suppose the Trump administration achieves a 6-3 hard right majority on the Supreme Court, or maybe more if other Democrats like Breyer or Sotomayor are gone. What rulings would you like to see them try to overturn?
my top picks: >united states v. wong kim ark birthright citizenship >griggs v. duke power landmark case on disparate impact >roe v. wade only after we deport the indios :^)
I would like to say the court should be respectful of the law, and unlike the left, we shouldn't legislate from the bench, but I spent years scared shitless about the Second Amendment, so fuck'em.
Jason Diaz
Id just want them to leave roe vs wade alone mainly. Its one of the few things keeping shitskins numbers in check. Without abortion itd be an absolute disaster in American cities by now. Read freakenomics take on the crime rate drop in the 90s coming about 20 years after abortion was legalized.
Samuel Foster
Kelo vs City of New London
Jason Barnes
>He doesn't want to overturn every ammendment after the 10th Civic cucks
Ian Anderson
Justice Thomas' Dissent..,.
'Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random. The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms.'
Ayden Myers
Affirmative action should be their first order of business.
Jeremiah Young
My mistake, O'Connor
Angel Butler
>america is a kritarchy >we shouldn't use power, that would be UNPRINCIPLED! this is why we keep moving left
Aaron Hall
Case: eminent domain could be used to take property from a private citizen for purposes other than a public use
Leo Wood
they should just fix the judicial activism mess that the left created and then fuck off. congress makes the laws, not the courts.
Charles Perez
Realistic - Obergefell v. Hodges - Same-Sex marriage Roe vs Wade - Abortion
Unrealistic - Loving v. Virginia - Mixed race marriage Brown v. Board - Niggers in White Schools Minor v. Happersett - Women Voting
Carson Ramirez
Marbury v Madison
Grayson Torres
how would the court work without marbury v. madison?
Thomas Phillips
>look at how some of those cases were justified Equal protection, due process, equal protection, due process! It's a magic wand.
Hudson Cook
This, nobody wins wars by playing nice
Jonathan Allen
you have to keep control of the judiciary and go after the other seats of left-wing power (universities, media, civil service, welfare patrons). we need: >civil service reform, fire all noncritical government employees >libelous journalists should be sued and caned >abolish welfare programs, deport illegal migrants (this is where united states v. wong kim ark comes in, if you can overturn that you can revoke most post-1965 citizenships). >activist NGO tax like the Stop Soros law in Hungary >create a board to oversee university curricula, noncompliant universities will have to register as activist NGOs, they will receive no NSF, NIH, DoD, DoE, national endowment for the humanities, etc. grants and an endowment tax
David Turner
Diversity hirings/afirmative action bullshit first. That breaks the ice on corporate intervention on what happens next. Remove birthright citizenship. By now corporations already dumped their colored workforce, especially in the news media. A little easier to make the camps without that internal push to blasting it every day. Only after we get back up to 90% do we make abortion illegal again, as it ahould be.
Zachary Cooper
The 19th Amendment
Matthew Clark
whichever ones accelerate the war
Chase Watson
Griswold v. Connecticut Grutter v. Bollinger Kennedy v. Louisiana
Ethan Sanchez
There wont be a war, just leftists shweltching as their buttplugs are removed and their thrown in jail for disorderly conduct.
Joseph Russell
You and the libs don't get this.
Conservative judges are conservative judges. Even if they disagree with how a case was decided int he past, they value the law being constant more than whatever they want the law to be. They don't like changing shit. Roe is the law of the land. They're not going to change that. Only a liberal would do that.
Dylan Diaz
With how well the republicans are doing the only way they could start to lose momentum is if they let it go to their heads, go on a massive power trip, and start opening old wounds.
Asher Anderson
>Conservative judges are conservative judges. Even if they disagree with how a case was decided int he past, they value the law being constant more than whatever they want the law to be. They don't like changing shit. Roe is the law of the land. They're not going to change that. Only a liberal would do that.
>just keep moving left lmao, to do otherwise would be unprincipled
Landon Robinson
How would Roe v Wade unconstitutional? I get the moral grounds, but its legal merits are based upon fetuses are considered citizens, equally to that of an actual living, sentient adult (or adults). Just like gay marriage, the constitution doesnt explicitely protect for fetus rights. M-muh right to life?
Ill tell you right now, abortions arent killing ANY families. It prevents weak ones from forming.
Cameron Torres
by your logic you could get a 5-4 prog court to "interpret" the first amendment as not protecting hate speech, or get a near-complete ban on guns by ruling on what precisely constitutes a well-regulated militia, and you would say "well, that's just the law of the land. we value the law being constant. those are Our Principles!"
Jeremiah Jones
i can still dream >depressed_guy_kitted_out_for_race_war.png
Gavin Phillips
Liberals: "Change the 2nd Amendment" SCOTUS: "Okay. All weapons, no matter the type, like intended, shall not be infringed" Liberals: "OMG FASCISM"
Angel Roberts
Checked. This is true. I teach said 'underprivileged' young people. They have zero ability to control their reproductive urges in a responsible manner. DESU most are like animals in heat that ought to be spayed and neutered. That will never fly, so keep roe alive BAMN or things will get MUCH uglier.
Logan Thomas
Wrong. Constitution will be upheld, not the opinions of the constitution. This fight is to move the SC as far to the right as possible. This will allow cases that republicans don't support from being removed from law. The last 60 years were an anomaly. Communists attacked the constitution and are now being removed from law.
Eli Roberts
>The last 60 years were an anomaly. Communists attacked the constitution and are now being removed from law. Pretty much, a ton of shit was basically magic'd into law through creative application of the 14th Amendment.