What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[The Minsky Moment]

Premium is pretty sweet, though.

For sure, but that is a different objection.

[The Minsky Moment]

I could be wrong, but it seems like only two judges argued the individuals lacked standing. one of the two argued "well, -they- don't own the corporation, their trusts own the corporation."

Separate issue.  The plurality punted on the issue- said they didn't need to address.  But 2 of the dissenters did point a fact that makes the Gorsuch opinion even more nutty.  The Greens didn't own shares in the corporation at all.  The corporation was entirely owned by trusts.  The Greens were just the trustees.  So what Gorsuch was really saying is that if the feds put a regulation in place that impacts at corporation, the trustees of trusts that in turn own shares in the corporation can *separately and independently* sue, not for any tangible harm to the company, but because the company's compliance would offend the personal beliefs of the individual trustees of the trusts owning common shares.

That is just bonkers.

[OttoVonBismarck]

I think there's a difference between "I think his opinion was wrong" and "he's bonkers." Especially considering Gorsuch is about to be a supreme court justice and thus far more accomplished legally than you can ever hope to be.

[The Minsky Moment]

I think there's a difference between "I think his opinion was wrong" and "he's bonkers." Especially considering Gorsuch is about to be a supreme court justice and thus far more accomplished legally than you can ever hope to be.

I didn't say he was bonkers, I said the opinion was.  And it is.  Getting appointed by Donald Trump is not very persuasive proof to the contrary. 

[OttoVonBismarck]

I think there's a difference between "I think his opinion was wrong" and "he's bonkers." Especially considering Gorsuch is about to be a supreme court justice and thus far more accomplished legally than you can ever hope to be.

I didn't say he was bonkers, I said the opinion was.  And it is.  Getting appointed by Donald Trump is not very persuasive proof to the contrary.

You just need to be mindful of your betters and show them appropriate respect, is what I'm saying.

[garbon]

I think there's a difference between "I think his opinion was wrong" and "he's bonkers." Especially considering Gorsuch is about to be a supreme court justice and thus far more accomplished legally than you can ever hope to be.

I didn't say he was bonkers, I said the opinion was.  And it is.  Getting appointed by Donald Trump is not very persuasive proof to the contrary.

You just need to be mindful of your betters and show them appropriate respect, is what I'm saying.

Clearly the times are stretching the hell out of the concept of "one's betters."

[The Minsky Moment]

You just need to be mindful of your betters and show them appropriate respect, is what I'm saying.

The next time I come across one, I'll keep in the mind, thanks.

[OttoVonBismarck]

You just need to be mindful of your betters and show them appropriate respect, is what I'm saying.

The next time I come across one, I'll keep in the mind, thanks.

Certainly if you come across a Suprme Court justice, you'll have done so.

Plus if I'm not mistaken you're a Jew, so any white Christian would also suffice.

[Eddie Teach]

Certainly if you come across a Suprme Court justice, you'll have done so.

Even if it's a woman?

[OttoVonBismarck]

Having read over Gorsuch's decision, I find it questionable to call it nutty for a few reasons.

1. Minsky's focus on the fact the Green's control Hobby Lobby through a trust appears largely irrelevant to Gorsuch's argument. Gorsuch asserts the RFRA claim occurs because the Greens hold controlling interest in the corporation that will offer the insurance (without really exploring the legal vehicle through which they control it) thus it is they who have to make an actual decision--provide insurance with features that violate their religious beliefs or do not. While he doesn't delve into it in his opinion, this would obviously be different than the CEO of Proctor & Gamble, who reports to a Board of Directors who report to shareholders, and which would have corporate bylaws generally requiring their executives to abide by the law.

2. I find Gorsuch's comparison to the Lee case which exempted Amish employers from paying social security tax to be a reasonable analogue for the Hobby Lobby situation, and thus whether you agree with his conclusion or not, I think it's decently grounded in precedent, which should put it outside the realm of a "bonkers" decision.

3. Gorsuch is also largely responding to the claims made by the government, which assert the Greens have no RFRA standing because they aren't responsible for the decisions their employees make. I think that's a reasonable argument, but there is precedent on the other side of it where an employer can assert a religious objection to doing something that could contribute to an employee doing something they view as immoral based on their religious beliefs. Gorsuch makes, to my mind, a decently logical argument that it is not the government's place to decide "what degree of separation" between an employer's action and an employee's action constitute a violation of religious morality, since the government cannot be in the business of deciding theology. Since there is no serious doubt as to the sincerity of the Green's belief, and they are responsible on a specific individual level for making the decision, it seems reasonable to say they're in a situation where they as individuals are making a decision over which they have full control, that might violate their religious conscience.

Doesn't seem "bonkers" to me. I'll add that as a matter of policy, I wouldn't have wanted the RFRA to be law at all, and without that I think the whole decision would have gone differently. But in a world where RFRA exists, I don't think his decision is "bonkers", other than I believe he gets some of the medical facts wrong. He states that the insurance plan would offer birth control that would "destroy a fertilized egg", which medically speaking I don't believe is true. I think the morning after pill rather works to prevent fertilization. The normal mechanism of action for a morning after pill is that it delays ovulation, which prevents an egg from leaving the ovary or it thickens the cervical mucosa which makes it difficult for sperm to reach an egg. While I believe there are statements saying that the morning after pill "could" cause a fertilized egg to fail to implant, and thus ultimately die, I believe that doesn't actually happen to the best of our knowledge.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Certainly if you come across a Suprme Court justice, you'll have done so.

Even if it's a woman?

That's a damn good question, how to rank a son of Israel vs a Christian woman.

[CountDeMoney]

Great, I have to fill in.  Not like I didn't have a ton of other shit to get done today.  Goddamnit.

He just really needs to go outside and play today.  He's been shut in too long.

[mongers]

Great, I have to fill in.  Not like I didn't have a ton of other shit to get done today.  Goddamnit.

He just really needs to go outside and play today.  He's been shut in too long.

He's just trolling another 'liberal' (non-deranged) forum; has to keep the hourly post rate up, otherwise no food on the table. 

[Syt]

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump
A new radical Islamic terrorist has just attacked in Louvre Museum in Paris. Tourists were locked down. France on edge again. GET SMART U.S.

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump
Professional anarchists, thugs and paid protesters are proving the point of the millions of people who voted to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump
Meeting with biggest business leaders this morning. Good jobs are coming back to U.S., health care and tax bills are being crafted NOW!

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump
Thank you to Prime Minister of Australia for telling the truth about our very civil conversation that FAKE NEWS media lied about. Very nice!

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump
Iran is playing with fire - they don't appreciate how "kind" President Obama was to them. Not me!

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump
Yes, Arnold Schwarzenegger did a really bad job as Governor of California and even worse on the Apprentice...but at least he tried hard!

Busy day.

[viper37]

So lovely how Conway blamed refugees for an American massacre that never happened...

check the Twitters at the bottom of the article
Link