this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2025
194 points (99.5% liked)

politics

25558 readers
2861 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In particular, arrest because of race or language spoken is now allowed

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] snooggums@piefed.world 81 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Open endorsement of racism by SCOTUS wasn't actually on my bingo card. Thought they would be more subtle.

Also, when did SCOTUS decide to throw out a massive number of decisions without deliberation? Are they really that in favor of a Trump dictatorship?

[–] CaptDust@sh.itjust.works 42 points 1 day ago (3 children)

when did SCOTUS decide to throw out a massive number of decisions without deliberation?

When their only job became clearing the way for the trump admin. This shadow docket shit is becoming a real problem for lower courts too because SC keeps ruling without elaborating their decisions. Its difficult to find judgement in line with this precedence without understanding how they're reaching these conclusions.

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 32 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Apparently they got tired of making shit up like during their last session.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 22 points 1 day ago

They don't have to justify their decisions. They've gone full authoritarian and are aggressively, flagrantly arbitrary. "Because we said so and you can't stop us" is their only reason. Fucking pigs.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago

Thankfully some of the lower courts are wising up to this shit. The thing about shadow dockets is they aren't actual rulings. They provide no legal guidance. So what some courts are doing is only applying them to the exact specific question they ruled on. If a party in the case submits a plea worded slightly differently than the one SCOTUS ruled on, the lower courts are perfectly free to ignore the SCOTUS shadow dockets ruling. Only actual written briefs carry any kind of weight of precedent.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 day ago

A problem with decisions that are only made to kiss Trump's ass is that it's hard to fabricate even a weak chain of reasoning to support them.

[–] Dragomus@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] snooggums@piefed.world 14 points 1 day ago

They wouldn't have anything to fear if they weren't enabling it to happen.