this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2023
158 points (97.0% liked)

News

36419 readers
2237 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FinnFooted@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

The amount of mental gymnastics this court has used to strike down years of precedent is insane. Can anyone actually still look at their rulings anymore and genuinely say that they aren't just making rulings based on their personal beliefs and bias? Tomorrow it will be illegal to own gold fish if they decided that was in the bible.

[–] SmurfDotSee@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

There's no mental gymnastics in this one. You just don't agree with them.

[–] FinnFooted@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Oh honey, Kavanaugh literally made a ruling about a week ago that contradicts this one. But yeah. You're actually right. They didn't use mental gymnastics. They were too lazy for even that. They're just saying no and contradicting themselves with almost zero justification as to why.

[–] SmurfDotSee@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yea, i mean, if you can't read, i could certainly see how you could conflate the two cases. But they're not the same. So...

Dumb point.

[–] FinnFooted@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

What? I didn't conflate them. I said the foundational arguments contradict each other and thus their own precedent.

[–] SmurfDotSee@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yea, but that's the thing. You're saying that doesn't mean it's true. And if you can read, you'll understand why they came to two separate decisions in two separate cases that have totally different underlying facts.

But, you know... You seem to either be ABLE to read and choose not to, or you are just saying shit to say shit without having read anything.

[–] FinnFooted@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"States can't sue the government just over 'indirect' harm from a federal policy" is literally applicable to both. Are you unable to extrapolate that information outside of the context of a single case? Does precedent mean absolutely nothing to you? because it sure doesn't to the supreme court anymore.

[–] SmurfDotSee@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Well, you clearly aren't capable, because you think these two cases are the same and they're not.

You can repeat that ad nauseam, and it still won't be true.

Just say you're upset at the ruling, and you have no idea what you're talking about beyond that and move on.

[–] FinnFooted@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Two things don't need to be EXACTLY THE SAME to follow the same logic. How do you not get that?

[–] SmurfDotSee@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

How do you not get that they AREN'T the same logic....

You keep insisting it's the same logic, and it's not. I even bolded the pertinent part for you that explains why it's NOT the same logic.

Jfc.