly.
>>
>>64063112
average american? no. american who pays attention to politics beyond the election cycle? yes.
>>
>>64062993
You also clicked the wrong post in catalog. This is the Scalia page, not the debate one.
>>
>>64063112
To be honest, if I was questioned at gunpoint on any given day I could name 4/9, and I think that is way above average for most americans
>>
>>64062923
like they would ever let a WASP in the supreme court
>>
>>64041642
The Onion is likely parodying the type of person who would unironically write that sort of article as much as they are poking fun at Scalia himself.
>>
>>64063112
>Do most Americans know who the supreme court judges are?


Yes. At least some of them. If I mentioned Scalia or a few others, the average american would know. They are generally household names.
>>
I honestly don't know who this is, but I assume he's been assassinated by Big Guys?
>>
>>64063713
Deemed 'Natural Causes' so we will never know for sure
>>
Liberal court...liberal court...liberal court. Say it with me bro. Liberal court...liberal court...liberal court.

Fuck you conservatards. You reign of stupid is fast coming to an end.
>>
>>64063605
I'm not sure the Onion is :that: meta.
>>
>>64063251
lol if you don't think he's a false flag
>>
why is trump so angry?
>>
Trump is fucking relentless. No surrender.
>>
>>64062302

I don't see why it was needed. Civil partnerships took care of the legal rights. It seems like they weren't enough purely because of the name, and since that goes hand-in-hand with the tradition of religious marriage, there's no reason that tradition couldn't be kept (and I'm not religious).
>>
>>64063112
Yes, but I read court cases now and again. They're really interesting. It started when I was really mad about some ruling, and was in an involved online debate about it. The debate got a little bogged down in details, so I read the opinion of the court. It really changed everything for me in terms of my ire towards the court system. I have since found that 99% of that ire is totally misplaced, that even Justices I disagree with (like Scalia for instance) are really reasonable people, and that most of my anger should be directed at the legislative branch which utterly fails to do its job.

9 times out of 10, if you don't like a court case, but READ the case, you'll see that the Justices are usually left in an impossible situation left by the legislature. "Judicial Activism" is kind of a bad meme.
>>
>>64063883
say liberal three times in the mirror and a democrat shows up and takes your wallet
>>
>>64063536
Retired in 2010 and two more during the last decade.
>>
>>64044673
link the archive.is version?
>>
>>64064010
>>64063979

Obama is going to steal the SCOTUS slot just like he stole Trumps bike
>>
>>64062845
>>64043644
Agreed.
>>
>>64064157
haha. Suck it. We will butt fuck you and your wallet now. W'ell also put an end to you stupid public religious shit.
>>
>>64064259

stevens was based as fuck, its a shame we don't have anyone close to him in there
>>
>>64061370

A 2L on the East Coast.
>>
“Mere factual innocence is no reason not to carry out a death sentence properly reached.” - Scalia

REST IN PEACE SWEET PRINCE
>>
>>64041642
this is bait, right?
>>
B A S E D

quotes incoming

“There is nothing new in the realization that the Constitution sometimes insulates the criminality of a few in order to protect the privacy of us all.”
>>
>>64063871
The CBC announcer on TWTW was so gleeful as she announced it. Then she proceeded to whine about how it's snowing in the winter in Canada. Toronto is so disgusting, I hate how the rest of us have to put up with their shit.
>>
>>64059379
Adultery should be severely punished
>>
>>64055974
>states rights you dummy, he argued the Feds have no authority over buttsex you illiterate fuck
>>
JEB BUSH CHICKEN LITTLE


THE SKY IS FALLING
>>
>>64064643
Which school are you at m8?
>>
>>64041947
What is there to question in that macro? Absolutely everything depicted as occurring objectively did occur, and the cake makes a good analogy (though arguably not the best).
>>
>dat awkward Jeb smile
gross
>>
>>64063368

I watch the odd political show most weeks, all year 'round. Judges names just never come up about anything. I couldn't even tell you if any politicians are even involved with appointing judges. As far as I know, judges appoint new judges. We do hear occasionally about a new law being shot down by the courts, and even then if they mention any judges names at all then you'd have never heard of them and they'd be instantly forgotten. Again, as far as I know, courts and judges don't have any strong link to partisan politics.
>>
>>64041642
No respect for the deceased is a sign of poor morals and mannerisms.
>>
Fucking shill crowd.
>>
"Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn't. Nobody ever thought that that's what it meant. Nobody ever voted for that. If the current society wants to outlaw discrimination by sex, hey we have things called legislatures, and they enact things called laws. You don't need a constitution to keep things up-to-date. All you need is a legislature and a ballot box. You don't like the death penalty anymore, that's fine. You want a right to abortion? There's nothing in the Constitution about that. But that doesn't mean you cannot prohibit it. Persuade your fellow citizens it's a good idea and pass a law. That's what democracy is all about. It's not about nine superannuated judges who have been there too long, imposing these demands on society."
>>
>>64022842
>based god

He was Yuge
>>
>>64065645
Suck it and bend over so the next liberal court can buttfuck your ass.
>>
>>64042530
>implying local gun stores have publicly traded stocks
Here's an alternative suggestion:
>become intelligent
>invest in firearms (ones that will appreciate in value)
>invest your time to become proficient with them
>vote, and encourage others to do so as well
>>
>>64065645
Certainly worse than Citizens United. Good luck being marginalized.
>>
>>64065911

its amazing to me how someone in that position cannot understand his charge or what the difference between de jure and de facto are

good fucking riddance
>>
>>64022842
Just watch Obama nominate a black woman for the Supreme Court and then see the Republicans recoil in horror at the public relations fallout.
>>
>>64065911
>Arguing from democracy: A system where 2 wolves and a lamb decide what's for dinner
>>
>>64065911
I really like that, going to try and find who said it now.
>>
>>64062715
He said "claiming" moral superiority.
>>
>>64066193
I should have guessed it would be Scalia, it sounded like him
>>
>>64060477
And your denigrating a dead man who did much good for the conservative cause because he didn't agree with you 100 percent of the time. Politically your an idiot personally your disgusting.
>>
>>64022842

He was not a real Catholic= because he acknowledges the American People as the supreme authority in law and governance, not Jesus Christ.

To hell with him.
>>
File: 1441422880954.gif (2 MB, 250x188) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1441422880954.gif
2 MB, 250x188
>>64048292
>>
Shill crowd ruined the debate. Who's with me?
>>
>>64041829
Powerful government is the problem not the money. No power in government, no money in government.

It's as simple as 2+2.
>>
"The substance of today’s decree is not of immense personal importance to me. The law can recognize as marriage whatever sexual attachments and living arrangements it wishes, and can accord them favorable civil consequences, from tax treatment to rights of inheritance.Those civil consequences—and the public approval that conferring the name of marriage evidences—can perhaps have adverse social effects, but no more adverse than the effects of many other controversial laws. So it is not of special importance to me what the law says about marriage. It is of overwhelming importance, however, who it is that rules me. Today’s decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court. The opinion in these cases is the furthest extension in fact—and the furthest extension one can even imagine—of theCourt’s claimed power to create “liberties” that theConstitution and its Amendments neglect to mention. This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves."

Justice Scalia, dissenting, Obergefell v. Hodges
>>
>>64066859
Wrong thread. Who's with me?
>>
>>64046507
You forgot "let me be clear"
>>
>>64041917
I hope you're next.
>>
>>64067563
youre number 1000, congrats
>>
>>64066416
I thought you were fucking with me man because the thread is about one guy. i was bout to be mean, glad you figured it out.
>>
File: Scalia.jpg (147 KB, 680x967) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Scalia.jpg
147 KB, 680x967
>you will never be as intelligent, well spoken, and hilariously insulting as scalia was.... and now he himself is dead.

why even live? he was feared and respected by the high ranking liberals in US govt and nobody is around to fill that void.

even on the crazy off chance that senate stalls the appointment until the next president gets in, i don't think anyone could properly fill this guy's shoes.
>>
Honestly, the supreme court is more important than the presidency, at least in my eyes. In terms of doing stuff, anyway.

Sucks we lost a good man. If we don't get a republican as president who can appoint another conservative judge, then we're in for a rude fucking awakening if we think everything is awful NOW.
>>
File: scalia_jerk_rect.jpg (295 KB, 660x440) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
scalia_jerk_rect.jpg
295 KB, 660x440
“To believe in traditional Christianity is something else,” he’s reported as having said. “For the son of God to be born of a virgin? I mean, really. To believe that he rose from the dead and bodily ascended into heaven? How utterly ridiculous. To believe in miracles? Or that those who obey God will rise from the dead and those who do not will burn in hell?”

“God assumed from the beginning that the wise of the world would view Christians as fools … and he has not been disappointed.”

“If I have brought any message today, it is this: Have the courage to have your wisdom regarded as stupidity. Be fools for Christ. And have the courage to suffer the contempt of the sophisticated world.”

Amen.
>>
>>64067739

Well unlike 95% of the people on 4chan I know that there is this magical thing called Google, and that I should ask it a question several times and ways before asking 4chan because it makes one look less stupid.
>>
Im happy this retarded piece of shit is dead and now Obama can appoint someone with a brain
>>
>>64067899
Maybe not Day 1, that is asking too much. But maybe we can find someone who has the ability to become another Scalia down the road.
>>
File: 1408543297950.png (29 KB, 633x758) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1408543297950.png
29 KB, 633x758
Fuck this makes me so sad. He was so based. He was a faithful catholic despite the church becoming so liberal. He made friends with people who disagreed with him despite most libtards today being spiteful faggots who would try to destroy people who disagree with him.

F
>>
File: 1453366174798.gif (2 MB, 500x285) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1453366174798.gif
2 MB, 500x285
>have a great day with friends
>come home and see this

Not wanting to sound like a bitch but I honestly want to cry. Scalia was a vanguard in our government protecting our rights and trying his best to turn the tide of degeneracy.

Fuck I thought after that one court circuit ruled that it is the constitutional right of any citizen to own whatever rifle they wanted I thought it would go to the supreme court and Scalia would come and save me in CA.

Scalia isn't coming, /pol/.

Nobody is going to save me.

We're so fucked. Nobody gives a shit anymore about what we're supposed to be. A bunch of immigrants came in to my state and told me what my rights were.

fuck.

I'm crying.
>>
>>64022842
Nice hitjob. You murricans must feel really safe now that the goverment has the right to perform extrajuditial killings of it's own citizens.
>>
>>64068264
Lacking one himself, how will he recognize it in someone else?
>>
Fuck so will Obama be a scum and appoint the first transgender Justice now?
>>
>>64068432
If Clinton is elected the USA is going down in flames, and it will be for the best; If she wins it will prove that the rot is too deep, we will need to wipe the slate clean and start over.

I honestly feel like I'm living in the Future History of Hugo Gottfried
>>
>>64068432
Ha ha.
>>
>>64042304
>Australian post actually smart and not shit posting
>Whats going on here...
It's new Zealand actually.
>>
Why does this have a sticky?

Should I know this fag?
>>
Just curious, is there a timeline of events at all?

Scalia missed breakfast/body found by hotel worker(9am?10am?)

Local county officals involved.
US Marshal Service and FBI said to be invovled.

5pm hearse arrives.

I guess this all seems about right, I was just idly curious if there was any other time frames mentioned today?
>>
File: 1444082904013.png (927 KB, 1202x833) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1444082904013.png
927 KB, 1202x833
>>64068432
I feel like crying too. Casuals don't realize how huge this is. It's bigger than the election. W will feel the effects of this for decades and could be a huge turning point in American politics going forward.

Given, Scalia was nearly 80 and probably going to resign in the next few years anyway, but the timing could absolutely not be worse.

Obongo was probably smiling ear to ear when he heard this.
>>
>>64068432
>Not wanting to sound like a bitch but I honestly want to cry. Scalia was a vanguard in our government protecting our rights and trying his best to turn the tide of degeneracy.
I think this is pretty overstated. Scalia wasn't on the side of protecting rights at all. He was on the side of keeping the constitution and its principles on stable footing. He's ruled for and against rights, though. Mostly he respected the limits of Federal government, even when it was inconvenient to his own biases.
>>
>>64066233
>Assuming the average drunk male voter is capable of noting the hypocrisy of the common female but not of the common politician.
>>
File: face1295652432320.png (3 KB, 429x410) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
face1295652432320.png
3 KB, 429x410
Rest in piece, another hero can leave this world to the next without shame.
>>
File: goptears.jpg (27 KB, 400x700) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
goptears.jpg
27 KB, 400x700
Cheers everyone
>>
>>64068894
One of the last people keeping the US from dragging the world into a global war.

Don't kid yourself that if we implode into a new Civil war that the rest of the World isn't going to be involved right up to your eyebrows
>>
Good bye Tony, you inspired me to great heights in academia. I wish I got to see you.
>>
>>64069159
look ma, I posted it again!
>>
>>64069129
>>64069262

At least he won't have to see it all come tumbling down despite his best efforts.
>>
>>64069193
You're fucking retarded.
>>
File: mitch-mcconnell.jpg (182 KB, 550x433) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
mitch-mcconnell.jpg
182 KB, 550x433
The sheer temerity of this immense faggot McConnel, calling for Obama to leave the appointment of his successor to the next President.

This turtle motherfucker has some incredible ball, I'll give him that.

HOPEFULLY we won't see yet another goddamn Catholic on the bench.
>>
File: 1454815135712.gif (2 MB, 240x180) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1454815135712.gif
2 MB, 240x180
Well fellow conservatives. No matter how much hits we take: we keep going further. Don't let this country become a cuck liberal paradise with no guns, illegals, disease ridden military aged male refugees, PC, and sjw's. We have to stop this fucking madness.
>>
>>64069540
>HOPEFULLY we won't see yet another goddamn Jew on the bench.
ftfy
>>
>>64045124
>Scalia wasn't for oppressing gays just was against gay marriage.

http://www.npr.org/2016/02/13/140647230/justice-antonin-scalia-known-for-biting-dissents-dies-at-79

>When the court struck down a state law that made private homosexual conduct a crime, Scalia was outraged.

http://www.npr.org/2016/02/13/140647230/justice-antonin-scalia-known-for-biting-dissents-dies-at-79

>[On gay marriage] "Really? Who ever thought that intimacy and spirituality (whatever that means) were freedoms?"
>>
>>64069471
You think there won't be a Civil war if Clinton is in office and just does more of the same as Obama in the name of 'progress'

If so you are the real retard here.
>>
>>64069647
>gay rights
>right to fuck 16 year old bois assholes

Sorry, no. Not in this country. Not in any civilized nation. Not getting stoned to death is more rights than any sodomite deserves.
>>
>>64069647

How about you read his actually words without the lib-media filter? Because his personal feels about gay marriage had nothing to do with his dissent.
>>
>>64055384

http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/religion_theseeker/2011/05/hate-evil-but-dont-celebrate-bin-ladens-death.html
>>
File: liberaltears2_1.jpg (165 KB, 1200x800) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
liberaltears2_1.jpg
165 KB, 1200x800
>>64062944
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/mitch-mcconnell-senate-should-wait-for-next-president-to-replace-antonin-scalia/
>>
>>64022842


TOO FUCKING SOON

I SWEAR IT WAS BLOOM BERG AND OTHER KIKES 5HAT KILLED HIM
>>
>>64069856
It truly is impossible to browse pol for a minute without someone sperging out about fags.
>>
>>64068859
>Take my rights I will laugh
I'm moving to Hungary either way because... well.. fuck this country, but you're a primo cuck dude.
>>
>>64069647
Wow this article makes me fucking mad, and I don't even like Scalia. They make him sound like some partisan fucking hack. I don't think that of ANY of the justices.

Fuck I hate the media so much.
>>
File: Ammon Bundy.jpg (103 KB, 1390x1000) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Ammon Bundy.jpg
103 KB, 1390x1000
>>64069654
>You think there won't be a Civil war if

Yeah, we don't think there will be a civil war if

Remember the huge convoys of True Americans who rushed to the last cause?
>>
>>64069647

This makes me hate liberals so much. I'm so fucking mad
>>
Pardon my ignorance, but what is the significance of this man's death?
>>
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>>
>>64069471

You assblasted your cuck conservative god is burning in hell fag?
>>
What did the deleted post say? Must have been triple aussie tier trolling.

As for the death itself, feels like an assassination. A chance to get another uber liberal on the court before obongo leaves.
>>
>>64070664
Evil wins.
>>
File: 1413673739947.gif (443 KB, 500x319) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1413673739947.gif
443 KB, 500x319
>>64070650
Stay mad, dickless conservative.
>>
>>64070804
I would actually love this but it's not going to happen
>>
>>64047872
Those lifetime appointments are so that they are removed from the political process, meaning they are safe from outside influence

unfortunately, we aren't safe from the ones who "really like making policy"
>>
>>64070664
Scalia's death is honestly more important than who win's the presidential election

Whoever fills his shoes will influence the next 30 years of judicial decisions
>>
>>64070664

He was the leading Constitutionalist on the Supreme Court, his death makes the court split 4-4 Lib-Conserve, but more like 4-1-3 Lib-Activist-Conserve

it means that Obama gets to trya nd push another one of his ideologues into the SCOTUS, making it 5-4/5-1-3. But even if he doesn't get one in the court will still rule in favor of Liberal causes or at best let lower court ruling stand.
>>
>>64022842

You guys realise he's a shill right?
>>
>>64070834
Uh.. I think you replied to the wrong post?
>>
>>64070964
Or religious ideologues.
>>
>>64071000
>>64070965
Well shit, what horrible timing to die.
>>
>>64071029
There's no such thing as a shill.
>>
>>64071090
Or Ideaologues in general, religious, secular or otherwise.
>>
>>64046441

Why would it be otherwise? Liberals are cucks, by definition they enter into agreements which don't benefit themselves.
>>
>>64070664
With his death a seat on the supreme court has opened up.

If Obama manages to fill that seat, or if dems win the white house in november, the supreme court will be majority liberal

With a Court majority, they will be able to declare any and all liberal legislation constitutional.

For example if a gun rights/grabber case is brought to the supreme court, they will side with the grabbers each time. Don't be surprised if they rule that all guns except for 200 year old muskets with enough powder and ammo for one shot are banned from private ownership.
>>
>>64056746
how do i even reading comprehension
>>
>>64071193
I'd have to see a secular ideologue in action on the Supreme Court to make a judgement on that, desu.
>>
File: 1449608231625.png (102 KB, 399x240) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1449608231625.png
102 KB, 399x240
>>64022842
Fucking hell I bet you they killed him
he was at a dinner and just went home early and died??

his actuarial tables gave <5-10% chance of dying this year

Obama fucking jumped on this like a madman, he's fucking trying to influence the election

kill scalia and then get the SC to make all illegals able to vote

FUCKING NIGGER
>>
>>64071211
>cucks

Opinion discarded. This word is on the same tier as le funny banana maymay.
>>
>>64071409
Ruled 'Natural Causes' so even if it was murder there won't be any investigation.
>>
File: Alan_Keyes.jpg (57 KB, 416x431) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Alan_Keyes.jpg
57 KB, 416x431
>>64071307
The longest a nomination has been held up was 125 days. Obama has 342 days.
>>
File: 1388548369743.png (587 KB, 935x701) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1388548369743.png
587 KB, 935x701
>>
>>64070963
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICERAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>RAND PAUL FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
>>
File: 1443298261845.jpg (149 KB, 700x468) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1443298261845.jpg
149 KB, 700x468
>post yfw Obama blows the fuck out of republicans for the 254th time
>>
>>64071556
Records are made to be broken, but yeah, I'm not optimistic.
>>
>>64042507
the Global Environment Facility, a UN organization, look it up. It's an eco Central bank, WORLDWIDE.

its a flimsy excuse to change the rules and send in troops to shut down a 'problematic' nation
>>
>>64071556
There is nothing in the Constitution that says how long Congress can take to approve of an appointee.
>>
>>64042838
Classic Jew, referring the guy to your cousin.
>>
>>64071612
Rand Paul is a meme politician.
>>
>>64071612
Does he have any law experience at all.
>>
File: us}cfpa!!.gif (4 KB, 354x216) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
us}cfpa!!.gif
4 KB, 354x216
>>64067049
Liberty: The God that failed. It exposes much as to why Scalia, though maybe well-intentioned, still doesn't get it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3P9nFumxKp8
>>
>>64071783
I think he was a medical doctor before going into the senate. So no.
>>
>>64071861

Liberty != secular

You can be free and religious
>>
File: Boehner Bawling.jpg (15 KB, 299x225) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Boehner Bawling.jpg
15 KB, 299x225
>>64071713
Oh I know, and Turtle Boy will probably make a run for the record at least.
But in his heart, he has to know that the blathering populist who's hijacked his party isn't going to win the Presidency by bullshitting.

Which leaves the prospect of Bill's axe-grinding old wife choosing the next Justice against the reasonable negro Centrist just getting it over with.
>>
>>64072029
We are backed up to a cliff, we don't really have much more we can retreat on.

We have to stand for something at some point, even at the cost of our lives.
>>
God chooses who leaves the earth and it was his time.
>>
Aw shit.

Without Scalia, the supreme court will go downhill really fast now. A good man. One of the few who was great enough to criticize the power grab of his own institution.

May he rest in peace.
>>
>>64022842
rip Scalia
>>
>>64072029
What the funk happens if they put another woman on there?
.oh more women than men how progressive.....
>>
>>64066923
"Let's cut all taxes!"
"Hands off my medicaid/fire department/streets/police department/military"

>Paying taxes
>Having all that stuff

Pick one.
>>
>>64072301
The biggest threat to your life your own choices make is Diabeetus.
>>
>>64072691
Worse the tax cuts have just caused more flat taxes like fucking red light cameras.
>>
>>64072029

>Obama
>reasonable centrist

That's why he appointed Sotomayor, a reasonable centrist :^)
>>
>>64071986

The only freedom you have is the freedom of your will. Otherwise, you are 99% limited.

It is through your will that you can overcome your limitations. If you do not, then you might as well be destined to Hell, for those who say they have no will, only have aligned their will to the easy, natural, and worldly.
>>
>>64072691

Other than Military and a few other things too large for any individual state to fund, all those things should be at the Local/state level

the issue is that we are at a point where many states are dependant on Fed money because they budget deficts, which lets the fed gain more power and the Fed is far easier to influence and control than 50 states and thousands of localities.
>>
>>64022842
Good riddance. I don't give a fuck
>>
File: image.jpg (28 KB, 236x343) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
image.jpg
28 KB, 236x343
non degenerate music /pol/ ?

youtube.com/watch?v=FXfIsK85fxk

pick related
>>
>/pol/'s response when literally anyone else dies
>"LMAO DUMB CUNT DESERVED IT DEAD NIGGERS DEAD KEKS PRAISE KEK LOL"
>Scalia dies
>"OMG HOW DARE THOSE HEARTLESS FUCKING LIBS STRAIGHT TO THE GAS CHAMBERS WITH THOSE DEGENERATES"

Fuck you /pol/ you bunch of brainwashed morons
>>
literally who?
some fatty in America?
who cares?
>>
>>64073409
This. Nobody gives a fuck about this fatty
>>
>>64073525
>>64073409
NON-AMERICANS LEAVE
>>
File: scalia.png (78 KB, 460x259) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
scalia.png
78 KB, 460x259
>>
File: 1415944713451.jpg (22 KB, 635x475) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1415944713451.jpg
22 KB, 635x475
Right now there are Americans in this thread who don't know who this man was.

And their vote is worth the same as mine.

FUCK ME
U
C
K

M
E
>>
File: palin-wink.jpg (28 KB, 635x456) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
palin-wink.jpg
28 KB, 635x456
>>64073082
>Other than Military and a few other things too large for any individual state to fund

Which amounts to an incredible number of things, not a "few" things.

I see that you really believe that the State governments are LESS power-hungry, corrupt, wasteful and incompetent than the Federal government.

Which shows me that you are almost completely unfamiliar with State and Local govnerment.
>>
was this dude murdered? i'm not familiar with him but did he have any recent activity that could have been a threat to the government?
>>
>>64073819
...
(Breaks pencil)
...
>>
Everyone's saying they hope Obama can get a replacement confirmed before he leaves. Only chance in hell that will happen is if he appoints a milquetoast left-of-center choice.

But what about this...

This is our year. We already have an amazing, true progressive presidential candidate in Trump. Let's go all in. Let's flood the general election with unprecedented progressive/Republican turnout. Let's take back Congress, elect the most progressive President in 60 years, and line him up to appoint a major progressive justice that our new Congress will approve of.
>>
>>64071861
I find this video distasteful. There is no question that laws are based on morals. Suggesting adherence to law is not totally decoupling law from morality, instead it just leaves open the question of where the relationship between law and morality lies. In the US that question is unambiguously answered: the people, with the legislature as their proxy.

>having to defend Scalia on this the day of his death
I wish I could just go to fucking bed and wake up three years ago already.
>>
>UNITED STATES, PETITIONER v. X CITEMENT VIDEO, INC., et al.

>I can neither understand nor approve of the disposition urged by the United States before this Court and adopted today, which not only rewrites the statute, but (1) rewrites it more radically than its constitutional survival demands, and (2) raises baseless constitutional doubts that will impede congressional enactment of a law providing greater protection for the child victims of the pornography industry. The Court today saves a single conviction by putting in place a relatively toothless child pornography law that Congress did not enact, and by rendering congressional strengthening of that new law more difficult. I respectfully dissent.

tl;dr - You want a better law - ask congress, not us. Sadly, the rest of the court figured "yes, lawmaking, that sounds like our job."

Scalia will soon be sorely missed.
>>
>>64055384

Leader of the opposition here said it was a tragedy. Yes, he's a leftie nutter.
>>
>>64073839

no, they are just as corrupt but there are a LOT MORE of them so rather than just bribe a handful of Federal officials you have to bribe a handful of State officials in every single state. Which is a much harder task.

As for 'few' going to many, that is just not the case, many of the federal agencies could and should be removed and given to the states.
>>
>>64042813

I'm glad that both are gone, although I did celebrate Osama's death, but will only be glad about the consequences of Scalia's death, not his actual passing or the end of his life on Earth.
>>
Within the first year of the new Supreme Court DC v Heller will be overturned.
>>
File: mccaingitmo1.jpg (10 KB, 402x250) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
mccaingitmo1.jpg
10 KB, 402x250
>>64074085
>so rather than just bribe a handful of Federal officials you have to bribe a handful of State officials in every single state. Which is a much harder task.
Not only is this entire premise ass-hatted, State and especially local officials can be bought on the super fucking cheap. You can get Mayors of cities like DC or Canada's Toronto for some blow and a hooker.

And not "influence" them, you can fucking OWN them.
>>
File: Current Year.png (334 KB, 599x487) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Current Year.png
334 KB, 599x487
>>64054635
>>
>>64074259
I don't think so. Judges are not usually very happy to overturn precedent without a really good reason. Usually.

But I can say that if this happens then it unquestionably signals a need for a civil war.
>>
>>64074259
what case is going to do that
>>
>>64073869
If people were going to murder him, it would have been before/after he handed the Bush v. Gore presidency to Georgieboy on a silver platter, or voting for Citizen's United. There is little point having him removed this late in Obama's presidency, where it is uncertain Obama can appoint some liberal replacement.

He was a fat, old man. Probably some kind of heart attack, or something.
>>
>>64074362

That implies that you cannot do the same with federal officials.
>>
>>64074362

So why aren't you doing it already?

I've been building blackmail on my local & regional government for a decade. it's harder now with apps, smartphones, tablets etc- it was way easier when all people used were PCs. but i still get my keylogging done :)

when the tipping point comes, my region will be home to the RWDS and local government will defend us against all comers, unless they want their affairs, porn, embezzlement, and other vices made public
>>
>>64074536
>this entire post

Jesus christ i didn't think i'd laugh this hard at this thread. You're a card, anon.
>>
He's been on the court for 30 years.

If he gave a darn about his precious Originalist legacy why didn't his geriatric corpse retire during any year from late 2002 through 2006 when the Republicans had Dubya in office plus Majorities in the Senate & House?
>>
>>64042846
>Daily reminder that none of the Founding Fathers endorsed the view that the Supreme Court should have judicial review.

Some did, though.
>>
>>64022842
rip fatso
>>
>>64074536
Rural Women's Development Society?
>>
>>64042688
If Trumps get schwacked this nation is going to burn.
Guaranteed civil war.
>Bernie gets cucked for dem nom.
>Trump Beats Shillary
>Trump assasinated
I be ina woods if it be so.
>>
>>64074716
because Bush was just as likely to put an Activist Republican on the bench, which is significantly worse than a liberal Constitutionalist
>>
>>64043409
>Since there are only two possible explanations of the origin of life
false

>any evidence that tends to disprove the theory of evolution necessarily tends to prove the theory of creation science, and vice versa.
also false.

>the abrupt appearance in the fossil record of complex life, and the extreme rarity of transitional life forms in that record, are evidence for creation science
since when does the abrupt appearance of complex life (presumably meaning multiple-cell life) translate into "all life forms now on earth appeared suddenly and relatively recently and have changed little"
life around the time complex life forms appeared were VASTLY different to those alive now.

>The body of scientific evidence supporting creation science is as strong as that supporting evolution. In fact, it may be stronger.
[in scalias dipshit opinion]. Creationism has fuck all scientific evidence in comparison to evolution.

>Evolution is not a scientific "fact," since it cannot actually be observed in a laboratory.
more false bullshit. micro-organisms have been observed evolving all the fucking time, and unless we are discounting the observing the fossil record as observation then we've seen it happen in macro-organisms too.

>Rather, evolution is merely a scientific theory or "guess.
this cunt doesnt even know what a scientific theory is.
>>
Isn't this the guy that saved video games or something?

Fuck off reddit.
>>
>>
Ayy
>>
>>64074716
Arrogance, I imagine. Remember what Karl Rove said back when he was slightly relevant, something like the Bush presidency would usher in an era of republican dominance. Sounds hilarious in hindsight, but a lot of conservatives back then actually believed that shit.
>>
Nothing can stop us from moving America forward. I hope the fat Fuck is burning in Hell.
>>
File: Bush.jpg (47 KB, 442x396) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Bush.jpg
47 KB, 442x396
>>64074882
>because Bush was just as likely to put an Activist Republican on the bench

W famously tried to put his fangirl secretary on the bench, which had even his Republican supporters shaking their heads in disbelief.
>>
>>64074895
yup, but don't ask the Lefties to remember the past, it is all about WHAT ARE YOU DOING FOR ME NOW!
>>
File: attack on tyrone.png (508 KB, 1024x576) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
attack on tyrone.png
508 KB, 1024x576
>>64074949
get off my planet you illegal alien!
>>
>>64022842
Fuck that fat fuck, I'm glad he's dead.
>>
>>64074965
They've also consistently bitten on the idea that "America is leaning to the Right", against the overwhelming evidence that America is leaning to social Liberalism, and Fiscal Conservatism has been dead in this country for over 65 years.
>>
>>64074949
>>64074909
lmao
>>
>>64074456
i cant tell if youre a shill or not... good job
>>
>>64074882
Roberts (a "Moderate Hero/Institutionalist") & Alito voted with Scalia 89-90% of the time.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/06/24/upshot/24up-scotus-agreement-rates.html

He never cared about his jurisprudence. He just wanted a job for life.

Completely selfish.

I'll freely throw RBG in the same dungeon with him during the Obama era through 2014.
>>
>>64075025
>yup, but don't ask the Lefties to remember the past

Whereas the Right just invents a fictional past where the country was the Andy Griffith Show.
>>
>>64074895
It was 5-4. Elena Kagan was actually the big savior, since she was on the fence about it, and eventually swayed towards violent vidya being protected under free speech.
>>
>>64022842

Good riddance, all these concucks sing him a sweet lullaby, faggots

>>64042999 :


>Scalia has argued that there is no constitutional right to abortion
>Scalia believed that the death penalty is constitutional
>Scalia concurred in the 1990 case of Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health in which the family of a woman in a vegetative state sought to have her feeding tube removed so she would die, believing that to have been her wish
>Scalia joined the majority per curiam opinion in the 2000 case of Bush v. Gore, which effectively ended recounts of ballots in Florida following the 2000 US Presidential election
>In 2004, in Rasul v. Bush, the Court held that federal courts had jurisdiction to hear habeas corpus petitions brought by detainees at the Guantanamo Bay detainment camp
>Scalia generally voted to strike down laws which make distinctions by race, gender, or sexual orientation

>Scalia was a devout Roman Catholic

Fuck this asshole.
>>
>>64042923
>>64063713
>>64070878
I wouldn't be surprised if he was assassinated. That was one of the first things I wondered after hearing about it. There's a shitload of people with motives.

If they don't release autopsy results, it'll be time to get the pitchforks.
>>
>>64075228
>Roberts (a "Moderate Hero/Institutionalist") & Alito voted with Scalia 89-90% of the time.
Those are relatively normal rates. In fact, it's rare to have agreement rates below 70%. Most hover in the 70-80% range.
>>
>>64075375

Based as fuck tbqh. Why don't you get some cream for that sore anus libcuck?
>>
>>64044074
>Obama gets to add a 3rd liberal :^)

Sage doesn't know the senate has to confirm.

Who controls the senate right now?

REDDIT FAGS ON SUICIDE WATCH
>>
>>64075375
>muh death penalty

There's absolutely nothing wrong with the death penalty, faggot.
>>
>>64075375
But none of those things are mentioned in the Constitution so it should default to the States, which is what Scalia said every single time.

If you want something to be legal go through the fucking legislature, that is what it fucking exists.
>>
>>64068432
I am with you dude. My mom texted with the news today. She is an appelate judge in Florida, appointed by /pol/'s latest meme — Yung Bush.

I just said, "oh fuck," when she texted me.

The implications of this are huge.. I mean mind is blown.

I work for a newspaper and last week I wrote a story about SCOTUS' precedent-setting stay in the Clean Power Plan case. It was a 5-4 decision, Scalia was the swing vote.

Goddamn man..history in the making.
>>
File: HarrietMiers.jpg (56 KB, 259x345) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
HarrietMiers.jpg
56 KB, 259x345
Anyone remember when W tried to appoint his personal lawyer and girlfriend to the Supreme Court?
>>
>>64075253
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Entertainment_Merchants_Ass%27n#Opinion
Is this it? Because it was 7-2 with Thomas & Breyer dissenting.
>>
>>64043076

>reply for awareness
>>
>>64075623
fuck my typos, son. Im faded for Big Scalia. Pour one out
>>
>>64068995
Why is Jeff Gerstmann crying?
>>
>>64075597

how in the god damn fuck are people this fucking stupid

read up on what fucking de jure and fucking de facto are
>>
>>64022842
I hope that fat useless fuck does not rest in peace. I hope his grave is broken into, and a rioting gang take turns dumping huge shits into it.
>>
>>64075375
Wow this guy was based as fuck, if the sjw really want to take a chance on fucking the world over this is their chance to take the spot
>>
>>64075905

edgy/10
>>
Why couldn't that kike Ginsburg have died instead
>>
>>64075890
>read up on what fucking de jure and fucking de facto are
Look, it's simple. You want the law to reflect the current situation - you change the law, in the legislative body responsible. You don't go to court, it's not their fucking job. Their job is looking at a law, and checking if it fits with the constitution, and that is all. Practicality is the job of legislation.
>>
File: red.jpg (341 KB, 717x880) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
red.jpg
341 KB, 717x880
>>64075905
>>
God rest your soul, Scalia-senpai.
>>
>>64043838
The people should be able to decide who lives and who dies. Penalties should be decided by the Jury.

>>64044143
Honestly they will be replaced by adapted fish pretty fast. Might be mass starvation.
>>
>>64075999

because she's not even in the bottom half of bad justices currently seated

>>64076068

alright fuckface

if something is deemed unconstitutional, there are no laws making it illegal, that is DE FACTO legality

they didn't create a statute, DE JURE, making something legal

you're right, its real god damn stupid, and total fuckups like you can't wrap their god damn head around it
>>
http://butthatsnoneofmybusiness.com/new-jersey-gay-couple-discovers-they-are-in-fact-long-lost-twins/
>>
>>64075984
l eddit/10
>>
>>64066467
>conservative cause

Fuck off with that shit, it doesn't mean shit and it never did. Trump exposed this charade for what it is. He did nothing for the common people, everything for Beltway cucks. "Conservative cause" is code for "I don't give a shit about Conservative values, I just want Republicans to win while the country rots".
>>
>>64075375
>Scalia generally voted to strike down laws which make distinctions by race, gender, or sexual orientation
If you're calling someone an asshole, it's a compliment. Are you a liberal or a nazi, just out of curiosity, since you sound like both?
>>
File: osama3.jpg (614 KB, 799x1024) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
osama3.jpg
614 KB, 799x1024
We are so fucked as a country.

Buy your guns now. You won't be able to by most of them soon.

Say goodbye to freedom of speech and the 2nd Amendment.

Say hello to unfettered immigration, affirmative action and hate-speech laws.

Transgender bathrooms for everyone by Christmas.
>>
>only 5 Goy-publican Senators between us and a gun-grabbing Supreme Court

It's all ogre. Goodbye friends.
>>
>>64043493

>BS in chemistry
>finishing this semester

Your opinion doesn't matter until you spend time in industry. Stfu and get off our /pol/
>>
>>64076396
You're right. We are fucked.
>>
Not arguing with you, thanks for da facts. Imma embellish a bit.

>>64075375
>Scalia has argued that there is no constitutional right to abortion

There isn't an explicit Constitutional right to abortion. The Justices ruled it was implied based on an expectation of privacy. Scalia's dissent is a great example of his notorious strict interpretation of the Constitution.

>Scalia believed that the death penalty is constitutional

Constitution does not prohibit the death penalty.

>Scalia concurred in the 1990 case of Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health in which the family of a woman in a vegetative state sought to have her feeding tube removed so she would die, believing that to have been her wish

Seriously? The Constitution obviously never fucking addressed this. States' rights. Leave it to local legislatures.

>Scalia joined the majority per curiam opinion in the 2000 case of Bush v. Gore, which effectively ended recounts of ballots in Florida following the 2000 US Presidential election

Not abreast of this one.

>In 2004, in Rasul v. Bush, the Court held that federal courts had jurisdiction to hear habeas corpus petitions brought by detainees at the Guantanamo Bay detainment camp

SCOTUS is infallible because it is final, but final because it is infallible.
>hate the game, not the player

>Scalia generally voted to strike down laws which make distinctions by race, gender, or sexual orientation

>Constitution...
>>
Another homophobic cunt down.

Love wins! LIBERALISM WINS! WE ALWAYS WIN!
>>
>>64076538
Not final because it is infallible*
>>
>>64069901

The case quoted in >>64069647 wasn't about gay marriage. It was about Lawrence vs. Texas (2003) where two men were arrested having sex in private (in a home belonging to one of the men) The Court basically struck down Texas' sodomy law, arguing that they violated the due process clause of the 14th amendment.

Scalia's dissent essentially focused on the slippery slope argument (e.g. striking down sodomy will eventually lead to beastiality, bigamy, etc.) and the argument that intimacy was not a right guaranteed in the constitution.

I disagree with Scalia's views severely, but he was brilliant and committed and his death was tragic.
>>
EAT A SALAD
A
T

A

S
A
L
A
D
>>
File: image.jpg (82 KB, 608x480) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
image.jpg
82 KB, 608x480
how do we fix women?
>>
File: 1328415951805.gif (2 MB, 300x196) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1328415951805.gif
2 MB, 300x196
How does that progress taste? /pol/ BTFO
>>
>>64066539
B-b-b-but he advanced the conservative cause. As right as you are, there's no point stating such obvious facts here. /pol/ talks tough when it comes to fighting leftism and degeneracy, but when one of the mainstream Republican milquetoast darlings dies they act as if modern day Mussolini died. This is the most pathetic /pol/ thread that I have ever seen, even more pathetic than the actual cuck threads. At this point I won't be surprised if /pol/ mourns if Jeb or George W die.
>>
File: 1454366351491.png (54 KB, 501x600) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1454366351491.png
54 KB, 501x600
>>64076703

the real Jews

enjoying that women's suffrage?
>>
>>64076709
>/pol/ talks tough when it comes to fighting leftism and degeneracy, but when one of the mainstream Republican milquetoast darlings dies they act as if modern day Mussolini died.
It's not so much about Scalia's personal views, but rather about a consistency in his judical decisions to me. Bending the constitution for a law in your favor won't do you good in the long run.
>>
LOVE WINS LOL

HOMOPHOBES BTFO

LOVE WINS LOL

HOMOPHOBES BTFO

LOVE WINS LOL

HOMOPHOBES BTFO

LOVE WINS LOL

HOMOPHOBES BTFO

LOVE WINS LOL

HOMOPHOBES BTFO

LOVE WINS LOL

HOMOPHOBES BTFO

LOVE WINS LOL

HOMOPHOBES BTFO
>>
shit america. this is bad
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWfRc9e9GJE
>>
>>64076396
gun shill detected
>>
File: 2012-04-21-CEFUK.jpg (38 KB, 385x500) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
2012-04-21-CEFUK.jpg
38 KB, 385x500
In 2005, Democrat Senate Leader Harry Reid said at the time of Sandra Day O'Connors retirement that she should be replaced by someone with the "same temperament and beliefs" as not to disrupt the "careful balance" of the court.

I'm sure we'll hear him call for the same when it comes to Scalia, right?
>>
>>64076974
This, I don't like Scalia but he was a reasonable man. We need more reasonable people, not necessarily more people that share the same views as me. Of course libcucks could never understand this distinction.
>>
>>64077086

o'conner was a solid swing vote, scalia never was
>>
>>64076181
>Penalties should be decided by the Jury.
I'll agree to this. Which is why I liked the Florida case that was just decided a month ago.
http://www.orlandoweekly.com/orlando/us-supreme-court-strikes-down-floridas-death-penalty-system-for-giving-more-power-to-judges-over-juries/Content?oid=2464118
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurst_v._Florida

Alito was the only dissenter in this case.
>>
>>64076703
I think the real issue is that Buzzfeed is run by hacks who should be given a helicopter ride over the Pacific.
>>
http://efukt.com/21214_Jew_Boy_VS_Swedish_Pornstar.html
I didn't know where else to post this.
>>
>>64077200
bait
>>
>>64076974
The consistency doesn't matter because Scalia sat on the same bench with Jews and made rulings in favor of Jewish owned businesses and banks. Free market bullshit is opium for mainstream conservatives, I thought that /pol/ was smarter than that. Freedom of business in america is freedom to become debt slaves to Jews and freedom to let them suck this country dry.
>>
Real talk here.


Does the republican controlled Senate have a real chance of keeping President Obama from appointing a liberal supreme court justice?
>>
>>64077460

its fucking fact dipshit

she was relatively conservative early on but later on she was the swing vote in almost every case, anyone who thinks she was liberal is a god damn moron
>>
>>64077475
>Free market bullshit is opium for mainstream conservatives, I thought that /pol/ was smarter than that.
In other words, you want him to do the opposite of his job and instead follow your economic opinion.

That's not going to happen.
>>
>>64077533

depends how liberal he goes but its not likely and if they go too long, people will grow very weary of it and create some backlack
>>
>>64077200
Not the point.
Replacing him with someone who doesn't vote like him will disrupt the current "balance" of the court.

Just more Democrat hypocrisy.
>>
>>64022842
RIP, it's a shame you passed before I could meet you, you titan of constitutionalism.
>>
>>64077557
haha

got em
>>
>>64075375
Those seem pretty consistent and decent.
>>
>>64077533
I mean they could all they want. The issue is that Obama will run it through the ringer in the MSM and hurt the Republicans' popularity big time. I think their best bet is to let Obama confirm whatever hack he wants after the primary season is over (Trump'll have a field day if they let Obama have his way) and then use that to fire up their base to vote.
>>
Besides DC vs Heller and Bush vs Gore, what has he done for you, /pol/?
>>
>>64077533
Obama probably will go with a moderate liberal, since that'll shift the court more liberal and hedge against a conservative that might be chosen to replace Ginsberg when she leaves soon.
He won't want to make the issue of selecting a court justice one that republicans can point to and say "this is who liberals want in the courts"
Also, three candidates are senators, republican and democrat.
If he picks too liberal, Sanders might side against it, and that'll look baaaaaad.
>>
>>64022842
Good fucking riddance.

Should have died sooner.
>>
>>64022842
>the supreme court will now be left leaning as shit
well shit, there goes democracy.
goodbye based scalia.
>>
>>64077562
Just noticed your flag flair. Why the fuck am I talking to you? American politics based on the constitution enable degeneracy and self-destruction.I'm just pointing out how it's hypocritical for /pol/ to push alt-right/anti-degeneracy politics while embracing a milquetoast Beltway Republican judge. This has nothing to do with his job. His job as it currently exists is an abomination that's a result of almost two centuries of judicial overreach.
>>
>>64077533
Definately.

3 options:
1) Hold the hearings and then vote down any nominee. They have the majority.
2) Fillabuster. Hold the hearings but have 40+ Senators vote to not invoke cloture which keeps the nominee stalled.
3) Senate Leader simply doesn't schedule a hearing. He controls the calendar.

All have risks for different reasons. Obama will definitely nominate someone. Then we will see which option they choose. I predict they will try #3 first, but Democrats may throw a fucking tantrum over it.
>>
>>64077533
Most judges seem relatively moderate. Unfortunately it's not easy for either side to ferret out judges before they're nominated, which is why the nominations are so contentious.
>>
>>64077086

Did Bush listen to Reid then? No?

Sounds like Obama has all the precedent he needs then.
>>
these le lerrddit scum think they've won something. The unfortunately nees for them is that the last adult on the SCOTUS is gone, for aobama rompelace with some psychotic liberal negrees,
Won't be"feeling the bern" when society is fucking imploding around,
>>
>>64077973
>I'm just pointing out how it's hypocritical for /pol/ to push alt-right/anti-degeneracy politics while embracing a milquetoast Beltway Republican judge.
>/pol/ is one person

That aside, you gotta work with what you have. Scalia was among the best options in the court.
>American politics based on the constitution enable degeneracy and self-destruction.
So in short, you simply hate freedom, and can't foresee a future where your political opponents hold all the power you want to hand to the government.

Also, it's amazing how you rant against judical overreach and against the one justice who has consistently complained about judical overreach.
>>
>>64077824

>If he picks too liberal, Sanders might side against it, and that'll look baaaaaad.

You fucking wot? I can't imagine any candidate being "too liberal" for Sanders to support short of (maybe) a literal communist.
>>
>>64078096
>implying obama isn't a piece of shit
>implying bush wasn't a piece of shit
>implying making literal kangaroo courts are a good thing
oh boy but good thing we will throw them "right wing extremists" into gitmo eh?
>>
>>64022842
...did Obama have Scalia assassinated?
>>
>>64078286

If Obama had his way Gitmo would be closed, I'm not sure what point you're making.
>>
>>64078300
Yes
>>
>>64078300
Hopefully.
>>
>>64078176
>you simply hate freedom

OMG can you be anymore cucked? And once again why are you arguing about this with me? Don't you have some rapefugees to shelter?

>Also, it's amazing how you rant against judical overreach and against the one justice who has consistently complained about judical overreach.

Gonzales v. Raich. Scalia was a hypocrite on this subject.
>>
>>64077824
>If he picks too liberal, Sanders might side against it, and that'll look baaaaaad.

This is the stupidest thing I've read all week.
>>
>>64078345
>If Obama had his way Gitmo would be closed
I'm not sure you realize this, but what obama says and what obama wants are wholly different things.
>>
>>64078300
nah probably shillary did though for when the election is inevitably brought to the supreme court again and she auto wins because of a pack of she boons on the supreme court.
>>
>>64078345
anon obama had a supermajority of dems in congress at one point, its literally his own damn fault gitmo is still open.
>>
>>64078286
>literal kangaroo courts
>LITERAL KANGAROO COURTS
Dear God, NO! The marsupial world order has begun! Their powerful hind legs, massive tails, and child-rearing pouches will destroy our judicial system!
>>
>>64078417

He really does want Gitmo closed though. He's still trying to find a way to do it, even though Congress has made it all but impossible.
>>
File: 1454977535852.gif (374 KB, 1200x900) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1454977535852.gif
374 KB, 1200x900
Libertarian here for Scalia

We must stop Obama for putting in a a political separatist from being on the Supreme Court
>>
Scalia was assassinated for blocking the Obama administration on carbon taxes.
>>
>>64043872
Small government types love it when you obstruct the legislative process to a screeching halt. There's nothing more they love than electing people to not do their jobs, and then act as if its a virtue. And as far as "independents/moderates" go, the Republicans gained even more seats in Congress after "shutting down" the government.
>>
>>64078386
>Gonzales v. Raich. Scalia was a hypocrite on this subject.
Why? Because he didn't argue against the feds have a power no one disputed they have?
>>64078561
No, not "even though", but "because".

It's a PR issue for him. So he gets to keep gitmo while looking anti-gitmo.
>>
>>64077533

No chance. Historically, appointing a supreme court justice takes about 2-3 months.
>>
>>64022842
Now if all the other shitbags would just keel over we might have some hope for the future...
>>
>>64022842
Gonna miss his defense of the second amendment.

Not going to miss him placing his religious affiliation above his duty to the country.
>>
What happens in these situations where votes have already been taken, and they are just waiting for june to release decisions?
The negroes wist ne celebrating bc the most outspoken critic of "affirmative blacktion" on the court is dead. I.d bet evrn some of the liberal scum on court aren't thrilled bc thry could count on him to say whst they were actually thinking.
Given thst obams has appointed 2 radical nebroes as AG, will he hsb balls to do same with a Supreme opening?
>>
>>64078561
By looking for a way to close it, you mean looking for a way to get Congress to share responsibility for anything bad that comes from closing gitmo. It's a military base. He can close gitmo just by ordering it closed. What he wants is to hide behind "bipartisan agreement" if the inmates go back to being terrorists,
>>
RIP
CONDOLENCES
>>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OO5y2O_hv3I

I guarantee you the Republicans won't want to nominate someone but the media will launch a huge shilling campaign basically saying "HURRRDURRR THESE PEOPLE WON'T NOMINATE SOMEONE" and it'll be Government Shutdown 2.

It's only a matter of time until some ultracuck goes over and nominates some libshit to the court. Good bye gunrights. Good bye closed borders. Good bye constitution.
>>
>>64078763
> feds have a power no one disputed they have

Growing weed in your backyard is interstate commerce? Thomas made the right conservative argument in this case. Thomas is what Scalia pretended to be while shilling for Beltway Republicans.
>>
HAHAHHAHAHAHAHHA
FUCK SCALIA
WHAT A PIECE OF SHIT

he wasn't even trying to make sense towards the end, he was just being a corrupt shitbag

good riddance
>>
I'm not a political geek like the rest of you but didn't this guy side with corporations owning elections in the Citizens United case? He can rot
>>
>>64078763

>It's a PR issue for him. So he gets to keep gitmo while looking anti-gitmo.

Except he's been persistently releasing inmates or transferring them to other countries. The PR from closing Gitmo would be a bigger accomplishment than just being anti-Gitmo but unable to do anything.

>>64078873

The inmates could have been transferred to federal prisons within the US but Congress wouldn't allow that.
>>
>>64078862
CNN said opinions aren't valid until they are released, so since Scalia isn't around anymore his vote doesn't count for jack.

Expect 4-4 deadlocks all day, every day.
>>
>>64079062
Yeah just like corporations own Trump and Bernie in this election, fuck off you prick.
>>
>>64078980
The President nominates, while Congress confirms.
>>
>>64078982
>Growing weed in your backyard is interstate commerce?
Effectively, it ends up being just that, and you bloody well know it. But surely there's no massive black market to be expected. All that weed will never cross state borders. No sire, nothing to see here.
>>64079065
>Except he's been persistently releasing inmates or transferring them to other countries.
... after they were no longer useful, and being glad he can dump them on someone else.
> The PR from closing Gitmo would be a bigger accomplishment than just being anti-Gitmo but unable to do anything.

Sure. But it would lose him Gitmo.
>>
>>64078375
Well we found the butt-sex fanatic
>>
>>64078862
Kagan recused herself from the affirmative action case so it was always going to be 5-3 or 4-4. Now it will be either 4-3 or 3-4
>>
>>64079104
4-4 deadlocks uphold in favor of lower court decisions, and the majority of lower courts are stacked blue. A metric shit-ton of liberal decisions can, technically, go through in the next 11 months.
>>
>>64079263

He's in his last year of the presidency, he doesn't "need" Gitmo anymore, if he ever needed it to begin with. It's not like there aren't plenty of other black sites probably still operating that don't serve the same purpose with none of the visibility.
>>
>>64079159
There are a lot of RINO's in the senate. The media will launch a huge shill campaign. We need Trump now more than ever.
>>
>>64079062
No offense, Anon, but you've been misinformed on Citizen's United.
It said Labor Unions (Democrats) and Corporations (Republicans & Democrats) cannot be restrained in spending money on political actions. There are still limits on how much you can donate to any one candidate though. Also, Democrats NEVER bring up the fact it included Labor Unions, which give HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS to Democrats (and Democrats only) every election period.

In other words, it's bullshit boogie man that liberals cite that has nothing to do with reality.
>>
>>64079130
You assume I support any candidate this election and that I'm not thoroughly disgusted with the rampant corruption on both sides . No how about you fuck off ass clown
>>
>>64077689
Agreed, I really wanted to meet the man.
>>
>>64079425

what about the liberals that don't support either being able to do that

or is that too complex for you
>>
>>64079425

>There are still limits on how much you can donate to any one candidate though.

But there's no such limit when it comes to donations to SuperPACs, which you conveniently neglected to mention.
>>
>>64044662
Im pretty left by /pol/ standards but I agree. Solar and wind are jokes. Why the fuck the green movement shoots itself in the foot by being anti-nuclear, we could be living in the clean-energy utopia they envision, except they prevent it by failing to have an ounce of pragmatism.
>>
>>64079492
>implying
>>
>>64079425
>It said Labor Unions (Democrats) and Corporations (Republicans & Democrats) cannot be restrained in spending money on political actions.
It's also a very important decision, because it's broader than that, because it bases the decision on associations of citizens, and the fact that you always need to spend money to exercise your right to free speech.

A wrong ruling could have been a serious cut on the freedom of the press, the right to demonstrate, and other "collective" speech.
>>
>>64079554
The "Not In My Backyard" effect is too strong. Everyone likes the idea of nuclear power, but no one wants a nuclear reactor in their neighborhood.
>>
Being against Citizen's United is being against Free Speech. It's that black and white.
>>
>>64079529
Presumably such people, if they exist, have died through various means that people with an IQ above 70 manage to avoid, like drowning the bathtub.
>>
>>64079773

not even remotely true

>>64079776

so too complex for you to comprehend, got it
>>
>>64043872
>they will stonewall for the entire year.
They won't do it. over 20 seats in the senate are up for the election and they're not going to risk those trying to stall for 11 months.
>>
>>64079725
There's also the matter that at least we here are getting a raw deal on nuclear. Long-term fuel storage, insurance, post-dismantling material storage, all that is left to the taxpayer under the guise of being too important for the company to handle.
>>
>>64079263
>Effectively, it ends up being just that, and you bloody well know it.

No, I don't because I'm not a German cuck. "Certainly no evidence from the founding suggests that "commerce" included the mere possession of a good or some personal activity that did not involve trade or exchange for value"-Justice Thomas.
>>
>>64079554
Most nuclear is blocked because of waste not because of whatever propaganda you think people are totally gaslit by. Nuclear had a chance but it's extremely expensive to get rolling and the total cost of ownership is a lot higher than the pro-nuclear camp wants to admit, because they *also* want to eliminate the laws that make it so fucking expensive, even though most of those laws are actually quite reasonable.
>>
>>64079531
>"cannot be restrained in spending money on political actions"
>You didn't say SuperPAC!!!

Do you even know what PAC stands for, idiot?
>>
>>64079920
Of course, he's right. And he would stay right, if posession is all people did. But as a matter of fact, they don't - black market trade is rampant. The feds have the right to react to said black market, and to attempt to fight it at its root.
>>
>>64079554
Solar and wind have their places but they're not, at least currently, viable replacements for all other types of energy generation. They pair nicely though with nuclear, with the nuclear plant providing baseline energy that adjusts to the variable output of solar and wind. Not all greens are against nuclear. Some are very much in favor and are very passionate about it. There has been a huge divide in the environmental community on the issue. That you don't know this makes me think you're a simple minded rightwing reactionary who lets political tribalism determine his views instead of actual science and implementation.
>>
Wasn't Scalia a disgusting papist?
>>
>>64080033
Yeah he was Italian.
>>
>>64079828
>so too complex for you to comprehend, got it
lel

>citizens united is overturned because corporations aren't people
>suddenly organizations are some kind of weird new entity that law cannot deal with
>unions can't rent space to hold meetings because you can't contract with these weird new entities
>businesses lose all their property because only people can own property and businesses aren't people
>entire economy collapses as legislators scramble to define what these weird new entities are and no one can agree on anything
but at least they're not buying attack ads against your pet communist!
>>
>>64080016
>But as a matter of fact, they don't - black market trade is rampant. The feds have the right to react to said black market, and to attempt to fight it at its root.

This is pure drivel. Judicial activism,at its finest. Supreme Court is suppose to rule on the immediate facts of the case, not consequentialist speculations,
>>
i can't believe how happy this greasy wops death had made me
>>
>>64080118

shocking how they did all that before the ruling

its almost like CU had nothing to fucking do with that at god damn all
>>
>>64080223
>Supreme Court is suppose to rule on the immediate facts of the case, not consequentialist speculations,
Don't be ridiculous, this isn't even possible in principle, nevermind in practice.
>>
>>64080118
Half of those consequences wouldn't happen.

It's just that everything that now goes through businesses would have to go through business owners, which can be odd groups.
>>
>>64080232
Gas yourself, you inbred hillbilly fuck. Italians are have more intelligence in one pinky than you do in your brain..or all of your three teeth. You are an embrassment.
>>
>>64080312
>It's just that everything that now goes through businesses would have to go through business owners, which can be odd groups.
Yeah, millions of owners in the case of a lot of companies that are publicly traded. Great.
>>
>>64080334
>Italians are have
>embrassment
>>
>>64080411
Even in those cases, the CEO could probably, as their representative, keep things together. It's less of an issue than people think. What would change a lot is liability issues - without companies as people before the law, you have to idendify a specific person you can sue, which can be very hard to track down.
>>
>>64080310
>nevermind in practice

Supreme Court isn't about "in practice". It's about upholding the Constitution and precedents. The coirt didn't do so in Gonzales v. Raich. Consequentialist speculation is the ideological basis for judicial activism. There is no "spirit of the constitution" or anything else like that. There's only Consitution, the precedents, and facts of the case. Consequentialist speculation goes beyond that. Just because it's practically impossible, doesn't mean the Supreme Court should strive to perform its duties to thefullest and without overreach.
>>
>>64079425
>There are still limits on how much you can donate to any one candidate though
I read the entire opinion and it's spawn Mccutcheon v. FEC, which boiled down to a denial that since Parties or Candidates can ever really be corrupted so I honestly don't understand why they even bothered to leave the hard money limits in place.
>>
>>64079921
Waste disposal would be easier if the US and Russia got rid of their antirecycling treaty (Since recycling the waste apparently brings it closer to weapons-grade?)
>>
>>64022842
How is jew Gingsberg still alive

Fuck
>>
>>64080664
>There's only Consitution, the precedents, and facts of the case.
And the facts of the case included the rampant black market for drugs, which very much goes past state lines, and does include weed from all sources it can gobble up. The facts of the case include that legalized growth includes a large option for the mafia to grow, which would and already did end up as interstate commerce. That's the basis the feds acted on, and hence they were allowed to.
>>
>>64076396
AUDIT THE SCOTUS MEDICAL RECORDS BILL

RAND PAUL WHEN
>>
>>64080334
any italian who wants to claim Scalia as their own can piss in their own mouths
>>
1/8 deaths are people dying in their sleep.

What is the percentage of old people that die in their sleep with no prior symptoms rather than going to a hospital or taking weeks to die on life support?
>>
>>64080746
i could have sworn ginsburg was one of the lot who died under obummer.
fucking barenstein universe shit.
>>
>>64080635
Companies functioned perfectly well as legal entities prior to Citizens United, and were very well-established in their legal rights and responsibilities. CU simply gave them a right they should not have had: to influence politics collectively, when previously their individual employees/investors contributed as they willed. Now, an employee or investor can see portions of the profits they helped create go to an arbitrary politician.
>>
>>64080859
>Ozzy
>pretending like anything going on in the real world has anything to do with you

I hear a dingo eating your baby abbo.
>>
>>64022842
>“disgust is not a valid basis for restricting expression.” -Antonin Scalia

Godspeed, big guy.
>>
>>64081187
LIBERAL SPOTTED
>>
>>64080854
>facts of the case included the rampant black market for drugs
> large option for the mafia to grow, which would and already did end up as interstate commerce

Once again, consequentialist speculation isn't a valid basis for jurispudence and constitutional rulings. By that logic milking a cow is illegal because there's a large market for illegal unpasteurized milk,and all milk starts unpasteurized. Funny how the potential for illegality is only considered to be a valid cause for activist judges when it comes to drugs or free speech. What makes you think you're an American constitutional scholar Germancuck?
>>
>>64022842
Good riddance to bad garbage.
>>
>>64077876
>there goes democracy
>based scalia
Republitard delusion knows no bounds. This man rigged a fucking election.
>>
>>64080664
>Supreme Court isn't about "in practice".
That's exactly what it is.
> It's about upholding the Constitution and precedents.
If this is all it were, the Supreme Court would hear one case a term. Legislation is not totally clear and legislatures are not in any way bound to make laws consistent even if they are clear. Then it is up for the courts to manage.

> There is no "spirit of the constitution" or anything else like that. There's only Consitution, the precedents, and facts of the case. Consequentialist speculation goes beyond that.
It totally doesn't and it's hard to imagine how anyone could be so narrow-minded to see this. Here's a question for you: the Fourth Amendment is totally clear, right, that warrantless search and seizure is against the law. Question: is a drug-sniffing dog a "search"? Please let me know which section of the Constitution you plainly read to come to such a conclusion.

>Just because it's practically impossible, doesn't mean the Supreme Court should strive to perform its duties to thefullest and without overreach.
They do. I have yet to read a single court case in which I felt they radically overstepped their bounds, after having found out what exactly was in contention and why it was in contention.
>>
>at model un
>people literally cheering after hearing he died
fuck melbourne
>>
>>64080746
>>64081154
the evil ones always live the longest

fuck I already see gross disgusting cat lady liberals tlaking all cynically about who it should be and why the republicans have no upsides
>>
File: US-Supreme-court.jpg (195 KB, 919x928) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
US-Supreme-court.jpg
195 KB, 919x928
PREDICTIONS /pol/
>Roberts
>Kennedy
>Alito
>Thomas
>Ginsberg
>Sotomayor
>Kagan
>Breyer

WHO DIES AND WHO RETIRES?
It was abundantly clear years ago that Scalia was never going to leave the bench in anything other than a coffin.
>>
>>64081181
>CU simply gave them a right they should not have had: to influence politics collectively, when previously their individual employees/investors contributed as they willed.
It gave them a right they were due for a long time, because it's not a right for the corporation, but for the owners, who build an association. Since that's a common thing (people associating to influence politics through speech together, instead of alone, because it makes their voice easier to be heared) there's no reason to make an exception for business owners. The press operates under the precise same basis.
>>64081282
>Once again, consequentialist speculation isn't a valid basis for jurispudence and constitutional rulings.
It's not speculation. Speculation would mean that you assume consequences that haven't happened yet.
> By that logic milking a cow is illegal because there's a large market for illegal unpasteurized milk,and all milk starts unpasteurized.
That may be the case if such a large market existed. It doesn't.
>>
>>64081287
you seriously think the retards obama throws in is gonna be any better? the court system is best when its balanced, with this highly left leaning shit its gonna cause all kinds of brands of retardation to happen in the court system.
the fact we had retards on both sides is why it was ok, removing one side means its gonna go from a reasonable middle to going extremist on one side, besides your a europoor, why the fuck are you even on this thread, this literally has fuckall to do with you other then you want to shitpost.
>>
>>64080735
No, there's a huge Cosean bargaining problem with nuclear waste because of State's rights. Between states that want nuclear power and states that don't mind storing nuclear waste are states that don't want either, for reasons that I am not wholly unsympathetic to. Transporting nuclear waste across the ocean doesn't seem particularly more safe than across a highway.
>>
>>64081388
My personal predictions
>Roberts
Retires
>Kennedy
Dies
>Alito
Retires
>Thomas
Dies
>Ginsberg
Dies
>Sotomayor
Dies
>Kagan
Retires
>Breyer
Retires
>>
>>64081402
>defending citizens united
Fuck off cucklord jew
>>
>>64081465
>Transporting nuclear waste across the ocean doesn't seem particularly more safe than across a highway.
It's significantly less safe, because it includes the possiblity of the waste simply being lost at sea, and then rotting away in the ocean. That's not a popular idea.

On the highway? Those containers are sturdy. Really sturdy. And you can't lose them on land.
>>64081550
Citizens united in effect guarantees the freedom of the press. Stop hating because you've been told to hate.
>>
>>64081463
Everything you said is literally irrelevant. I don't have allegiances to Obongo or anyone else. I'm simply pointing out how fucking retarded people are in praising this man simply because he was on their team.
>>
>>64081609
anon i was simply saying this is the death of democracy because having a court full of leftist she-boons means everything right or center is gonna be suppressed hard and this will allow stupid shit to happen. the supreme court is supposed to be a safeguard against stupid shit from one side, not enable the shit out of it,
>>
>>64081609
He isn't on my team and I still praise him. Fuck yourself.
>>
>>64081343
>It totally doesn't and it's hard to imagine how anyone could be so narrow-minded to see this. Here's a question for you: the Fourth Amendment is totally clear, right, that warrantless search and seizure is against the law. Question: is a drug-sniffing dog a "search"? Please let me know which section of the Constitution you plainly read to come to such a conclusion.

When did I mention plain reading? And you got your analogy backwards. In the spirit of consequentialist speculation you're embracing, search dogs would be made completely illegal since they have the potential to violate all sorts of civil rights in hypothetical scenarios. There's a thin line between interpreting the Constitution and judicial activism and the court must tread this line. Consequestialist jurispudence taken to its logical conclusions can lead to all sorts of bizzare legal rulings. The Supreme Court crossed a line it shouldn't cross in Gonzalez v. Raich and many other rulings.
>>
>>64081402
The owners of a business should contribute their OWN funds, not the funds of their business. They should not have the right to hijack the profits of their company for their own personal beliefs. If one wants to band together to influence politics, that's what political parties are for. Corporations should be in the business of making products and profit, not public policy.
>>
>>64081227
>“tradition is a valid basis for restricting marriage.” -Antonin Scalia
Fuck that guy, at least disgust is technically harm on some level.
>>
>>64081742
>The owners of a business should contribute their OWN funds, not the funds of their business. They should not have the right to hijack the profits of their company for their own personal beliefs.
Do you believe this should be true for ALL businesses? No public issuing an opinion through your business?
>>
>>64081402
>Speculation would mean that you assume consequences that haven't happened yet.

Because they fucking haven't. Raich was growing weed for herself, not for gangs, mafia, or cartels.

>That may be the case if such a large market existed. It doesn't.

Define "large" market. And you can apply the same logic to illegal arms trading. Once again WTF makes you an American Constitutional scholar, Germancuck?
>>
>>64081906
>Because they fucking haven't. Raich was growing weed for herself, not for gangs, mafia, or cartels.
But Raich is only one individual case in a large context. You can always find exceptions to broad-stroke laws where the law isn't needed. Doesn't mean the law can't persist.
> And you can apply the same logic to illegal arms trading.
And you should, if arms posession wasn't a guaranteed right.
>Once again WTF makes you an American Constitutional scholar, Germancuck?
Same thing that makes you one, nothing. Don't pretend you've studied law.
>>
>>64081609
>you only like him because he liked what you like!
Well... duh. I liked that he regularly checked the powers of the court. I shared many of his conservative values, and I liked that he stood up for the little guy against imminent domain in Keller vs New London, despite losing that battle.

He was alright by me. I hate the slow March of progressivism. Democracy has outlasted its usefulness in my opinion. The people in this country are vastly different and largely incompatible with one another.
>>
>>64081721
>>64081729
You don't get more anti-democracy than rigging elections.

>>>/closet/, GOP shills
>>
>>64081739
>There's a thin line between interpreting the Constitution and judicial activism and the court must tread this line.
We will continue to disagree on this point for basically ever. Courts are routinely presented with cases they are bound to decide in which any decision at all will have the ramifications you suggest they should be incapable of having.
>>
>>64081802
Yes. Corporations comprise widely varied individuals, with diverse opinions. Their common bond is to make products or services for profit; the political opinions of the CEO should not be forced upon his employees or investors, nor the reverse.
>>
>>64047592
Who the fuck invited you to the world at large
>>
>>64082005
>your not for communism
>so you are a pro bush corruption faggot
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
fuck off you stupid shit, take your redditard ways and get out of here, centrists exist you know, theres shit beyond your faggot 2 party homosexuality circlejerk you undemocratic faggot,
>>
>>64082114
Congratulations. You just killed the freedom of the press, in its entirety.
>>
>>64082024
I'm not talking about ramifications themself, I'm talking about putting ramifications on the same level or above as Constitution and precedent when making the ruling.
>>
File: TIE_Fighter.png (259 KB, 640x352) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
TIE_Fighter.png
259 KB, 640x352
>>64081758
It is though.. the institution of marriage provides benefits because the couple has a high probability of providing children for the machine of the society, and even better chance of doing so if they had more money
>>
>>64082209
What don't people understand about this. If a faggot wants to spend all his life or even marry out of some fag religion then go ahead. Just don't give them any benefits that are meant to support nuclear families.
>>
>>64047592
>>64082122
>tfw liberalism can only live when the daddy conservatives are supporting them

liberals would be so lost if it was just them
>>
>>64082002
>But Raich is only one individual case in a large context.

Meaningless. Supreme Court should rule on individual cases.It regularly throws out cases with enormous context because of standing and other minor technicalities.

>Same thing that makes you one, nothing. Don't pretend you've studied law.

I'm not. But you keep on applying assumptions that work in German civil law to American common law.
>>
>>64022842
His death proves that there is no god or if there is he doesn't support you cuntservatives. You think if there is a god and he's on your side he would have just killed Scalia almost a year before a new president would be put into office. Your god is not real. And if there is a god he obviously favors liberals. Why else would he kill Scalia now?
>>
File: 1455416629985.jpg (304 KB, 1280x1705) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1455416629985.jpg
304 KB, 1280x1705
rip
>>
>>64082327
>Just don't give them any benefits that are meant to support nuclear families.
Honestly, I'm in favor of redirecting all those funds supporting marriages towards supporting children. If need be, starting with proof of conception by a doctor, to permit preparations.
>>
File: ZoidJesus.png (548 KB, 725x549) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
ZoidJesus.png
548 KB, 725x549
>>64082327
Yea, that's what I'm saying.. in this modern world we need to retool these kinds of things, if people want to "change society" then so should we, so they don't destroy it
>>
>>64082171
>me
>undemocratic
Are you seriously this dense that you don't get what I'm saying? You don't get to call someone who rigs elections a champion of democracy. Period, end of story.
>>
>>64082432
>he thinks god is a merciful god
>he thinks god is inherently good
>he legitimately believes everything liberals do is right and holy no matter how much they lie and cheat the system
reddit plz your retardation hurts like hell.
>>
>>64022842
He a real nigga dawg.
>>
>>64082187
The "Press" sucks anyway and should just stick to reporting facts and other things are defenable against libel and slander. I would shed no tears for the loss of their endorsements and opeds (which shouldn't be shoved as the representation of all their employees in the first place).
>>
>>64082361
>Supreme Court should rule on individual cases.
With this argument, you could invalidate damn near every law. It doesn't work like this. SCOTUS has heared the reason - black market interstate traffic fueled by homegrowth - and given it the nod, over the individual argument. Because that's one of the basic reasons we have governments, so we can make individuals take the fall to a certain extent for the benefit of the whole.
>>
>>64082432
maybe it does, maybe it doesn't

my god is different form yours
>>
>>64082187
The press merely expresses opinions and, one would hope, relates news and facts. There's a big difference between saying something, and contributing money to something. The CEO of a corporation is perfectly entitled to express his opinion on a political issue, but should not use his corporation's funds to lobby for it. In the same way, a newspaper that endorses a candidate is entirely different from that newspaper contributing money to that candidate.
>>
>>64082209
>It is though..
>tradition is rational basis
>that a law has existed for at least 2 generations is good enough reason for it to be immune to rational basis review
Why even have rational basis review at that point?

>the institution of marriage provides benefits because the couple has a high probability of providing children for the machine of the society, and even better chance of doing so if they had more money
And you think IVF and/or surrogacy are free?
>>
>>64082193
How is this to be avoided? Use the drug-sniffing dog example for concreteness so maybe I can understand what difference you think could exist but isn't being honorably adhered to.
>>
>>64082583
>With this argument, you could invalidate damn near every law.

No you can't, because all laws are assumed to be constitutional until the Supreme Court rules on them.

>black market interstate traffic fueled by homegrowth - and given it the nod, over the individual argument.

6 out of 9 justices did. The court has reversed their positions and reasoning before. My argument is that the dissents were more logical and consistent with Constitution and the precedents.

>so we can make individuals take the fall to a certain extent for the benefit of the whole

There is no precedent for such legal logic in American law.
>>
>>64082558
I don't think god exists at all, moron.
>>
>>64082572
>The "Press" sucks anyway and should just stick to reporting facts
There is no such thing as truly neutral reporting. You can report facts all day and still have one hell of a bias.
> I would shed no tears for the loss of their endorsements and opeds (which shouldn't be shoved as the representation of all their employees in the first place).
It's not just endorsements and opeds. It's explanations, interpretations, individual opinion pieces by people clearly idendifying themselves, ability to select news to publish and not publish, as well as the ability to select what parts to publish and not to publish.

It's also, again, blatantly violating people's right to free speech. Just because they have more means than you doesn't mean you get to drag them down to your level.
>>64082684
>There's a big difference between saying something, and contributing money to something.
When saying something, money is inevintably always involved. The usage of money to make your voice heared is nearly universal. That was one of the key points in the ruling. Even you are, right now, spending money to make your voice heared.
>In the same way, a newspaper that endorses a candidate is entirely different from that newspaper contributing money to that candidate.
And now off you go to read CU again. Because CU doesn't permit the company to hand over money to the candidate. Just to act as the press, even if that's normally not their business.
>>
File: AYPgg.jpg (38 KB, 640x480) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
AYPgg.jpg
38 KB, 640x480
>>64082694
have you ever heard of a little thing called stare decisis?

or jurisprudence?

do you not understand that laws were in place for practical reasons, not to please peoples emotions?
>>
>>64082854
>There is no precedent for such legal logic in American law.
Of course there is. All age restricting laws work that way. People who are ready for the responsiblity earlier take the fall to protect those (or from those) who are not.
>>
>>64022842
rip american dude, no idea what's going on but god speed
>>
>>64082864
>do you not understand that laws were in place for practical reasons, not to please peoples emotions?
Sodomy sex was illegal until 2003, your move.
>>
>>64081063
There's always prior symptoms, it's just ignored a lot of the time.

So much shit gets swept under the rug of "I'm just feeling old". Heart failure? Nah I'm just old it's normal for me to not be able to walk for more than 30 seconds.
>>
>>64082980
do you think technicalities are going to prove laws aren't in places for reasons

>>64082943
the most conservative of our supreme court justices has died, he was the 4th conservative, of the 7

obama and the jews killed him prolly
>>
>>64082816
>Drug dogs are Constitutional for law enforcement searches
>Military police can use the drug dogs to detect drugs in private residences that they wouldn't otherwise
> They can use the knowledge of drug posession that they wouldn't otherwise have to intimidate the homeowner/resident into quartering them
>Third Ammendment violation
>Therefore sniffing dogs are unconstitutional

This is what I could think of off the top of my head. My point is you could stretch out the potential ramifications into all sorts of fantastical scenarios.
>>
>>64083138
>the most conservative of our supreme court justices

no, that would be thomas
>>
>>64083138
>do you think technicalities are going to prove laws aren't in places for reasons
My point is not that laws aren't put in place for practical reasons but that not all laws are put in place for practical reasons.

And it's an exception, not a technicality.

And if they are put in place for practical reasons ARGUE THOSE FUCKING REASONS.

That "we've always done it that way" isn't a fucking reason. If you can't even come up with the reason used at the fucking time for the law in the first place, fuck off with that shit.

Tradition alone cannot form a rational basis for any law.
>>
>>64083229
>>
>no, that would be thomas
Scalia is more conservative than Thomas.
>>
>>64082921
> All age restricting laws work that way. People who are ready for the responsiblity earlier take the fall to protect those (or from those) who are not.

Age restricitng laws aren't a precedent for universal application of common good in legal rulings. The Supreme Court has stated multiple times that it rules based on Constituion, not common good.
>>
>>64083289

no he isn't

not even fucking close
>>
>>64083186
I simply don't understand your position at all. I thought you were levying the ramification charge at the justices themselves (and by extension me, who is supporting their activities in this conversation), but now it seems like you're using to to explain your position, but I don't see how it resolves the problem of justices deciding constitutionality, which is the very overreach you wish to curtail.
>>
>>64081739
>Question: is a drug-sniffing dog a "search"?
Yes, it is an evidence-gathering technique that exceeds the limits of human senses in a significant way.
>>
>>64083309
>Age restricitng laws aren't a precedent for universal application of common good in legal rulings
Nice subtle moving of goalposts there.
>>
File: hqdefault.jpg (19 KB, 480x360) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
hqdefault.jpg
19 KB, 480x360
>>64083229
yea i mean 5th of 9 right?

either way, it puts the majority down

and puts conservatives in a shitty situation

Because if they block a supreme court justice form getting put there, the liberal media will put a huge fuss up

which will make it look like they are trying to control shit

when if it was the liberals, it would be seen as a great political move
>>
>>64083289
If you define Conservatism by toeing the modern GOP line then Scalia was more conservative. If you define it by Constitutional conservatism then Thomas was more conservative.
>>
>>64083289
Nowadays even Alito has been
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideological_leanings_of_U.S._Supreme_Court_justices
>>
>>64045723
Agreed. We're right on schedule for social collapse in 2020 with this one.
>>
>>64082994
>So much shit gets swept under the rug of "I'm just feeling old". Heart failure?
This is true. It was just recently reported that a major symptom of having a heart attack in women is merely shortness of breath, nausea, and back or neck pain.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-women-heart-attacks-idUSKCN0V32QN
>>
>>64083351
My point is that the Justices are free to decide Constitutionality, but not to put the potential ramifications of their rulings on the same level as Constitution and precedent when deciding the constitutionality. Law=!application of the law. It's a tricky distinction, but an important one.
>>
File: blacula_03.jpg (520 KB, 1350x1746) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
blacula_03.jpg
520 KB, 1350x1746
>>64083253
rationally argue that life matters.

you can't, cause you're asophist

liberals dont listen to reason, they say "these are just reasons"
>>
>>64050675
Indefinite detention.
>>
>>64045941
Ginsburg confirmed SJW libtard. Who will stand in her way now?

Shit's not looking good.
>>
>>64083526
>rationally argue that life matters.
I want to live. If I die this interest would be harmed. My life therefore matters to me and as I am a citizen, to this country.
>>
I HOPE HE ROTS IN HELL

Thank God we have Obama to fix the supreme court now. Hopefully whoever he appoints is flat out opposed to corporate personhood. That's really the top priority over all others at this point.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wai6OM3YKTk
>>
>>64083526
>>64083577
if they listened to reason, they would not be liberals

I can hear the liberals squealing with excitement from here

I am /Bay Aryan/, and on the news they are already talking about "the republicans will block whatever we do!"
>>
>>64083524
I really don't see the distinction, my apologies.
>>
>>64045372
>nstead of beheading people for some bullshit? :(

I bet you failed decapitation 101, nerd.
>>
>>64083382
I'm not moving any goalposts, I'm just explaining how the Constitutional jurispudence works. At no point did the Supreme Court rule "Age restricitng laws exist, therefore we should rule based on the common good" The fact that laws exist in USA doesn't mean that the Supreme Court approves of the logic behind them,it means that the law hasn't been succesfully challenged in the Supreme Court.
>>
File: 1426477270993.jpg (3 MB, 2560x2880) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1426477270993.jpg
3 MB, 2560x2880
>>64083666
>Hopefully whoever he appoints is flat out opposed to corporate personhood.
Let me guess, you get your political opinons from facebook and youtube?
>>
File: 1453754011073.png (8 KB, 542x328) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1453754011073.png
8 KB, 542x328
>>
File: fic-fcyb.gif (6 KB, 336x216) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
fic-fcyb.gif
6 KB, 336x216
>>64083790
GERMANY PLS
>>
>>64083683
All good, this distinction is the reason why the Supreme Court has been such a shitshow for decades. If you want to understand where I'm coming from read some of Thomas's decisions.
>>
>>64083790
>>64083825
That's a relief.
>>
>>64083751
No, I don't use either. My core philosophy at this point stems from this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ik1AK56FtVc

All else follows. Currently Sanders is the only one who gets it.
>>
>>64083731
>At no point did the Supreme Court rule "Age restricitng laws exist, therefore we should rule based on the common good" The fact that laws exist in USA doesn't mean that the Supreme Court approves of the logic behind them,it means that the law hasn't been succesfully challenged in the Supreme Court.
Yes, but that wasn't what you asked me to provide. You asked me to provide that it exists in american law. And it does, challenged or not.

It's a concept that's all over the place. There's criminal law, which is mostly universal, and then there's the shitton of other laws which were made because a few people ruined good things for everyone, so everyone else now can't have good things anymore either. It's all the regulations on businesses, all those city ordinances, the traffic laws, and so on and on.
>>
File: 1434241185272.jpg (56 KB, 406x476) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1434241185272.jpg
56 KB, 406x476
>>64083863
>No, I don't use either.
>posts a youtube video
>>
>>64082861
>The usage of money to make your voice heared is nearly universal
Thus giving the wealthy proportionately more power economically AND politically. Why would one amplify that problem even further by giving them the ability to spend the profit of a corporation, in addition to their personal wealth? Corporate political contributions serve to inhibit free speech, not increase it: they drown out smaller, individual voices by sheer force of wealth. To treat a corporation as a person results in actual people becoming less-than-persons, never able to compete with the massive size and resources of multi-billion dollar businesses.
>>
>>64083876
>It's a concept that's all over the place. There's criminal law, which is mostly universal, and then there's the shitton of other laws which were made because a few people ruined good things for everyone, so everyone else now can't have good things anymore either. It's all the regulations on businesses, all those city ordinances, the traffic laws, and so on and on.

See, this is what I mean when I say you're applying German law logic to American law. This is why this conversation is so fruitless.
>>
>>64083833
I love Thomas, he's my favorite Justice.

Maybe my drug-sniffing dog is a bad example. Can you use some other example and show the contrast between actual court opinion, your view on what it should be, and finally how that decision would somehow not be "elevated"?
>>
>>64083914
It's a lecture. Are you retarded enough not to understand that? Do you have an alternative ubiquitous video sharing site that works on all bandwidths and countries?
>>
>>64084014
>I love Thomas, he's my favorite Justice.

...holy dogshit
>>
>>64083951
>Why would one amplify that problem even further by giving them the ability to spend the profit of a corporation, in addition to their personal wealth?
Because the corporation is the personal wealth of its owners. I don't see how that's so hard to get.
> To treat a corporation as a person results in actual people becoming less-than-persons, never able to compete with the massive size and resources of multi-billion dollar businesses.
And this is why people team up in large numbers, form demonstrations, political activist groups, unions and so on and on. Unions, notably, were given the exact same rights by CU.
>>64083994
Elaborate. Are you trying to tell me that laws that apply to everyone after a few people abused the lack of them aren't a thing in america?
>>64084031
I'm saying that if you can't explain it yourself, odds are you're just repeating someone elses opinion.
>>
>>64084125
Ban lobbying
>>
>>64084014
Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz. The decision elevated the consequences of drunk driving above the Fourth Amendment rights when it came to constitutionality of sobriety checkpoints.
>>
>>64084158
Yes, that'll work. We'll just forbid people to talk to politicians. I'm sure that's constitutional.
>>
>>64084231
Go on.
>>
>>64022842
who is the fatty?
>>
File: fic-fdce.gif (5 KB, 336x216) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
fic-fdce.gif
5 KB, 336x216
>>64083851
>>64083825
you're welcome, that was close
>>