Posted on 05/23/2022 7:39:04 AM PDT by Morgana
I believe they have about 33 cases left to rule on for this term (I may be incorrect on my math). I assume they will issue rulings on the most controversial cases on the last day they issue those so they can get the “hell out of dodge”. They are going to probably have additional “decision” days added to the calendar unless they plan to issue about 7 or 8 decisions for the next four Mondays.
Don’t they usually release the biggest opinions at the very end of the term?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
SOP! Nothing new.
Roberts is a horrible passive-aggressive jerk.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
A duplicitous CJ and a duplicitous RC.
Can’t blame them, esp. those with children.
The leftists are going to make it intolerable to be in or near DC this summer.
A Color Revolution every two years.
I would guess that the author of the majority opinion (Alito, I think) is making sure his argument is bulletproof.
Correct, although the draft that was released by the culprit was already pretty much bulletproof, especially when compared to the Roe decision.
Question: Can SCOTUS hear a case and decline to offer a ruling?
You are better off changing your screen name, because when you post your opinion with out a real source, and if I see it, I’ll be there.
......................................................
I understand your aggravation, but are not opinions expressed all the time and in every imaginable venue that aren’t predicated on any “real source”?
If he did that, then there would be no abortion in any state.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Obviously!
Not sure I understand your question, but yes, the SC hears cases and declines to rule, kind of. It is weird. Example:
https://news.ballotpedia.org/2020/12/21/u-s-supreme-court-declines-to-rule-on-merits-of-census-case/
Conservative principles argue — if we must err — that we err to the benefit of the doubt, which is in this case to ascribe full personhood at conception, thereby bestowing the full canopy of Constitutional rights and protections upon “the least of these” at the hour of their earliest need.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
Perfectly stated!
Hence my comment hoping Alito might beef up the original.
It would be a fitting repartee to all the blood cultists chanting in the streets.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes, and my hope as well.
That would be one of the easiest things to discover, considering the technology forensics that are used today. That it hasn’t happened yet makes me highly suspicious of Roberts.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
A decision might be made on humanitarian grounds by the Justices or by the Chief Justice to not reveal who the Leaker was. And, it’s quite possible that the Leaker may never become known to anyone but the Leaker.
Say what?
That is not what I meant. I just meant that the decision will overturn Roe, as the leak implied.
The liberal justices are still reaching for a dissenting opinion more rational than “until my face turns blue”.
Brave, brave, brave, brave, Sir Roberts, he buggering off, he’s...
Every one is entitled to their own opinion, but the tinypubbie pretended for months that the bullshit he was pimping was real accurate data and we were all going to die from chi-com19.
He kept up this fraud for months even after he had to know the numbers were coming from 'cooked books'.
After the facts were known, following the death, mask pimp, dr fauchewit and backing him with fake numbers has driven me over the cliff.
When I challenged his source {worldometer} he just ignored it, and he can ignore all of my posts, but they will keep on coming.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.