Yesterday, the Supreme Court handed down three major cases with unanimous decisions. One, Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, raises additional questions over diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs that have been widely used in higher education and businesses. There is no reason to believe that DEI measures are DOA, but the decision is likely to accelerate challenges based on reverse discrimination after the Court rejected the imposition of an added burden for members of any “majority group” including straight, white males.
The immediate question before the Court was a circuit split over the standard that applies to a member of a “majority” group who claims that he or she was treated unfairly based on majority characteristics. The Sixth Circuit, along with four other circuits, held that such litigants must shoulder additional pleading burdens under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
Many of us have long argued that this long-standing rule was itself discriminatory and at odds with both constitutional and statutory authority. It was a bizarre interpretation of a law that barred employees from discriminating based on “race, color, religion, sex, and national origin.” That would ordinarily require a plaintiff to support a claim of disparate treatment by showing that she applied for a position for which she was qualified but was rejected under circumstances giving rise to an inference of unlawful discrimination. However, judges began to add their own burden of white, male or straight litigants in requiring them to show additional “background circumstances” that show the defendant is an “unusual employer” that discriminates against majority groups.
In this case, Marlean Ames, a heterosexual woman, claimed that she was demoted at the Ohio Department of Youth Services after Ginine Trim, a gay woman, replaced her supervisor. Trim hired a younger gay man allegedly based on sexual orientation. Both the district court and the Sixth Circuit dismissed the complaint because Ames failed to identify any other “background circumstances” that demonstrated her employer discriminated against heterosexual women.
“As a textual matter, Title VII’s disparate-treatment provision draws no distinctions between majority-group plaintiffs and minority-group plaintiffs. Rather, the provision makes it unlawful “to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.” The “law’s focus on individuals rather than groups [is] anything but academic.” Bostock v. Clayton County (2020). By establishing the same protections for every “individual”—without regard to that individual’s membership in a minority or majority group—Congress left no room for courts to impose special requirements on majority-group plaintiffs alone.”
Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Gorsuch, filed a concurrence that chastised lower courts and “judges creating atextual legal rules and frameworks.”
The opinion has broader implications for businesses and higher education where DEI has been used to brush aside such reverse discrimination claims. Often such claims are mocked as suggesting that members of a majority group are “victims.” While not imposing this specific “add-on,” these controversies involve much of the same bias against reverse discrimination claims. Litigants complain that they often face greater demand and resistance to their claims as opposed to employees who are part of minority groups.
Various legal groups insisted that the Sixth Circuit was correct and that majority-group litigants should shoulder an added burden, including the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, National Women’s Law Center, Latino Justice, National Employment Law Project and Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund. The views of these groups could not garner a single vote on the Court.
The Ames decision is a welcome development in bringing greater uniformity in the treatment of discrimination claims. It is also a shot across the bow of businesses and universities that have used DEI to dismiss the countervailing interests and claims of majority-group employees.
Here is the decision: Ames v. Ohio Dep’t of Youth Services
Last week the Trumptards were saying Musk walks on water. But Musk offended the head ‘tard. Now, they think Musk is a radical leftist lunatic for going against Trump’s scorched earth debt raising bill.
False, MAGA people generally agree with Musk that the pork in the “big beautiful bill” is a bad idea and should be cut out of it.
ATS – who said any such thing ?
There have been multiple posts on this.
You or one of your looney ATS friends claimed that obviously All MAGA would decide they were both right.
Now you are claiming MAGA turned on Musk.
And then we find Musk and Trump have kissed and made up.
Or maybe they were just trolling you from the start.
Regardless, the OBBB is a bloated behomoth.
It also appears to be the best that can be accomplished in a world where Democrats refuse to do what is necescary and cut spending and Republicans must do what is necescary on their own.
Regardless, If Musk can shame a few Republicans into supporting greater cuts – more power to him.
If Musk can shame a few democrats into voting for something sane – more power to him.
If Musk chooses to fund primary challenges to democrats and republicans that are unwilling to cut spending – that would be great too.
@John
Exactly. I could give a sheet about the spat – that bill is bloody awful and contrary to much of what Trump ran on. It’s beyond disappointing. What has changed? And the trolls just naturally expect everyone else to be as pinheaded and ugly as they are; such is the prison of their minds.
And yet – still not a reason to ever give the reins back to the modern left. Nope!
“What has changed?”
I fear that once again Trump is allowing some deep-state (your adjective preference may vary) moles among his advisors to exploit his apparent overwhelming desire to be acclaimed a great man to undermine his sense of what needs to be done for the country. It took longer to happen in this term than in his first, but at this point, it doesn’t seem materially different to me. I’d love to be wrong about that. The solace for me is thinking of how very much worse off we would be by now if Harris had won the election.
Shabbat Shalom everyone 😊
Have a peaceful sabbath.
Shabbat shalom to you
What an interesting dissent, basically a two parter. First, Thomas and Gorsuch point out the absurdity of the background circumstances test. A woman may be part of the majority group in nursing, but a minority in construction. Does a woman have different burdens of proof based on occupation, etc,? I can’t imagine why the majority didn’t want it in the majority opinion. But then Thomas literally asks a future litigant to give him a chance to overturn the McDonnell Douglas summary judgment standard as another atextual judge made rule. He may be right, and this is not the first time a Justice has signaled that a given subject would make a good test case, but I still wonder about whether Justices should be trolling for cases.
*Not a dissent but Gorsuch and Thomas concurring with the court in addition hammering Mcdonald Douglas made up framework.
PT confused me (easily) in the supervisor replacement, lesbian, and then demoted her and another hire gay man.
I’m not sure what it all means except discrimination is evenly applied having no distinction between majority minority. I think it’s called equal protection so here everyone has something. If you’re a woman you’re protected if men are promoted or if you’re gay and straights promoted blah blah. This had a fortuitous triple whammy because demoted, passed over twice for lgbt. The correctional facility was building a nest for lgbt. Feathering it’s nest.
Scotus took it because of Mcdonald Douglas framework is not within title VII so it’s made of whole cloth AND youth services required more evidence because she’s white, a majority, at step 1. Requiring more background circumstance at step 1. Was discrimination as others don’t have that burden.
The case was remand and step 1. Removed. Vacated the lower courts opinion.
Sue away but this was a slam dunk.
*^^^ in addition they pointed out majority minority is no longer applicable because the variation it’s hard to discern. Women are a majority in women’s sports and general population for instance.
It is also complete idiocy.
Discrimination is discrimination – always
Yes, for or against…
Positive or negative, hostile or friendly, immigrant or citizen,
The law is micromanaging the lives of citizens. Let them eat wedding cake!
I’m surprised at the violence as a personal note, incredibly violent people. Are gated communities allowed?
It appears this case is about government employment
That means the 14th amendment applies
DEI in government is constitutionally barred numerous ways
Though SCOTUS disagrees the CRA can not constitutionally apply to private actors
DEI in the private workplace is an incredibly stupid idea that appears to be DIE ing as it should
But it is legal
Lots of bad ideas are and must be legal
If the constitution only protects good ideas it protects nothing
Because government can always infringe on something by claiming it is a bad idea
Why would you think this decision applies only to govt employment? DEI is an acronym for discrimination, which, contrary to your claims, is illegal in all employment.
“[Private property is] that dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in exclusion of every other individual.”
– James Madison
“Why would you think this decision applies only to govt employment?”
Because courts decide the cases in-front of them not other nonsense.
“DEI is an acronym for discrimination”
No it is a synonym for discrimination. It is an acronym for Diversity Equity and inclusion.
“which, contrary to your claims, is illegal in all employment.”
Do you think before you post ?
“no shoes, no shirt, noservice” is discrimination.
Discrimination is just a USUALLY negatively conotated version of CHOSE. Though it is sometimes positively conoteed “discriminating viewers choose ….”
No discrimination is NOT illegal.
Only very specific forms of discrimination are illegal.
And even then only in some contexts. I am free to ban mexicans or Buddhists from my home as an example.
And unconstitutionally so. SCOTUS does not get it right all the time.
The words in the constitution must ALL have meaning, and the contracts clause prohibits government from interfering with private contracts
that includes employment. The FIRST successful challenges to Jim Crow type legislation and redlining were rooted in the contracts clause.
Government was FORCING people to discriminate. and ACOTUS following the constitution determined that Government could NOT do so.
But then along came FDR and myriads of bad SCOTUS decisions deviating from the plain text of the constitution and from common sense.
Most of which we are still stuck with.
Honestly what idiot thinks that barring private discrimination is even possible ?
Is govenrment going to review every hiring and firing decision ?
If you do not want a slow slog to totalitarianism do not expand the power of government – particularly in a way that will generate more government action without any benefit.
Should people discriminate on the basis or race, religion, …. no. But the free market does a good job of puishing bad decisions by private actors.
And if you think it is behind the times – the first amendment provides a remedy – free speech and protest, and boycott.
Regardless if as a landlord I discriminate against say nigerians – how are you ever going to prove that ?
I have never had a nigerian try to rent an apartment – and if I did – I reject 90% of applications as it is. You think you are going to be able to find a pattern ?
And even if you did – if you have the slightest knowledge of statistics, you know that random chance dictates that even norms do not distribute evenly.
The average height of american males is 5’9″ but your community could be taller or shorter – even significantly taller or shorter.
That could be something in the water, it also could be just random chance.
Or put differently patterns that deviate from the norms do NOT statistically prove anything.
If something has a 1 in a 1000 chance of occuring naturall. That means that in the US it occurs 350,000 times
The only way you can prove discrimination is if people are stupid enough to say they are discriminating.
It is ALWAYS a bad idea to make something illegal that is ALWAYS impossible to detect absent confession.
If secession is constitutional, everything Lincoln did was and remains illicit and unconstitutional, including the “Reconstruction Amendments” of Karl Marx.
Jonathan: The MAGA crowd on this blog are confused and perplexed. How could it come to this? That the richest person on the planet and the most powerful person on the planet would be facing a messy divorce. The people who thought it was a match made in heaven are suddenly faced with having to take sides in what is going to prove to be the most contentious divorce of the century. But, hey, I tried to warn you. There could never be a happy marriage between two crazy sociopathetic narcissists. Of course, the answer is simple. Don’t side with either one of these losers. Side with the American people against the whole rotten corrupt gang that pretends to be in charge.
Now you have to feel for DJT. With Melania he now has two foreigners who won’t sleep with him!
Dennis
“Two foreigners who won’t sleep with him”
I love it !!!
I wish I had thought of that.
Unfortunately the MAGA mob here doesn’t really appreciate a bit of wit.
Nice job totally ignoring the subject of the post in order to talk politics.
Dennis – if there ever was a real spat, if Trump and Musk were not Trolling you,
they are already past it.
Trump and Musk are not married. Even married couples disagree sometimes – often even. Even about important things.
Have you not ever been married ? I am married to my High School Sweet heart – for over 40 years, More than 50 since our first date.
We have had lots of disaggreements – just today.
Trump and Musk are not married and only left wing nuts thought they were.
Maybe you think that Republicans must agree on everything – because everyone on the left is required to have identical views on everything.
But that is not so.
Sen. Paul, Cruz, Hawley, Graham, and Collins each disagree with the others about something.
Yet they are all republicans, and they do not hate each other or try to censor or cancel each other as left wing nuts do.
What most of those who have walked away from the left near universally say is how liberating it is to be able to say what you think, without fear of retribution.
People who support Trump take him seriously but not litterally.
Left wing nuts take Trump litterally but not seriously.
Trump and Musk will periodically disagree – and with certainty you will post telling us all it is the begining of the end of MAGA.
To a large extent they agree – and in that agreement they work togather to accomplish things.
Do you think Musk is going to fund big spenders – left or right in 2026 ?
Do you think that if those Musk funds are elected that TRump will be stronger ? Abslutely.
Dennis was it just yesterday that you were telling us all that the Job numbers was something like 37K
“Economy
U.S. payrolls increased 139,000 in May, more than expected; unemployment at 4.2%”
CNBC
are you EVERY right about anything.
DEI cannot be DOA (Dead on Arrival) because DEI has been with us for many years. A more appropriate symbolic phrase might be “death knell”. That is perhaps the judicial branch is awakening up to the idea that policy decisions are best left to the legislative and executive branches while the judiciary should look to the text of the law to address questions that come before the courts. Currently there seems to be a number of judges that wish to correct, what appears in their view, bad policy decisions made by the executive branch. It is to be hoped that this decision will sound a death knell for judicial verdicts attempting to promote some, arguably righteous, cause that is not actually mandated by the legal text.
DEI needs to DIE. Racism is ugly, yes. But it should not be illegal.
Kilmar Abrego Garcia has been returned to the U.S. So Trump did another TACO.
So much for not being able to do anything about it. Trump the moron caves again.
Fine. Now it’ll go away. They’ll find a abregos moral character is deficit.
Has nothing to do with Trump or TACO jokes about him. That’s what happens when Geo tries to play lawyer. If he is one, on federal payroll in the aeronautics industry, he sure has much spare time on his hands to read these comments every day then research them on google before posting his “authoritative” response. Various attorneys on this blog have put him in his place. If he IS a lawyer, God help us all.
Where he will face criminal charges, and be deported AGAIN.
I am surprised. But it is still a winning issue for Trump.
It Defangs several courts. He is being tried in Tennessee for crimes in Tennessee – DC and MD courts will have no jurisdiction
It will end this nonsense from the left that Garcia is just some Maryland Dad, and not a gang banger.
It will be costly in time and money – but he likely will end up back at CECOT
And there is nothing you can do about it.
It is amusing how an editorial on a DEI related SCOTUS decision can morph into a discussion about the relationship between President Trump and Elon Musk.
My interpretation of that behavior is that people are desperate for several things…
Open discussion
Virtue Signaling
Virtue Shaming
Attention
Re DEI, is it DOA? I certainly hope so. I see nothing good in the principals pushed by the Left in that regard.
Re Musk and My President. I like them both. They are both correct. Trump is doing what he needs to do to get parts of his agenda codified. Musk is absolutely correct about the spending. If we don’t see about $1T -2T in recisions this Summer we are phuct. Is their breakup real? Could be. What I do know is that they are both very smart and they are both great showmen. It is making for some awesome theater🤣
As an aside, the parking lot at work was very heavy with luxury cars. I always resented that my tax money was subsidizing $100k luxury virtue signaling devices. When I found out my name was in Tesla’s HR dept I did not rise to the bait. I went and bought a big Ford pickup to park next to the Eurotrash. Next up, winch to hitch rehab of a 70’s truck. No more Si Valley traffic for me🤣🤣🤣
Old My wife and I have 3 other vehicles. The only one I love the most a 1994 Toyota land cruiser with 300 + miles with no mayor breakdowns. The my wife has a 2015 honda CRV 147miles, with no issues. I also have a 2013 Ford F-150 with 130.000 before the motor broke.
My next truck, if I can find one one would be a 1980 Chev or Ford truck.
Try 1974 Chevy Nova. Hint: you will be able to use space between the engine as extra storage for your luggage. There are just basics under the hood. That is all you need. And still works.
OFF TOPIC
My wife had a 1966 Chevy C20 that she inherited from her father. I beleive the engine was a 327. You could fit 5 people under the hood.
Nothing there that was not needed. She sold it. Someone restored it and is driving it arround as an antque. It still does everything it did 50 years ago.
My wifes 2nd car was a Nova – though older than 74. We were rear ended in it once.
No damage to the Nova. a couple of thosaund to the car that hit us.
But we did have a whopper of a headache for a few days.
One of the vehicles that I drive is a 2001 ford F-350 with 330,000 miles It is beat to schiff. dents all over, a bit of rust, needs new mirrors, The rails on the bed are crushed and it STILL hauls over a ton without a problem.
It is a mess, and it keeps going and going with no signs of stopping.
“I was hired to lead Jeffrey Epstein’s defense as his criminal lawyer 9 days before he died. He sought my advice for months before that. I can say authoritatively, unequivocally, and definitively that he had no information to hurt President Trump. I specifically asked him!”
– David Schoen
Why the delays on releasing Epstein docs?
Would the reputation of the US suffer irreparable damage? Not a valid reason!
Would more Republicans be outed than Democrats, shifting the balance of power? Coin toss on that one. Not a valid reason!
Are there associated cases that would be damaged by disclosure? Possibly. Still, let the chips fall where they may!
Note to Jizzlaine: you’re in prison, stop thinking like a blackmailer, cry havoc and release the hounds. What’s the worst that can happen? “They” kill you? That may happen regardless. Have a little fun watching all the corrupt paedos running around in a panic worse than a USAID budget cut🤣
I believe the Epstein documents are being carefully reviewed by the DOJ and FBI for bad info that could discredit the whole Epstein report. Once the report has been verified, I believe it will come out.
If you think that the Clinton, Biden, Comey, Brennan and Garland cartel wouldn’t have leaked Donald Trump’s name in the Epstein case if they could have years ago, they would have. So, they went with Russian Pee tape hoax.
So you BELIEVE that the Epstein documents are being reviewed by the DOJ and the FBI.
Do you also BELIEVE in the Tooth Fairy.
What about Santa Claus !!!!!
The Easter Bunny is real .
Right ????
I’m sure you also have monsters in your closet
And Boogeymen under your bed
“The Easter Bunny is real .”
He was. Our poodles caught him and ate him last week. No Easter for the kids next year.
Now that’s funny and witty.
I like it.
Why can’t the rest of the MAGA mob come up with witty responses to my comments ?????
Under Biden……….. Yeah they would have released it. Stop playing stupid
Old.
If Biden and his DOJ had any info on Trump and these girls. You can be sure they would have dumped it during the election. Which means they have zip
Dustoff, critical thinking is no good for your health, ya know.
Ronald Coase and Milton Freidment lived to 99.
Critical thinking is aparently very good for your health.
Epstein lived by blackmail and extortion.
You know it’s in there somewhere.
Long ago -= probably only a month or so, but so much has happened it seems years.
Bondi announced that when she sent agents to the SDNY she found that they had 1000’s of video tapes from Epstien.
Releasing these is very difficult. DOJ has no duty to the perpitarators, but there are victims of trafficking in these videos’s and DOJ can not just DOX them onto the internet. They did not volunteer to be Onlyfans fodder.
MAGA stalwart Jack Posobiec has some thoughts about Trump’s spat with Elmo.
He tweeted the following:
Some of y’all can’t handle 2 high agency males going at it and it really shows
This is direct communication (phallocentric) vs indirect communication (gynocentric)
I understand you aren’t used to it
https://x.com/JackPosobiec/status/1930724723563913578
The gayest tweet I have ever read.
Most appropriate for the start of Gay Month.
Most republicans have never seen 2 gay men fight before
MAGA
Make America Gay Again
He admits he likes to see two males going at it.
What else needs to be said.
Many have long suspected that MAGA warrior Jack Posobiec is phallocentric.
He’s a navy boy, so not really surprising
Do the phalluses have to touch?
I’m a little confused.
DARREN, SERIOUSLY?
You may be watching the “Art of the Deal” worked to perfection.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Sheesh!
Dear Prof Turley,
It would appear DEI is alive and well.
To the extent this woman was ‘passed over/demoted’ because of her sexual orientation.
*note. it’s not like ‘racial’ discrimination, see e.g. slavery, which clearly undermined the principles of diversity, equity and inclusion. .. often for mere material gain!
I never argue about human consensual sexuality, if I can help it. I have learned ‘no’ means no. .. when I even think of a woman now, I think of a man ‘then take away reason and accountability’.
*thankfully, the world is ruled, unerringly, by the ‘golden rule’ .. . it is upheld by the twin pillars of reward and punishment.
Can we go back to Mr. Turley’s essay on how Elon should receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom from Trump?
Alternatively, you could “go back” to communist party headquarters and get a new assignment, let’s say, East Timor?
I hear Stephen Miller’s wife, Katie, has joined Elmo’s stable of breeders.
She married Stephen, then moved on to Elon
Talk about poor life choices !!!!!
Actually, she is the only one of Elmo’s breeders who made a move UPWARDS!!!!?
Congress has no enumerated power to exploit bias or favor in the consideration or treatment of any particular individual.
Americans certainly have the constitutional freedom to make distinctions, mark a difference, and discriminate.
Americans certainly have the constitutional freedom to decide with whom to associate or socialize and whom to ignore or reject, if not directly in the Constitution, then by the 9th Amendment.
________________
Ninth Amendment
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Congress has no enumerated power to regulate private lives, private property, private preferences, private choices, or private commerce.
Congress has the power to regulate commerce among nations, states, and Indian tribes.
Congress has no enumerated power to compel or ensure employment or success in any endeavors of individuals.
Congress has the power to legislate against bodily injury, property damage, etc.
The principles of communism, such as central planning, control of the means of production, redistribution of wealth, and social engineering, and the principles inherent in the slogans “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” and the “dictatorship of the proletariat (hired help)” constitute antithetical and unconstitutional collectivism and despotism from the disturbed mind of the invalid and pathological inebriate, Karl Marx.
Constitutional American government exists to provide maximal freedom to individuals while severely limiting and restricting what is designed and intended to be infinitesimal government.
*. What strikes this unlearned mind is discrimination cannot be for nor against.
Cars drive forward and in reverse. Personally I’ve been troubled by the idea of neutral.
I’ll read the case in its entirety but this was a public youth services case and the straight woman was passed over and then demoted a second time both for homosexual reasons. Clearly the youth services had a mission statement of serving the youth homosexuals and not youths in general. Obviously discrimination for homosexuals rather than against straights.
⚠ WARNING. Skip the later posts. The trolls are up early and off topic. It’s always enjoyable when on topic.
“I was hired to lead Jeffrey Epstein’s defense as his criminal lawyer 9 days before he died. He sought my advice for months before that. I can say authoritatively, unequivocally, and definitively that he had no information to hurt President Trump. I specifically asked him!”
– David Schoen
**^^^ skip TO the earlier or older posts. 😏.
This case is about homosexuals in correctional facilities employment. It’s just one more example of multiracial, multigender,multicolor problems, multicultural problems in a diverse population all trying to achieve equal opportunity and when that fails equal economic conditions.
The homosexual advantage in this case doesn’t apply. It’s not listed but somehow twisted itself into gender standing? It belongs somewhere in the miasma of Americans with disabilities. I’m a biologist and no, do your own homework. Maybe talk Estovir into doing your homework.
The core problem is majority v. Minority rule as found in the idea of democracy. It’s also within other disciplines as supplanting cultures as in sociology and the intersection of politics and sociology.
Laws should contain universals. This removes Majority v. Minority. All people need food for instance is a universal and laws for purchase, distribution , quality, quantity, and more are appropriate but specific foods such as wedding cakes are not or should not be part of food and equal availability.
Because of biology when a political system seeks to micromanage the lives of people the system is doomed. Hire the most qualified is a universal.
Ms Ames cisgender birthing person may or may not be the most qualified and the law forbids negative assessments and it also forbids positive assessment qualifications as to race, color, gender, religion and somehow lgbt found its way in, too.
Here’s the rule: hire, fire, employ, promote, demote, based on merit. See disabilities act for accommodations and mitigations otherwise. A disability is defined as a major life function impairment. Homosexual in and of itself have none as surrogacy is available. I’m being silly now…
I’ll stay with my tribe when possible and apply the law appropriately in public discourse and action. If I see a willful supplanting of the American culture I’ll fight you to the death. ☺
The idea with merit is each person will find an appropriate fit as to his or her individual merit. Merit is a universal.
I think neutral may have been found.
Something seems to have happened to Trump in the middle of a post.
Trump posted the following in the early hours of the morning:
“Groceries, gasoline, energy,”
Did he have a stroke ???
Did he fall asleep on the toilet again ?????
Had to take a dump.
We don’t need to know the details
Diaper change most likely.
Actually he has been replaced by a robot.
He was just rebooting.
“I was hired to lead Jeffrey Epstein’s defense as his criminal lawyer 9 days before he died. He sought my advice for months before that. I can say authoritatively, unequivocally, and definitively that he had no information to hurt President Trump. I specifically asked him!”
– David Schoen
*. Aren’t there 1000s of videos to view? It’ll take time to watch them.
All down loser… LOL
What’s the category , anon? I’ll take universal needs for 1000, Alex.
It is not “reverse discrimination” or “reverse racism.” It is discrimination, and racism.
Yes, Miss Karen. I love it. It’s for or against, TOO. It’s positive and negative. You shall pass no law hostile to —> take your pick! Religion, speech, press ? The case was advancing homosexuality and not negative to heterosexuality. It’s enough to decriminalization. It leaves a void of neutrality.
Hahahaha….
Dear Mr. Turley, just a short note to the gleeful Dennis: President Trump and Elon Musk are already working on a reconciliation. Have yet to see any Democrat reaching out to Tapper or Jean-Pierre.
Elon who ??????
Never heard of him.
I’m sure Trump has never heard of him either.
I believe he was the coffee boy for the Whitehouse staff.
Actually he was the covfefe boy if I remember correctly.
OT
President Lincoln was a great president.
Precedent is an established rule or authority.
President Lincoln imposed martial law.
President Lincoln suspended habeas corpus.
President Trump must now impose martial law and suspend habeas corpus to suppress the rebellion of the juristocracy.
The Sixth Circuit did what Judge Bork warned against in The Tempting of America: The Political Seduction of the Law (1990). The court sought to achieve a political end by reading into the statute an onerous requirement only for whites, straights, males, that simply is not in the text of the law. Even the Supreme Court’s most left-wing Justices are on board that that’s improper, and the Court’s unanimous opinion was authored by Justice Jackson.
Such a text-based decision by Scotus is a tribute to the late, great Justice Antonin Scalia. Through force of intellect he managed to convince even the most activist jurists that such non-textual interpretations based on an ill-defined, and assumed, “intent of Congress,” is improper.
NotSoOld: Nice. Thanks.
Good to see you Lin.
-Uncle Henry
I only read the dissent. Better language with the common man in mind.
Oops smh…concurring Thomas and Gorsuch. ^^^
That’s judges writing laws…