John Roberts Begs the Liberal Justices to Stop Criticizing the Court

Authored by and submitted by Picture-unrelated
image for John Roberts Begs the Liberal Justices to Stop Criticizing the Court

Republicans strongly opposed that level of relief when it was announced. At the time, however, even they acknowledged that it would be extremely difficult to challenge in court. To bring a lawsuit, a would-be plaintiff would have to show that they were injured in some way by the executive order. Without an injury, there’s nothing for the court to fix, and if there’s nothing for the court to fix, there’s no reason for it to hear the case. The Constitution only allows the courts to hear “cases and controversies,” not issue freewheeling advisory opinions.

Who is possibly injured by having $10,000 in debt removed from your student loans? Certainly not the individual borrowers who received that relief, despite some tortured attempts to claim otherwise. In a separate ruling on Friday, the justices unanimously rejected a too-clever-by-half lawsuit by two individual borrowers who were recruited by right-wing legal activists. The borrowers claimed that the order was invalid for procedural reasons and that, if it were redone properly, they might receive even more debt relief. Justice Samuel Alito, writing for all nine justices in Dept. of Education v. Brown, rejected that argument out of hand.

In Biden v. Nebraska, a coalition of Republican-led state attorneys general sought to overturn the order. How could states possibly have standing, you might ask? They do not go to college, after all. The residents of a state may go to college, but the state couldn’t sue on their behalf because they don’t have standing either. And while every state operates its own colleges and universities, those schools get the tuition payments no matter what happens to the student debt that follows, so there’s no injury—and thus no standing—to be found there.

Picture-unrelated on July 1st, 2023 at 03:53 UTC »

I’ll never forget or forgive Roberts for Citizens United. Dumb motherfucker wrecked the country

OsellusK on July 1st, 2023 at 03:12 UTC »

If you don’t want to be criticized for overreach, don’t overreach.

s0c1a7w0rk3r on July 1st, 2023 at 03:12 UTC »

Then how about you six conservative judges not be such blatant partisan hacks who are corrupt and have decided to legislate from the bench. That would be a start.


Since this comment has high visibility, I implore all of you to vote and get others to vote because Biden won 2020 by 43,000 votes. Here’s how Trump would have won:

Step 1: Trump beats Biden in AZ by receiving 10,458 more votes.

Step 2: Trump wins GA by receiving 11,780 more votes.

Step 3: Trump takes WI by getting 20,683 more votes.

NOTE: That’s 42,921 votes. That’s all he needed across those three states for the following to occur…

Step 4: Trump and Biden would be tied at 269-269 for the Electoral College. The vote would then go to the House of Representatives to decide POTUS.

Step 5: It isn’t a straight party line vote, so Democrats holding the House in 2020 means as much as the popular vote does… nothing. It is decided by state “delegations,” 26 of which are required to elect the next POTUS. Democrats had control of 20 state delegations, three were tied, and 27 were Republican controlled delegations.

It shouldn’t be any stretch of the imagination how Republicans would have voted.

Step 6: Trump is re-elected. Joe Biden writes a book called “What Happened This Time.” The country spirals harder into right wing fascist theocracy with the corporate oligarchy behind the curtain..

That’s it people. Less than 43k votes, it was that close. There were over 155 million votes cast, and that minuscule amount would have altered history.

Vote. Just fucking vote.