Skip to main content
Topic: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision? (Read 22573 times)

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #150
See how dangerously stupid this is? As I said, the case has already been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
You not only don't understand the case, you don't even understand the basic "facts" you think are part of it... TDS hasn't a cure (that I know of).  "Ignorance is remedial. Stupidity is forever."

Lawyers do what lawyers do. Just like prosecutors and judges who are political activists do what they do...

But enlighten me, ersi: What was the case? :)
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman
 (iBook G4 - Panther | Mac mini i5 - El Capitan)

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #151
You not only don't understand the case, you don't even understand the basic "facts" you think are part of it...
Says the guy who thinks that capital and Capitol are the same thing. And declaring war (expressly mandated in the constitution) and declaring insurrection (expressly punishable by the constitution) are the same thing legally and morally.

You are not in a position to tell who understands anything or doesn't. You are not even in a position where you can be helped out of your delusion. You are projecting in the worst way.

Seriously, every time you feel like saying "you don't understand" or "you don't know" you need to stop and examine yourself carefully, because there are tons of things you are missing every time. This discussion is far over your head. You have completely lost the plot.

Edit: The saddest thing is how you are contributing nothing of value. You are not citing a single fact (well, this would require you to know what the word means, again...). You are never following up on points that others made, e.g. the difference between U.S. and international law that jax brought up or Lichtman's predictions (and his comments on how Bush v Gore elections went) or the fact that Trump is using the presidential immunity in attempt to overturn the hush money conviction while the hush money conviction had nothing to do with his being the president. It's really sad that you have completely, 100%, lost the plot and also lost the basic capacity to stay relevant in the discussion.

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #152
When asked "What was the case?" ersi waves his hands...

The case was simple, really: Bookkeeping misdemeanors[1] whose statute of limitations had run out were bootstrapped to felonies on the theory that they constituted election interference in the 2016 Presidential Election, even though they were "committed" after the election and two Manhattan DAs had declined to prosecute[2] and the FEC (Federal Elections Commission) (which is actually tasked with prosecuting such) also declined to prosecute...

My take: Knowing a conviction would be overturned (for numerous reasons), the aim of the prosecution was to keep Trump off the campaign trail[3] — which it did! But alas! it didn't harm the Trump campaign. :)
Involving payments for a Non-Disclosure Agreement with Stormy Daniels, which weren't illegal...
Including Bragg himself!
Secondarily, a win for Trump on appeal wouldn't come before the 2024 election, and he'd be tainted as a "convicted felon" in the meantime... Mission accomplished!
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman
 (iBook G4 - Panther | Mac mini i5 - El Capitan)

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #153
Everything you say is nonsense and lies. It's nonsense because none of it explains how presidential immunity can apply (completely apart from the fact that SCOTUS ruling on absolute immunity is flatly wrong) to the case. So, can you try again: How does presidential immunity apply to the hush money case? And better don't try, because it doesn't. The best reason pro-Trump pundits can come up with is SCOTUS decision, but everybody knows it's the wrong decision made to cover Trump's ass specifically.

And, for your benefit, an incomplete list of the lies that you crammed in your post:
- The payment scheme for the non-disclosure agreement was illegal. To say it was legal is a lie. You were lied to. The payment scheme for the non-disclosure agreement put Michael Cohen to jail,[1] which means that Trump, the guy on behalf of whom those things were made, belongs to jail. There's no theory about it. These are facts, if justice matters.
- The "after election" part was only some reimbursements to Cohen in order to complete the payment scheme. Everything with regard to Stormy Daniels had taken place before elections for the sake of the looks of the candidate Trump.
- Let's also take your "knowing a conviction would be overturned"... Who is going to overturn it and why? If the bet is on the Trump-appointed corruption-mired absolute-immunity SCOTUS majority, then I guess everybody knows this indeed, because they have made it clear that their purpose of existence is now to ensure presidency for Trump regardless of all of his disqualifications. But what legal reason is there? Because legally, Cohen went to jail for the same thing, and Trump should have been jailed just for violating gag orders already.
- "To keep Trump off the campaign trail"... So you are against prosecuting criminals who organise a political campaign to cover their asses? If yes (and that's an obvious yes), then when you bring up the legal aspects (which you do without any comprehension of the issues at hand and implications at stake) it's just a smokescreen for your hyperpartisanship.
- "A win for Trump on appeal wouldn't come before the 2024 election, and he'd be tainted as a "convicted felon" in the meantime..." His reputation was tainted (what a ridiculous understatement) before he ever ran for president. He has managed to bluff his way through it, but it's all bluff. He was morally corrupt empty shell of a liar with many criminal secrets long before, with hundreds of court litigations under his belt already. You personally perhaps don't lie intentionally, but stop being so stupid as to lie unintentionally with every word!

Moreover, you are omitting many lies, e.g. that Trump is saying he did not sleep with a porn star. He did. He is also a rapist. He is also sex trafficker. He is a routine business fraudster and tax evader. Many of his worst crimes with global implications, such as his machinations with Russians (where Mueller Report barely scratches the surface) and Saudis, are going unprosecuted. But in the Q/MAGA world Biden's age is a worse crime than any of Trump's crimes + disqualifying character flaws.

Next time, to make it simpler for yourself, abstain from lies.

Your only value here is that you are representing the wackiest Q/MAGA point of view, which is otherwise unrepresented as long as SF is silent. Unfortunately that point of view is so one-sided that it got old many years ago.

And what's the case that I keep referring to? It's many things, so many that they are over your head, but it includes that you are an entrenched hopeless hyperpartisan hypocrite. You are only in for Trump and you really do not care for law and constitution, justice or anything else. You are here merely proclaiming the cult of your Leader. It's also the case that Trump is election thief and insurrectionist. It was there live for you to see on January 6th 2021, but Q/MAGA wackadoodles only see what their Leader tells them to see. And Trump also stole state secrets. In a normal country, these are reasons to disqualify him as a presidential candidate, but USA is not normal.

Mitch McConnell said not too long after the insurrection that "we have criminal justice system" and "former Presidents are not immune from being held accountable". Yet when it comes to Trump, the most obviously unqualified and dangerously insane guy you ever had in top office, you apparently do not have criminal justice system and he is declared immune.
How did you forget this part again? I know: Your fav pundits are not reminding you. And the way Michael Cohen was jailed includes campaign finance violations, which would have been a good reason to add them to the Trump case also. It should be clear to you: In the hush money case, Trump is guilty of everything that Michael Cohen is guilty of plus more.

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #154
Everything you say is nonsense and lies.
You can refute the facts of the case? :) Please do!

I didn't claim that the recent SCOTUS case on Presidential Immunity had any application to the so-called "Hush Money" case. (A press release of Cohen's plea deal is here. Parse it as you will: Trump was not charged. I wonder why? :) )
The payment scheme for the non-disclosure agreement was illegal. To say it was legal is a lie. You were lied to. The payment scheme for the non-disclosure agreement put Michael Cohen to jail,[1] which means that Trump, the guy on behalf of whom those things were made, belongs to jail. There's no theory about it. These are facts, if justice matters.
So: If someone claims I benefited from someone else's criminal actions, I'm guilty too? (Interesting theory — of justice.)
The "after election" part was only some reimbursements to Cohen in order to complete the payment scheme. Everything with regard to Stormy Daniels had taken place before elections for the sake of the looks of the candidate Trump.
Or husband Trump... but you wouldn't understand such.
Let's also take your "knowing a conviction would be overturned"... Who is going to overturn it and why?
The Appeals Court of New York. Silly: There were so many reversible errors in that trial that even the brilliant Bragg hasn't counted them! (I know you don't see any, because Due Process is a "foreign" phrase! :) )
"To keep Trump off the campaign trail"... So you are against prosecuting criminals who organise a political campaign to cover their asses?
Do you seriously contend that Trump runs for re-election in 2024 to avoid prosecution? :) (If Trump had not run, none of the cases against him would have been "prosecuted"!)

I guess this is your actual argument:
Moreover, you are omitting many lies, e.g. that Trump is saying he did not sleep with a porn star. He did.
You were there?! What kind of sicko are you? :) (I mean, just in your imagination, of course!)

Let's face it: This is your real understanding
He is also a rapist. He is also sex trafficker. He is a routine business fraudster and tax evader. Many of his worst crimes with global implications, such as his machinations with Russians (where Mueller Report barely scratches the surface) and Saudis, are going unprosecuted. But in the Q/MAGA world Biden's age is a worse crime than any of Trump's crimes + disqualifying character flaws.
In other words, you read and believe the tabloids and  so-called Russian disinfo.
And Trump also stole state secrets.
Really? Might they have been documents related to the phony Russia, Russia! Hoax? I can see why Democrats would be concerned about those coming out! Unfortunately, the President has the authority to declassify documents!

Let's face it: You don't like Trump for some reason, so you believe anything and everything against him; and that, for you, is good enough to pronounce judgement! But, poor ersi, you don't rule the world, and you can't support your angst... (I suspect, because you won't be honest! :) )
As you said
And what's the case that I keep referring to? It's many things, so many that they are over your head, but it includes that you are an entrenched hopeless hyperpartisan hypocrite. You are only in for Trump and you really do not care for law and constitution, justice or anything else. You are here merely proclaiming the cult of your Leader. It's also the case that Trump is election thief and insurrectionist. It was there live for you to see on January 6th 2021, but Q/MAGA wackadoodles only see what their Leader tells them to see. And Trump also stole state secrets. In a normal country, these are reasons to disqualify him as a presidential candidate, but USA is not normal.

Mitch McConnell said not too long after the insurrection that "we have criminal justice system" and "former Presidents are not immune from being held accountable". Yet when it comes to Trump, the most obviously unqualified and dangerously insane guy you ever had in top office, you apparently do not have criminal justice system and he is declared immune.
In other words, you don't like Trump. So: Trump is guilty, even when he is found not guilty!
Because you say so!
That -in your mind- is Justice denied!

You could be in for a rude awakening: Trump could win re-election and the various trials would go away (for their own and individual deficiencies) and those suffering TDS will cry themselves to sleep — and wake to a saner world! :)


进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman
 (iBook G4 - Panther | Mac mini i5 - El Capitan)

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #155
I didn't claim that the recent SCOTUS case on Presidential Immunity had any application to the so-called "Hush Money" case.
But SCOTUS apparently does. Can you defend them or can we agree that SCOTUS is indefensible? The problem is that SCOTUS is indefensible on more points than just this one.

And it's a bigger problem that you are consistent on only one point: Trump is holy!

(A press release of Cohen's plea deal is here. Parse it as you will: Trump was not charged. I wonder why? :) )
You already forgot that Trump is a convicted felon in connection with those very events?! Facts are clearly not your thing, never were.

So: If someone claims I benefited from someone else's criminal actions, I'm guilty too? (Interesting theory — of justice.)
Where does this idiotic baby-babble come from? Do you need to be reminded multiple times over a single post what case we are talking about here?

Of course you're guilty, when the "someone" is your goon whose job it is to cover up your crimes, misdemeanors and self-inflicted reputational damage by whatever means, criminal or other, because that's what he is getting paid for from you. It's how mafia dons go down.

I see you wrote some more meanwhile. But you did not say anything that changes anything, so nevermind. Except:

Unfortunately, the President has the authority to declassify documents!
So you're in the declassify-by-thinking-about-it camp :lol: Thanks for confirming that you're totally in the imaginary alternative facts universe.

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #156
As always, ersi: Hand waving, and vehemence from you! Shall we wait and see what happens? (Or will you vilify the U.S. justice system and democracy for not agreeing with the High Holy ersi, judge of all that is — what? Your preconceptions?!)

BTW: The SCOTUS Presidential Immunity case does not implicate the so-called Hush-Money case in Manhattan. Merchan has to go through the motions of "judging"...[1] But even I can see at a glance that if there's any new evidence or admissibility of evidence problems, the lower court has the responsibility to make such determinations; not an appeals court and not SCOTUS.
Well, he wanted this case! And his daughter has likely made enough money off of it! He'll likely retire from his temporary gig before the election. :)
Pretend to "judg-y" stuff! :)
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman
 (iBook G4 - Panther | Mac mini i5 - El Capitan)

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #157
BTW: The SCOTUS Presidential Immunity case does not implicate the so-called Hush-Money case in Manhattan. Merchan has to go through the motions of "judging"...
The latter is one of your classic half-sentences, worth pointing out this time.

Merchan has to go through the motions of judging — judging what? Judging whether the immunity applies or not! This renders your first statement false. SCOTUS immunity ruling has direct implications on all Trump's cases, making the legal process over former presidents impossible, because judges have to do the extra work of adjudicating "absolute immunity" over every little piece of evidence, and this includes the hush money case, because the defence has already presented motions to that effect, e.g. that Trump's tweets in the hush money case are immune.

You are wrong as always. You should seriously ask why everybody half a globe away knows the American so-called system better than you do. Anyway, since this is so, you are the absolute doofus.

As a reminder, some of the more obvious things you have been wrong about earlier:
- That the E. Jean Carroll rape trial will be appealed successfully. Nope. Instead Trump got double-trialled for this due to repeated defamation, and another one is in the air. He is the rapist.
- That Durham Report will impeach Biden. Nope.
- That Biden is impeachable for bribery. Nope.
- That Biden did something corrupt in Ukraine. Nope.

Not to mention the far more obvious crimes of Trump, too obvious for you to comprehend.

You are always wrong about everything. Whenever you say somebody else is wrong, you are projecting. Go learn the difference between capital and Capitol, then maybe you can move on to harder things such as the fact that what the constitution allows is legal and what it prohibits is illegal, not the other way round as you have it right now.

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #158
That the E. Jean Carroll rape trial will be appealed successfully. Nope. Instead Trump got double-trialled for this due to repeated defamation, and another one is in the air. He is the rapist.
l'll just leave you with this: AP reported on the trial at the time and said "The verdict was split: Jurors rejected Carroll’s claim that she was raped, finding Trump responsible for a lesser degree of sexual abuse."  This was during the #MeToo movement.
Of course, you''d already joined the sufferers of Trump Derangement Syndrome. :)

But, since you're such a legal scholar, why did Temporary Judge Merchan allow the prosecution to call Stormy Daniels as a witness?
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman
 (iBook G4 - Panther | Mac mini i5 - El Capitan)

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #159
And I'll just leave you with this:  Among other frivolous appeals and motions, Trump attempted specifically to get the word "rape" ruled out. He said that the word would be a defamation of him. But instead it was ruled that when he objects to the word "rape" it is him defaming E. Jean Carroll.

You said that the appeal would be easy. To the contrary. Trump was judicially shut up and must pay up. He also tried the presidential immunity trick already in that trial to no avail.

You are favouring a rapist for your next president.[1]

But, since you're such a legal scholar, why did Temporary Judge Merchan allow the prosecution to call Stormy Daniels as a witness?
My legal expertise of American law vastly surpasses yours, so watch and learn. I will speak to you when you deserve. Right now you are in deep deficit of merit.
Not to mention serial adulterer, convicted felon, business fraudster, insurrectionist, nepotist dictator wannabe, peddler of state secrets and election thief.

 

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #160
:) No answer, as usual. Hear-say. hyperbole, libel and outright lies...You -of all people- should know that political prosecutions depend only upon who's in power!
You are favouring a rapist for your next president.
We survived Bill Clinton's two terms... :)
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman
 (iBook G4 - Panther | Mac mini i5 - El Capitan)

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #161
Let's add "rapist" to the list of words that you do not know. You do not deserve an explanation, but here goes, out of my plentiful generosity. Clinton's famous impeachment incident involved consensual sex. That's not rape. Very sad that even this is over your head.

Sexual misconduct is not necessarily connected to professional misconduct. Trump is afflicted with debilitating professional misconduct, while Clinton is not, even though both Trump and Clinton have fairly egregious personal misconduct. I am positive that both of them are pedos, for example. In Clinton's case, this has not affected his ability to do politics, but even a doofus like yourself should see that Trump is not getting anything professionally right, be it real estate or politics.

The only area where Trump is "effective" is media, but that's in the worst tabloid way, perfectly illustrating why he is properly termed as bad citizen. If you were reasonable, you would not want him for a neighbour or employer, for example. But you are not reasonable, so give it a go, doofus.

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #162
Clinton's famous impeachment incident involved consensual sex
His impeachment "involved" his suborning perjury in a civil trial concerning sexual harassment... He was subsequently disbarred for two years, fined $90,000 and paid a hefty sum to the woman who sued him (Paula Jones received $850,000 in a settlement.) He was acquitted in the Senate trial.
You likely are referring to Ms. Lewinsky — because of your tabloid mentality. What are you, 12 years old? :)
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman
 (iBook G4 - Panther | Mac mini i5 - El Capitan)

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #163
Clinton's famous impeachment incident involved consensual sex
His impeachment "involved" his suborning perjury in a civil trial concerning sexual harassment... He was subsequently disbarred for two years, fined $90,000 and paid a hefty sum to the woman who sued him (Paula Jones received $850,000 in a settlement.)
Clinton's sexual harassment involved "propositioning" and exposure. Still different from what Trump the rapist did. Moreover, as I just explained, the professional conduct and qualifications matter more, but clearly not for you.

You go back to your dunce corner. You'll get out when you answer the following sanity check questions:
- How much of this did you buy? https://ncmint.com/trump-never-surrender-mugshot-2-bill/
- Who won the 2020 presidential elections?
- Is Trump associated with Project 2025?


Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #164
Whiloe you're in "idiot mode", I'll placate you:
- How much of this did you buy? https://ncmint.com/trump-never-surrender-mugshot-2-bill/ Nada, amigo.
- Who won the 2020 presidential elections? Joseph Biden (with caveats — that your understanding of U.S. election laws won't allow you to consider... :) )
- Is Trump associated with Project 2025? He's said no. But I'm not sure what your problem would be... In case you haven't noticed, Trump is not an ideologue.
But pray tell, what problem do you see with Project 2025?

进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman
 (iBook G4 - Panther | Mac mini i5 - El Capitan)

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #165
Let's see. One correct answer, one qualified correct answer, and one wrong answer. Could I say you half-passed the sanity check with caveats? Should I take into account that your first line is pure projection or should I disregard it because projection is your normal mode?

- Is Trump associated with Project 2025? He's said no.
Trump lies. I mean, Trump is lying specifically about this. In his agitation speeches he quotes from Project 2025. The authors and project drivers include people like Peter Navarro and others who served in Trump administration, so Trump is lying when he says he doesn't know them. And the project is substantially a creation of the Heritage Foundation whom Trump definitely knows. So, pants-on-fire level liar.

But I'm not sure what your problem would be... In case you haven't noticed, Trump is not an ideologue.
But pray tell, what problem do you see with Project 2025?
Right, ideology is over Trump's head. Which means somebody else is feeding the ideology to him. Trump's ideology is whatever sounds good for major donors when he is doing fundraising.

And what problem do I see with it? The immediate problem is that this is the point where you failed the sanity test.

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #166
The immunity decision is wrong on a deeper level than the dissenting opinions let on. Presidential immunity should be compared to diplomatic immunity or immunity of parliamentary delegates. It is the person that is immune from arrest in a given official capacity. The person's actions still (stand or) fall under law.

Say, Russian diplomats in Baltic countries serially driving drunk and ramming other cars, putting people in danger. They can be ticketed for that and the embassy will be notified, but the traffic police cannot arrest the diplomat because of diplomatic immunity. The diplomat can only be arrested when we deem him a spy, i.e. he is actually not a diplomat.

So here, I'm saying it: SCOTUS majority are a bunch of Oakdalean redneck doofuses. They granted absolute immunity to "official acts" for all eternity, preventing "official acts" from being used in judicial proceedings, thus demonstrating that they don't know what immunity is.

To be able to use the phrase "nobody is above the law" means that the deeds anybody does are prosecutable and litigable according to law, but immunity means that certain office-holders can stay in office to the end of their term. When out of office, they are fair game. That is, according to law Trump (reminder: Trump is not president! He is out of office!) was litigable, but SCOTUS decided that Trump is god. The current SCOTUS is a bunch of Trump's goons, doing his bidding, even to the point of dropping any and all legal expertise.

USA is a third world dump with major delusions of grandeur.

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #167
The immunity decision is wrong on a deeper level than the dissenting opinions let on.
Let me stop you there...

The executive of our federal government has certain prescribed duties. To effectively execute these, he is -by law, precedent and long tradition- granted certain privileges and immunities. Seldom have such been questioned directly. (See the Nixon Watergate Scandal. And the Clinton impeachment. :) )

The leader of a nation is not quite the same as a mere representative of such.[1] Or would you argue that Socialism is the only "get out of jail free" card, ideologically? (You know; The Arc of History!) Remember when Khrushchev said: "We will bury you!" He meant that the U.S. and capitalism in general would perish trying to compete with the U.S.S.R and socialism. What happened?)

BTW: Would you prosecute each and every Estonian "chief executive" for dereliction of duty?
(Maybe prosecute their descendants?)
You don't talk about your country's politics. Perhaps because you used to be a minor functionary before under the Soviets? (Can you not convince your fellow-countrymen that you offer them anything of value?) Are you feeling — Biden-ed? :)

One might say, hubris has its obvious drawbacks. But shouldn't one add that Reality matters more?!
That's the main problem with ideologues, ersi: They're "system"  -whatever it is- proceeds and supposedly transcends Reality! It's hard to make people keep believing that!

Marxists have no such problem! Just kill enough people and you win! :) Yeah!

Uh, no thank you.
But how would you know? Your country has so often and for so long been ruled by conquerors that you don't know the difference! You're used to being serfs or slaves or Quislings! But don't mistake me: I mean you, personally, ersi: Not your countrymen. You imbibed Marxism as a babe, and you still crave your "mother's milk"! I'm sorry that that happened to you; but it wasn't my fault, nor was it something you can blame someone else for. Life is what it is.
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman
 (iBook G4 - Panther | Mac mini i5 - El Capitan)

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #168
The executive of our federal government has certain prescribed duties. To effectively execute these, he is -by law, precedent and long tradition- granted certain privileges and immunities. Seldom have such been questioned directly. (See the Nixon Watergate Scandal. And the Clinton impeachment. :) )
From Watergate everybody (except you) learned that Nixon was alone in thinking that "When the president does it, then it's not illegal" was the principle. But now SCOTUS overturned it in their judicial activism: When the president does it, then it is beyond question, beyond scrutiny. And not only when the president is in office, but forever!

Seriously, get some help, urgently. And I don't mean online.

Re: What's Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court decision?

Reply #169
But now SCOTUS overturned it in their judicial activism
You could get someone to read the actual decisions to you... Oh! Wait: That's what you already did. :) You need better sources.
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman
 (iBook G4 - Panther | Mac mini i5 - El Capitan)