Way to continue to erode our rights Republican judges

S

spandy

Well-Known Member
If you aren't doing anything illegal, you shouldn't be worried about it. Pretty sure 99%+ of the people in prison broke the law.

 
Flaming Pie

Flaming Pie

Well-Known Member
Isnt it 4v4 dem/repub?

Does it really surprise you though?

The government on both sides of the aisle needs the people stripped of their rights so the government can continue trampling on our rights.

I saw this coming.
 
P

pabloesqobar

Well-Known Member
Flaming Pie said:
Isnt it 4v4 dem/repub?

Does it really surprise you though?

The government on both sides of the aisle needs the people stripped of their rights so the government can continue trampling on our rights.

I saw this coming.
Click to expand...
Yep. Breyer, a Clinton appointee, voted with the 4 Republican Justices. But for his vote, this wouldn't have happened.
 
Ace Yonder

Ace Yonder

Well-Known Member
bundee1 said:
In name only. Breyer was a compromise who votes mostly right.
Click to expand...
That's not really true, he actually votes mostly left with a few exceptions. His voting record is pretty clearly left, he is and has voted pro-choice, pro-gay mariage, pro-gun control, pro-separation of church and state, pro-Obama care, pro-EPA, and pro-pathway to citizenship. He is a little more centrist than some of the other justices (as cases like this one illustrate), but to portray him as voting "mostly right" isn't fair at all.
 
P

pabloesqobar

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
4/4 right wing justices vote for it.

1/4 left justices vote for it.

thus it is the left's fault.

solid logic, tard.
Click to expand...
Well, of course the Justices that decide what the law is, are politically biased. Right?

In this case, of course the 4 Republican Justices ruled the way they did. Which I 100% disagree with. It's not like they threw the 4th amendment out the window, but it changed the interpretation of the exclusionary rule. And in limited circumstances.

For reasons not entirely clear, a lone Democrat chose to be part of the majority.

That's all I'm saying. You seem pretty riled up tho.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
pabloesqobar said:
Well, of course the Justices that decide what the law is, are politically biased. Right?

In this case, of course the 4 Republican Justices ruled the way they did. Which I 100% disagree with. It's not like they threw the 4th amendment out the window, but it changed the interpretation of the exclusionary rule. And in limited circumstances.

For reasons not entirely clear, a lone Democrat chose to be part of the majority.

That's all I'm saying. You seem pretty riled up tho.
Click to expand...
"But for his vote, this wouldn't have happened."

^^^^that is you trying to blame this all on one liberal justice, instead of the right wing justices who went 4 for 4 on this, a perfect 100%.

i am just calling you out for being a spineless ideologue fucktard.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
So police can search illegally yet still use what they find.

They can seize any of your assets they want, with no reason, leaving the citizen with no recourse- completely contravening our constitutional right against search and seizure without due process.

They can murder with impunity.

The Supreme Court refuses to respect We the People's Constitutional Rights, and without term limits, we have no way to get rid of them.

How is this anything BUT authoritarianism?

Anyone?
 
P

pabloesqobar

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
"But for his vote, this wouldn't have happened."

^^^^that is you trying to blame this all on one liberal justice, instead of the right wing justices who went 4 for 4 on this, a perfect 100%.

i am just calling you out for being a spineless ideologue fucktard.
Click to expand...
Ahem. Read the title of the thread. Of course the 4 Republicans were going to vote the way they did. That was a given, correct? It should've been a 4 v. 4 vote, and remanded.

But a Democrat sided with the Republicans. And now it's a bullshit law.

Ok?
 
Flaming Pie

Flaming Pie

Well-Known Member
pabloesqobar said:
Well, of course the Justices that decide what the law is, are politically biased. Right?

In this case, of course the 4 Republican Justices ruled the way they did. Which I 100% disagree with. It's not like they threw the 4th amendment out the window, but it changed the interpretation of the exclusionary rule. And in limited circumstances.

For reasons not entirely clear, a lone Democrat chose to be part of the majority.

That's all I'm saying. You seem pretty riled up tho.
Click to expand...
You rustled his jimmies.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
pabloesqobar said:
Ahem. Read the title of the thread. Of course the 4 Republicans were going to vote the way they did. That was a given, correct? It should've been a 4 v. 4 vote, and remanded.

But a Democrat sided with the Republicans. And now it's a bullshit law.

Ok?
Click to expand...
so 4 republicans are blameless for voting for this piece of shit, but the one democrat out of 4 who did is the one who you choose to go on a crusade against?

partisan hack much?
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
pabloesqobar said:
Ahem. Read the title of the thread. Of course the 4 Republicans were going to vote the way they did. That was a given, correct? It should've been a 4 v. 4 vote, and remanded.

But a Democrat sided with the Republicans. And now it's a bullshit law.

Ok?
Click to expand...
And it's still 4/5 republicans who voted it in and then turn around and tell us they're protecting our rights.

So fuck those republicans who vote to eliminate my constitutional rights, and fuck republicans who would apologize for it, or worse, actually think it's a good idea.

And while I'm at it, fuck democrats who would follow their lead!

Unfuckingbelievable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top