Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Ed & Dave Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-15-2014, 08:06 PM  
AustinChief AustinChief is offline
Administrator
 
AustinChief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Austin
Casino cash: $6972
SCOTUS Watch June 2014

Gonna be a huge month for the Supreme Court.

Here are some decisions we should see in the next 10 days...

National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning
This should be an EPIC SMACKDOWN to Obama and his arrogant bullshit. This is by far the one I am most anticipating.

Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
Not sure how this will play but leaning toward a poke in the eye for Obama here.

... and the rest that sort of matter...

Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus
This is a no brainer.

Riley v. California and United States v. Wurie
So is this one.

Aereo
Tough call here.

McCullen v. Coakley
Very tough call.

..and a dozen or so more that shouldn't matter unless we get some crazy decision.
Posts: 14,723
AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2014, 01:33 PM   #31
banyon banyon is offline
Supporter
 
banyon's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Dodge City, Kansas
Casino cash: $5570
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
Even when the legislature is infringing a right? I think not.
The opinion was not decided on constitutional grounds.

Read it for yourself here:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions...-1493_k5g1.pdf

In fact, they do not even mention the Second Amendment one time in either the majority opinion or the dissent.
__________________

Last edited by banyon; 06-17-2014 at 01:39 PM..
Posts: 32,667
banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2014, 01:34 PM   #32
banyon banyon is offline
Supporter
 
banyon's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Dodge City, Kansas
Casino cash: $5570
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
Exactly.

I liken it to someone voting for someone else. Basically the dissent is saying it's ok to fraudulently vote for someone else so long as it turns out in the end that the person would have voted that way anyway.
That's actually a better analogy than the one I just posted.
__________________
Posts: 32,667
banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2014, 01:38 PM   #33
banyon banyon is offline
Supporter
 
banyon's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Dodge City, Kansas
Casino cash: $5570
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
As suspected this decision was unanimous.

http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/06/op...e/#more-213516
This was basically just a ruling on standing to sue, saying that candidates didn't have to wait until they were prosecuted to challenge the Ohio law against false political statements.

Now that they can sue, they will have to go back to the Ohio Federal district court and finish their suit. Another ruling on the laws' constitutionality is probably 2-3 yrs away.
__________________
Posts: 32,667
banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.banyon wants to die in a aids tree fire.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2014, 01:40 PM   #34
AustinChief AustinChief is offline
Administrator
 
AustinChief's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Austin
Casino cash: $6972
Quote:
Originally Posted by banyon View Post
This was basically just a ruling on standing to sue, saying that candidates didn't have to wait until they were prosecuted to challenge the Ohio law against false political statements.

Now that they can sue, they will have to go back to the Ohio Federal district court and finish their suit. Another ruling on the laws' constitutionality is probably 2-3 yrs away.
Yup, that should be a no brainer as well but you never know. I was surprised at how badly the lower court screwed up on this one.
Posts: 14,723
AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2014, 02:01 PM   #35
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by banyon View Post
Also: this argument just struck me as preposterous. Did Scalia want to reinvent the meaning of the term "material"?

One of the key elements in the illegal purchase of a weapon is whether you are a felon. Therefore, the identity of the purchaser is relevant to that inquiry to determine whether such person has a criminal history with such convictions. So, the identity of the actual purchaser is indeed important in making such a determination. Because they turned out not to be a felon doesn't mean that the fact of their identity wasn't relevant and material to answering the question asked. In logical terms, that is the fallacy of affirming the consequent.

It is no different than someone creating a false name and trying to obtain a DL with it. Does the fact that the person was actually eligible for a valid DL under their real name mean that you can't prosecute them for trying to fraudulently obtain a DL? Of course not.
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you (and it's also possible/likely that I've over simplified Scalia's theory), but I'm not sure the requirement for a real name on the DL is based on the same language so it might not be an adequate analogy.
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2014, 02:08 PM   #36
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
Exactly.

I liken it to someone voting for someone else. Basically the dissent is saying it's ok to fraudulently vote for someone else so long as it turns out in the end that the person would have voted that way anyway.

It made no sense whatsoever.
That analogy fails because, as I understand it, it's not unlawful to purchase a gun at the request of someone else and with their money (unless one of nine circumstances exist and they didn't in this case) whereas it is unlawful to cast a vote for someone else. In the voting example, the crime you commit is voting illegally not lying about your name.
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2014, 02:13 PM   #37
Xanathol Xanathol is offline
Starter
 

Join Date: Mar 2011
Casino cash: $5570
Quote:
Originally Posted by banyon View Post
The dissent was the one advocating to strike down a popularly elected law by rendering it useless. The majority wanted to uphold the will of the legislature.

Agree with them or not, the majority wasn't doing judicial activism here (though some of the judges in the majority are known for that).
Not even close - read the law and the case again.

The law states that the one purchasing the gun must pass a background check (among other things). What the dissenting opinion is saying is that the form's question on who is the purchaser shouldn't be there, since the person purchasing the firearm at this time is indeed the one making this purchase (ie. the defendant and therefore the question is redundant).

The law itself states that the purchaser must pass a background check - not some 'ultimate' purchaser. When the defendant 'sells' the gun to his uncle, then the uncle should have to pass a background check - and get this - he filled out the paper work and did! The 'stink' on this issue is the uncle sent the check ahead of time. If he had waited ~2 weeks, there is no case at all.

Kagan & company ultimately don't want private gun sales. To that affect, in this case, they are using the form as if it were the law instead of the actual law itself. Remember, the uncle ALSO filled out the necessary forms for a firearm purchase. No one was trying to hide anything.

Kagan and such are ignoring the, as Scalia put it, 'plain English of the law'. They are twisting a question on a form to hinder a gun sale because a check was written 'too early'. Its ridiculous.
Posts: 525
Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Xanathol must have mowed badgirl's lawn.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2014, 02:17 PM   #38
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $8805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xanathol View Post
no case at all.

Kagan & company ultimately don't want private gun sales. To that affect, in this case, they are using the form as if it were the law instead of the actual law itself. Remember, the uncle ALSO filled out the necessary forms for a firearm purchase. No one was trying to hide anything.

Kagan and such are ignoring the, as Scalia put it, 'plain English of the law'. They are twisting a question on a form to hinder a gun sale because a check was written 'too early'. Its ridiculous.
The bold part is the camp banyon is in too. Or he favors more gun controls.
__________________
Posts: 57,507
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2014, 03:28 PM   #39
Amnorix Amnorix is offline
In BB I trust
 
Amnorix's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Boston, Mass.
Casino cash: $6335
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmo20002 View Post
JFC, BEP...
You're really not familiar with how a case can get to the Supreme Court? Not everything comes down to a question of constitutionality.

As you're aware, there's a million federal laws out there. If there's a difference of opinion on how a law should be applied, who do you think decides that?

She's a f'n moron, as you should well know by now...
__________________
"I love signature blocks on the Internet. I get to put whatever the hell I want in quotes, pick a pretend author, and bang, it's like he really said it." George Washington
Posts: 33,177
Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2014, 03:38 PM   #40
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $8805
I see the wife was inadequate again last night, Amn. So you're feeling grouchy. Better get a magazine to handle it.
__________________
Posts: 57,507
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2014, 03:39 PM   #41
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $8805
Even so, that law is still being misapplied and needing a license is bogus anyway, for something that is a right. Perhaps some here need to read and understand my position. I gave one within application of the law and another without, admitting I didn't read the case, but that a license is bogus if something is a right.
__________________
Posts: 57,507
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2014, 03:43 PM   #42
WhawhaWhat WhawhaWhat is offline
Veteran
 

Join Date: Feb 2013
Casino cash: $7712
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
I see the wife was inadequate again last night, Amn. So you're feeling grouchy. Better get a magazine to handle it.
Who uses magazines these days?
Posts: 4,378
WhawhaWhat Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.WhawhaWhat Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.WhawhaWhat Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.WhawhaWhat Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.WhawhaWhat Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.WhawhaWhat Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.WhawhaWhat Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.WhawhaWhat Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.WhawhaWhat Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.WhawhaWhat Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.WhawhaWhat Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2014, 04:02 PM   #43
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $8805
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhawhaWhat View Post
Who uses magazines these days?
Depends on one's location.
__________________
Posts: 57,507
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2014, 04:36 PM   #44
AustinChief AustinChief is offline
Administrator
 
AustinChief's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Austin
Casino cash: $6972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
She's a f'n moron, as you should well know by now...
Amnorix! You have any predictions on National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning?
Posts: 14,723
AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.AustinChief has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2014, 05:12 PM   #45
Cochise Cochise is offline
This season:
 
Cochise's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Casino cash: $9377
Quote:
Originally Posted by alnorth View Post
This case is in a state that is not a right to work state brought by members of a public employee union. They are arguing that their union is a political organization that is engaged in political speech and elections beyond the scope of just collectively bargaining for them, and that by being forced to join and pay dues, they are being compelled to support a union whose politics they dont agree with. That is fine for a private company union since you don't have to work there, but they are arguing that (since they are government employees), the government cant make them contribute to a cause they don't agree with.
I don't know how you would even argue against that.
Posts: 42,332
Cochise 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Cochise 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Cochise 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Cochise 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Cochise 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Cochise 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Cochise 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Cochise 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Cochise 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Cochise 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.Cochise 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.