Bulldozers at Big Bend

[SAJ-99]

SCOTUS is fine with it. The arguement “The Government’s interest therefore outweighs any aesthetic, recreational, and environmental harm” opens the door to just about anything, anywhere.

Supreme Court allows Trump administration to continue border wall construction

The Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for the Trump administration to resume construction of a border wall in the Big Bend region of southwestern Texas. In a four-page, unsigned opinion, the ju…

www.scotusblog.com

 

[elkduds]

SCOTUS is fine with it. The arguement “The Government’s interest therefore outweighs any aesthetic, recreational, and environmental harm” opens the door to just about anything, anywhere.

Supreme Court allows Trump administration to continue border wall construction

The Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for the Trump administration to resume construction of a border wall in the Big Bend region of southwestern Texas. In a four-page, unsigned opinion, the ju…

www.scotusblog.com

All the more reason for Texans and all Americans to choose blue, and replace the Heritage Foundation-SCOTUS.

 

[Hunting Wife]

SCOTUS is fine with it. The arguement “The Government’s interest therefore outweighs any aesthetic, recreational, and environmental harm” opens the door to just about anything, anywhere.

Supreme Court allows Trump administration to continue border wall construction

The Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for the Trump administration to resume construction of a border wall in the Big Bend region of southwestern Texas. In a four-page, unsigned opinion, the ju…

www.scotusblog.com

Doubling down on the idea that laws don’t matter anymore. Seems funny to me how the don’t tread on me crowd seems fine with handing the federal government unlimited power to do whatever they want, wherever and whenever they want. What a weird timeline we’re in. Will be interesting to see who is suddenly not ok with it when the Dems use this playbook on gun control and “green” energy.

But it’s fine. Everything’s fine.

 

[noharleyyet]

Occam's Pendulous Razor ladies/gents

 

[SAJ-99]

Occam's Pendulous Razor ladies/gents

Occam wouldn’t defend a lazy legal argument.

 

[rogerthat]

Let’s go ahead and allow the activity continue while considering the merits until undoing it is a moot point anyway. Idgaf what the legal arguments are this scotus is a joke and lost my respect. Maybe they need a little refresher on construction projects. Another irreparably damaged institution imo.

 

[Irrelevant]

There was only one dissenter on the court. Which means there could be more to it than they just "approved" or rubber-stamped another idiotic trump idea/action. It could also be that the SCOTUS stayed in its lane, read the law, and said the judge didn't have authority.

 

[SerialScience]

There was only one dissenter on the court.

There was only one judge who openly expressed their dissent.

 

[SAJ-99]

There was only one dissenter on the court. Which means there could be more to it than they just "approved" or rubber-stamped another idiotic trump idea/action. It could also be that the SCOTUS stayed in its lane, read the law, and said the judge didn't have authority.

It depends on how you look at it. Clearly they said the judge didn’t have authority to stop the idiotic action. So who keeps the executive branch from doing idiotic things? I think we know it isn’t SCOTUS or the judicial branch at all.

 

[Gr8bawana]

The idea of checks and balances was killed the second this admin. took office.

 

[rogerthat]

There was only one dissenter on the court. Which means there could be more to it than they just "approved" or rubber-stamped another idiotic trump idea/action. It could also be that the SCOTUS stayed in its lane, read the law, and said the judge didn't have authority.

You’re probably right honestly but the playbook is getting pretty old for me. Declare an emergency (usually on very weak or even false pretenses) to get around regulations and laws. Lawsuits filed. Lower court puts in place an injunction that seems reasonable. Admin runs to Supreme Court and Supreme Court overturns it all the while knowing that at a certain point of accomplishment or harm the lawsuit becomes moot. Rinse and repeat. The net effect whether real or perceived is a damaging of the supreme courts reputation. I think they are all a bunch of political hacks. I used to have great respect for our Supreme Court.

 

[Irrelevant]

It depends on how you look at it. Clearly they said the judge didn’t have authority to stop the idiotic action. So who keeps the executive branch from doing idiotic things? I think we know it isn’t SCOTUS or the judicial branch at all.

Congress. They need to find some ballz

 

[Irrelevant]

It depends on how you look at it. Clearly they said the judge didn’t have authority to stop the idiotic action. So who keeps the executive branch from doing idiotic things? I think we know it isn’t SCOTUS or the judicial branch at all.

I mean if we've entrusted the executive branch to defend our country then even I can't see how this isn't allowed, even if I hate it