Do at least five SCOTUS justices believe rotten boroughs should be legal? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 29, 2024, 01:48:16 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  Constitution and Law (Moderator: Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.)
  Do at least five SCOTUS justices believe rotten boroughs should be legal? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: ?
#1
Yes
 
#2
No
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 7

Author Topic: Do at least five SCOTUS justices believe rotten boroughs should be legal?  (Read 764 times)
Greedo punched first
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,810


« on: April 24, 2021, 12:25:59 PM »
« edited: April 26, 2021, 10:09:03 AM by ERM64man »

Do at least five justices believe that rotten boroughs should be legal? I don’t mean gerrymandering, I mean grossly malapportioned rotten boroughs.
Logged
Greedo punched first
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,810


« Reply #1 on: April 24, 2021, 02:42:05 PM »

No. The whole purpose of the Framers' mandate of a census every 10 years was to literally depart from the British practice of "rotten boroughs" that had been created by the Industrial Revolution's huge population migrations. A Court majority is about as likely to support bringing "rotten boroughs" back as a Mod is to tell you that they've finally had it up to here with your nonsensical spam.
I posted a legal expert’s tweet. I didn’t make this up out of thin air. I know there are at least three who believe rotten boroughs should be legal (Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch).
Logged
Greedo punched first
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,810


« Reply #2 on: April 24, 2021, 02:56:30 PM »

No. The whole purpose of the Framers' mandate of a census every 10 years was to literally depart from the British practice of "rotten boroughs" that had been created by the Industrial Revolution's huge population migrations. A Court majority is about as likely to support bringing "rotten boroughs" back as a Mod is to tell you that they've finally had it up to here with your nonsensical spam.

I posted a legal expert’s tweet. I didn’t make this up out of thin air. I know there are at least three who believe rotten boroughs should be legal (Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch).

Your "legal expert" is a staff writer at Slate, so not exactly an unbiased party. Unlike you, I choose to live here in the real world, & not in a baselessly apocalyptic nightmare that you, Slate, & I think Jeffrey Toobin seem to all collectively share.
Are Salon and Vox reliable? Have you read the book American Fascism? I find Jeffrey Toobin too optimistic for my taste.
Logged
Greedo punched first
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,810


« Reply #3 on: April 24, 2021, 10:16:48 PM »
« Edited: April 24, 2021, 10:20:23 PM by ERM64man »

So we're just going to ignore that the tweet was from 2019 and seemed to hinge at least in part on Trump winning reelection?
Not necessarily. It was from 2019, but I think the context is what happens if it becomes at least 6-3. That meant it would definitely become at least 6-3 if Trump gets another term. It became 6-3 despite Trump’s loss.
Logged
Greedo punched first
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,810


« Reply #4 on: April 26, 2021, 10:00:50 AM »
« Edited: April 26, 2021, 10:04:11 AM by ERM64man »

True, but Roberts has really been leaning on Kavanaugh to adopt the gradualist approach.  It seems to be working so far and may also be influencing Barrett to rule in a more reserved way than expected.  
Famous last words. It looks like there might be quite a few partisan 5-4 decisions with Roberts dissenting outside of religious liberty cases.

Logged
Greedo punched first
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,810


« Reply #5 on: April 26, 2021, 12:05:39 PM »

True, but Roberts has really been leaning on Kavanaugh to adopt the gradualist approach.  It seems to be working so far and may also be influencing Barrett to rule in a more reserved way than expected.  

Famous last words. It looks like there might be quite a few partisan 5-4 decisions with Roberts dissenting outside of religious liberty cases.

Says the user for whom seemingly every single significant prediction which you've ever made concerning Court decisions has ended up wrong in one way or another. The only person in our vicinity who's ever consistently had "egg on their face" concerning Court decisions is you. Shut up & let people who actually know what they're talking about talk, know-nothing.
You don't think Vox is a reliable source?
Logged
Greedo punched first
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,810


« Reply #6 on: April 26, 2021, 02:23:19 PM »

True, but Roberts has really been leaning on Kavanaugh to adopt the gradualist approach.  It seems to be working so far and may also be influencing Barrett to rule in a more reserved way than expected.  

Famous last words. It looks like there might be quite a few partisan 5-4 decisions with Roberts dissenting outside of religious liberty cases.

Says the user for whom seemingly every single significant prediction which you've ever made concerning Court decisions has ended up wrong in one way or another. The only person in our vicinity who's ever consistently had "egg on their face" concerning Court decisions is you. Shut up & let people who actually know what they're talking about talk, know-nothing.
You don't think Vox is a reliable source?

No, not reliable after 2016 and just off the wall ridiculous since 2019 or so.
How did Vox become "ridiculous"?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 15 queries.