9 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
LMWC's avatar

I disagree with Jeff Childers that the Missouri vs Biden case was “perhaps” punted because of the bigger Trump immunity case coming. I think Missouri vs Biden is the biggest deal to come down in decades. The court punted it because they want nothing to do with righting Constitutional wrongs sending us down the road to totalitarianism. They did the same after the 2020 election in failing to take up the Texas case of election corruption. They used a technicality to get out of dealing with a Constitutional crisis, they wanted no part of. The Trump immunity case will fly out the window on Friday as the Supremes run for the hills, and it will likely be thrown out as well on some technicality. The same 3 “conservative moderate” judges have voted with the lib judges in every big Constitutional case that has arisen the last few years.

While I love Jeff and his law background sorting things out, I also disagree that overturning Roe was an important step for restoring constitutionality. The timing reeked, the leaking reeked, and the Dems greedily using it for the ‘22 and now ‘24 elections reek. Kavanaugh and ACB have proven they are captured.

Expand full comment
Jeff C's avatar

The Texas case regarding the 2020 election was exactly what I thought of too, they chickened out as they didn't want to deal with the question.

Expand full comment
Fred's avatar

I read somewhere that there was screaming from the chambers prior to that decision, and that somewhere in their “rules,” they have a duty to maintain national tranquility or some such phrase. I still hate that they didn’t take the case…

Expand full comment
carily myers's avatar

SCOTUS blog-an aide heard Roberts literally screaming about the case and how they couldn't afford to take it on (Texas v. Penn). First time this aide had heard raised voices regarding a case, he had been there 10 years.

Roberts was losing it over that particular case.

Expand full comment
GenEarly's avatar

Nothing personal for Jeff, but "Lawyers" generally have to "believe in the system".

Even the democRat Bolshevik lying lawyers "believe" they can destroy the Kulaks via Lawfare..... and seem to be doing a bang up job of it too.

2024 into 2025 and 1775 into 1776. "Si vis pacem para bellum"

Expand full comment
carily myers's avatar

like

Expand full comment
Credenda's avatar

Interesting. Somehow I knew they were untrustworthy almost immediately. They were establishment conservatives, only interested in maintaining the status quo. Very sad.

Expand full comment
Politico Phil's avatar

Logical comment.

Expand full comment
NAB's avatar

Great comment.

Expand full comment