• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

SCOTUS decisions

Junebug said:
The threat to censure Schumer is silly. He got lost in the heat of the moment, said something that went too far,
and admitted his mistake. It’s time to move on.
Click to expand...

Yet RJ gets a one-week ban.

Full disclosure -- I argued for a three-week ban.
 
"clear double standard" is definitely the title RJ should use when he revises/re-releases his memoirs
 
If I revise anything, the story still wouldn't be as boring as your life and have more than Junebug ever has. So sad.
 
RJKarl said:
If I revise anything, the story still wouldn't be as boring as your life and have more than Junebug ever has. So sad.
Click to expand...

fuck off grumpy boomer. i'm generally fine with your extreme level of self absorption, misery and lack of both class and humor but fuck, dude. get a life.

have you ever taken good natured ribbing in stride even once in your allegedly "not-boring" life?
 
I take more shit here than everyone else combined. If you actually paid attention, I do more self-deprecating hits on myself that anyone, but you can't allow yourself to see that either. It would get in the way of taking the easy way out.

Let your hair sometime rather than looking for a shot.
 
 
RJKarl said:
I take more shit here than everyone else combined. If you actually paid attention, I do more self-deprecating hits on myself that anyone, but you can't allow yourself to see that either. It would get in the way of taking the easy way out.
Click to expand...

now read this imagining trump’s voice saying it
 
U.S. District Court Judge goes after the SCOTUS conservative bloc in Harvard Law & Policy article

Slate: About time that progressive judges swing back at conservative judges

Essentially the law review article and the Slate article lay out how American democracy has been under assault from conservative judicial activism for decades, but has been ramped up considerably in the last 5 years, and now someone finally took a shot back. Both are good reads, highly recommend.

Opening paragraph from Judge Adelman:

By now, it is a truism that Chief Justice John Roberts’ statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee that a Supreme Court justice’s role is the passive one of a neutral baseball “umpire who [merely] calls the balls and strikes”1 was a masterpiece of disingenuousness. Roberts’ misleading testimony inevitably comes to mind when one considers the course of decision-making by the Court over which he presides. This is so because the Roberts Court has been anything but passive. Rather, the Court’s hard right majority is actively participating in undermining American democracy. Indeed, the Roberts Court has contributed to insuring that the political system in the United States pays little attention to ordinary Americans and responds only to the wishes of a relatively small number of powerful corporations and individuals.
Click to expand...
 
Oh, my mistake assuming “Lynn” was a she.


It’s beside your point, yes.


But yours may not be the only point that matters.



So thx for answering my question.
 
Junebug said:
Adleman is an idiot. There is a reason judges don’t publish crap like this.

Rule 2.1 of the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct: Giving Precedence to the Duties of Judicial Office

The duties of judicial office, as prescribed by law, shall take precedence over all of a judge's personal and extrajudicial activities.

COMMENT

[1] To ensure that judges are available to fulfill their judicial duties, judges must conduct their personal and extrajudicial activities to minimize the risk of conflicts that would result in frequent disqualification. See Canon 3.

[2] Although it is not a duty of judicial office unless prescribed by law, judges are encouraged to participate in activities that promote public understanding of and confidence in the justice system.

By his article, Adleman voluntarily created conflicts in several areas of the law, not to mention all but accusing Roberts of perjury at his confirmation hearing.

This type of article should be written by a law professor, not a sitting judge. If he want to write articles like this, he should resign.
Click to expand...

You have got to be fucking kidding me. Seriously, how do you look yourself in the mirror?
 
I mean you literally one up yourself on hypocrisy and bullshit every time you post. I'm starting to think you are just fucking with everyone. If so, good job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top