The official thread of SCOTUS cementing the US as a theocractic fascist state.

[CitizenVectron]

 

[SuperSpreader]

I don't even know where to put this...

 

 

[CitizenVectron]

My wife and I have made the decision to never visit the US again. Can't do it.

[CitizenVectron]

 

[Uaarkson]

1 hour ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

Guess they didn’t want their FB timelines flooded with Jesus porn 

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

Kagan clearly reads the Atlantic and is brain poisoned. 
 

sotomayer once again is correct

[Chris-]

42 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

Kagan clearly reads the Atlantic and is brain poisoned. 
 

sotomayer once again is correct

 

It was a safe vote, fuck the shadow docket. 

[Massdriver]

3 hours ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

Alito and Thomas rubber stamp whatever right wing media and Trumpers want them to. 

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

The Supreme Court gives lawsuit immunity to Border Patrol agents who violate the Constitution

WWW.VOX.COM

---

Egbert v. Boule is a severe blow to the proposition that law enforcement must obey the Constitution.

 

Quote

 

The Supreme Court handed down a decision on Wednesday which effectively gives Border Patrol agents who violate the Constitution total immunity from lawsuits seeking to hold them accountable.

 

Justice Clarence Thomas’s majority opinion in Egbert v. Boule, moreover, has implications that stretch far beyond the border. Egbert guts a seminal Supreme Court precedent, Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents (1971), which established that federal law enforcement officers who violate the Constitution may be individually sued — and potentially be required to compensate their victims for their illegal actions.

 

Egbert is a severe blow to the broader project of police accountability. While it does not target lawsuits against state law enforcement officers who violate the Constitution, it all but eliminates the public’s ability to sue Border Patrol officers — and possibly all federal officers — who commit similar violations.

 

In fairness, Egbert does indicate that people who believe their rights were violated by federal law enforcement may file a grievance with the law enforcement agency that employs the officer who allegedly violated the Constitution. But such grievances will be investigated by other law enforcement officers, and no court or other agency can review a law enforcement officer’s decision to exonerate a fellow officer.

 

And, perhaps most importantly, Egbert most likely shuts down a civil rights plaintiff’s ability to be compensated if their rights are violated.

 

 

Of course, it's him writing for the majority.

 

OF COURSE!

[Jason]

Don't forget that the federal government uses a very broad definition of "border". 

 

[Captain Pickle]

On 5/26/2022 at 12:03 PM, CitizenVectron said:

My wife and I have made the decision to never visit the US again. Can't do it.

I mean I likely will eventually but I’ve had a personal ban on the us for years now. I mean it was first trump but then it was the fear of how Covid friendly the place is. Now but always and forever it’s the gun humping and racism etc. but if there is a slight improvement on those I might release the ban.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

Remembering how trump used border patrol agents in DC and Portland in summer 2020

[Comet]

4 hours ago, Captain Pickle said:

I mean I likely will eventually but I’ve had a personal ban on the us for years now. I mean it was first trump but then it was the fear of how Covid friendly the place is. Now but always and forever it’s the gun humping and racism etc. but if there is a slight improvement on those I might release the ban.

Hah a slight improvement 😞

[Ricofoley]

4 hours ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

In fairness, Egbert does indicate that people who believe their rights were violated by federal law enforcement may file a grievance with the law enforcement agency that employs the officer who allegedly violated the Constitution. But such grievances will be investigated by other law enforcement officers, and no court or other agency can review a law enforcement officer’s decision to exonerate a fellow officer.

lol, c'mon, this is way more insulting than if they'd just said outright they were above the law

[Jason]

5 hours ago, Jason said:

Don't forget that the federal government uses a very broad definition of "border". 

 

 

Akshually... 

 

 

[Guest]

14 hours ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

The Supreme Court gives lawsuit immunity to Border Patrol agents who violate the Constitution

WWW.VOX.COM

---

Egbert v. Boule is a severe blow to the proposition that law enforcement must obey the Constitution.

 

 

Of course, it's him writing for the majority.

 

OF COURSE!

Bivens claims are almost universally unsuccessful in the 40 years since it became the standard. Not sure that this holding practically changes things.

[silentbob]

8 hours ago, Jason said:

 

Akshually... 

 

 

 

So 60% of the states now live in a Online Gamers SWAT Zone without repercussions.  
 

Some robocall yesterday was trying to tell us Trudeau is ruining Canadian values and stepping on the rights of people to travel freely. After seeing what keeps being added stateside, I think I’m good staying here. Oh and I hung up after I heard the above question. So I guess I’m a undecided on the poll

[marioandsonic]

1 hour ago, silentbob said:

So 60% of the states now live in a Online Gamers SWAT Zone without repercussions.  

 

This is something that really worries me.  So if someone organizes a SWAT call on you by claiming you have illegal immigrants in your house, they suffer no repercussions?

[Ghost_MH]

38 minutes ago, marioandsonic said:

This is something that really worries me.  So if someone organizes a SWAT call on you by claiming you have illegal immigrants in your house, they suffer no repercussions?

 

The person placing the false tip would be fully liable here.

[Guest]

45 minutes ago, marioandsonic said:

 

This is something that really worries me.  So if someone organizes a SWAT call on you by claiming you have illegal immigrants in your house, they suffer no repercussions?

 

5 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

The person placing the false tip would be fully liable here.

The ruling also does not absolve the government of liability, this ruling limits the individual liability of federal agents under the Bivens framework. Congress, were it to actually work, could also create individual civil liability for federal agents.

[marioandsonic]

1 hour ago, sblfilms said:

 

The ruling also does not absolve the government of liability, this ruling limits the individual liability of federal agents under the Bivens framework. Congress, were it to actually work, could also create individual civil liability for federal agents.

 

Lol

[Ghost_MH]

1 hour ago, sblfilms said:

The ruling also does not absolve the government of liability, this ruling limits the individual liability of federal agents under the Bivens framework. Congress, were it to actually work, could also create individual civil liability for federal agents.

 

In theory it doesn't absolve the government, but what recompense is due to the aggrieved here? You aren't wrong, though, the original Bivens ruling hasn't exactly worked out the way it should. The federal agents here wouldn't liable, but the agency isn't really either and even if they were so what? What does that even mean? If border patrol violates my rights, what do I get in return? I'm not even legally owed an apology.

[Jason]

 

[GeneticBlueprint]

Do state supreme courts count?

 

https://www.wlbt.com/2022/06/16/high-court-upholds-life-sentence-forrest-co-man-convicted-marijuana-possession/

 

Spirit of the law for fascist shit. Letter of the law for minorities.

[Ghost_MH]

16 minutes ago, GeneticBlueprint said:

https://www.wlbt.com/2022/06/16/high-court-upholds-life-sentence-forrest-co-man-convicted-marijuana-possession/

 

Spirit of the law for fascist shit. Letter of the law for minorities.

 

TIL that since 2014 in Mississippi all burglaries are considered violent crimes even if there was no actual violence, physical harm, even threat of violence and/or physical harm.

 

So his three strikes for a life sentence were a non-violent burglary, possession of a gun with a criminal record, and 1.54oz of marijuana. Good thing they have a Republican governor that'll more than happy just leave him locked up forever.

[BloodyHell]

On 6/18/2022 at 1:37 AM, Ghost_MH said:

 

TIL that since 2014 in Mississippi all burglaries are considered violent crimes even if there was no actual violence, physical harm, even threat of violence and/or physical harm.

 

So his three strikes for a life sentence were a non-violent burglary, possession of a gun with a criminal record, and 1.54oz of marijuana. Good thing they have a Republican governor that'll more than happy just leave him locked up forever.

Jesus christ, what a frightening and terrible fucking law. Three strikes, I mean. 

Like seriously, how fucking absurd do you need to be to ever think prison should adopt fucking baseball as its format. Except that every 3rd time you don't hit a home run, you go to prison for life. 

 

 

There is most certainly plenty I will never agree with the left on, but the GOP is just so terrible that there is no viable alternative. I can't imagine how anyone could currently say they love America and vote Republican. 

 

Its been far too long since an American political party has folded, now would be a good time. The GOP needs to die. 

 

Two party systems are terrible. 

[CayceG]

The solidification of theocratic fascism in the United States continues:

 

 

 

Supreme Court Rejects Maine’s Ban on Aid to Religious Schools - The New York Times

WWW.NYTIMES.COM

---

The decision was the latest in a series of rulings forbidding the exclusion of religious institutions from government programs.

 

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

Ah late June, summer is in full swing and the reactionary court releases its insane opinions

[CitizenVectron]

So does this mean that Muslim schools also must be funded by the state?

[GeneticBlueprint]

29 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

So does this mean that Muslim schools also must be funded by the state?

 

Let's call the Satanic Temple to start a private school while we're at it.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

1 hour ago, CitizenVectron said:

So does this mean that Muslim schools also must be funded by the state?

Of course not. Same for Jewish schools

[Guest]

1 hour ago, CitizenVectron said:

So does this mean that Muslim schools also must be funded by the state?

It means if the state wants to provide education funding to private schools, they don’t get to discriminate on the basis of things like religious affiliation.

 

The actual solution here is for the government to not subsidize private schools at all. Private schools should stand on their own two feet, or close up if they can’t.

[mclumber1]

Isn't there some missing context here?  There were no public schools to send kids to in rural Maine, so the parents either had to homeschool their kids or send them to a private school. If the only viable choice is a religious private school, would it not be unfair for the state to deny the vouchers/money for those schools?

 

On the other hand, this does open up the possibility of parents requesting money to send their kids to a Islamic school or even a Satanist school, which is fair I suppose.  Are there even Satanist schools? 

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, mclumber1 said:

Isn't there some missing context here?  There were no public schools to send kids to in rural Maine, so the parents either had to homeschool their kids or send them to a private school. If the only viable choice is a religious private school, would it not be unfair for the state to deny the vouchers/money for those schools?

 

On the other hand, this does open up the possibility of parents requesting money to send their kids to a Islamic school or even a Satanist school, which is fair I suppose.  Are there even Satanist schools? 

People choosing to live in the middle of nowhere and then forcing everybody to subsidize the substantially higher per-pupil cost of private schools isn’t moving the needle for me on this issue.

[mclumber1]

11 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

People choosing to live in the middle of nowhere and then forcing everybody to subsidize the substantially higher per-pupil cost of private schools isn’t moving the needle for me on this issue.

 

It sounds like Maine needs to build more schools in rural areas, even if they are for a few kids.