US Democrats upset that the Supreme Court has voted, by majority, that racism isn't ok anymore

[Caracus2k]

Some things change others don't...

The Democrats aren't happy that their racist policies have been overturned.... race based college/ university admission polices won't be allowed going forward.

Affirmative action: US Supreme Court overturns race-based college admissions

The landmark decision strikes down decades-old policies defended as a way to boost diversity.

www.bbc.co.uk

The US Supreme Court has ruled that race can no longer be considered as a factor in university admissions.
The landmark ruling upends decades-old US policies on so-called affirmative action, also known as positive discrimination.
It is one of the most contentious issues in US education.
Affirmative action first made its way into policy in the 1960s, and has been defended as a measure to increase diversity.
US President Joe Biden said he "strongly" disagreed with Thursday's much-anticipated decision.
"We cannot let this decision be the last word," he said. "Discrimination still exists in America." (but a little less now going forward eh Joe...)

 

[Caracus2k]

Sounds like 40 million voters upset with a conservative majority supreme court to me...

It would have been a throughly immoral policy if enacted.

The Democrats have been slapped down with three of their trash policies blocked over the past few days now

1) an attempt to maintain actual systemic, institutional racism in the United States - blocked

2) an attempt of transferring debt from some of the richer and actually more privileged in society to some of the less fortunate and poorer members - blocked

3) the same old nonsence or trying to compel creative enterprises to create products that go against their personal beliefs /values. - blocked

 

[Caracus2k]

Imagine taking out a loan and then complaining you actually have to repay it.....

Someones almost inevitably going to bring up PPP 'loans' so best to address that stupid talking point now....

Its a ridiculously stupid comparison to contrast loan forgiveness which was the the *EXPLICIT/ STATED BEFOREHAND* intention of the CARES act, ***WHICH WAS AUTHORISED BY CONGRESS ACTUALLY IN A TIME OF EMERGENCY***

with an act ***NOT AUTHORISED BY CONGRESS***, not timed to coincide with a time of relevant emergency and which was not part of the intention under which student loans were given!


Here's the CARES act, which has a whole section on the circumstances in which loan forgiveness would be provided.

PPP loans were given to all sorts of businesses, including those were Democrats had a finical interest in/ or ownership of and the Democrats pushed for the whole process of applying for loan forgiveness to be simplified!


Some Democrat whoose firms benefited from Loans:

• Dean Phillips (D-Minn.), net worth $77 million, received a $135,800 loan for his Geniecast, LLC.
• T.J. Cox (D-Calif.), net worth $11.8 million, received $609,825 for two of his 26 businesses.
• Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.), net worth $10.9 million, is tied to a loan of $1,100,000.00 that went to a law firm where her husband is chairman emeritus, Lowey Dannenberg P.C.
• Earl Blumenaeur (D-Ore.), net worth $4.5 million, received $432,734 for his two companies.
• Paul Pelosi, the husband to House Speaker Nanci Pelosi (D-CA) is linked to a company that say millions in loan forgiveness. Two loans given to EDI Associates, a restaurant based company totalled $711.708 and $996.392 respectively, both forgiven

Biden's actions in attempting to have student load forgiveness were so contrary to what was deemed acceptable that he had even gone against the stated prior views of one of the most senior members of his own party

https://twitter.com/x/status/1420417022786261002

Basically Congress authorised a bill, with bi partisan support, which had the expressed intention from the outset that any money provided would not be paid back if it was used as the bill intended it.

The transfer was only called a loan so as to reinforce the principle that money could be recovered if not used as intended.

This is nothing like student loans.

 

[Caracus2k]

If this was a Muslim objecting on their religious grounds it would have been laughed out of the SC.

What a bizarre claim.... of course exactly the same sort of provisions/protections would apply to a Muslim business

 

[Caracus2k]

The Supreme court is now very right wing, they don't Judge on right or wrong anymore they judge on whos putting it through.

Someone's upset the SC isn't full of 'progressive' activists that are going to push through the nonsense the Democrats having been trying on of late...

Roe v Wade, was case law, supposed to be set in stone but the Republicans got lucky and was able to fill it with a majority in their favour, Case law is now no longer any use in the supreme court, they tore up the rule book.

This is absolute nonsense of the highest order.

There had been 233 Supreme Court Decisions overturned before Roe v Wade was overturned.

Not many as an overall % of the decision made but some of the decisions overturned were quite quite notable like Lawrence v Texas which ruled that in almost all cases that anti sodomy laws (that were mostly used to target gay men) were unconstitutional, contrary to prior decisions.


Should that one of been 'set in stone'?


As always the politicians are playing the voters for fools.

Rather than relying on a Supreme Court Decision that was they knew was always risky the Democrats could have actually codified a federal right to abortion in actual Statue rather than and SC decision.

They had at least two times when they could have done so in the past few decades but didn't

Why?

Mostly because by falling to legislate for it they could continue to use it as an election issue because the 'right' to an abortion was always more at risk as long as the didn't legislate for it.

If they really cared for managing the rights of women whilst not going absolutely berserk and allowing the abortion of healthy, viable full or near full term foetuses they could have brought in a law and been like most of the rest of the developed world that allow elective abortions earlier on in pregnancies but have restrictions on later term ones.

Keeping the abortion issue a precarious one suited the Democrats.

No law is safe now, the Republicans can win everything because if anyone rules against them they appeal it all the way to the supreme court who will side with them.

The Supreme Court are just there for checks and balances. Roe v Wade was clearly a stretch to pull a 'right' to abortion from the constitution as it was already written....

The Democrats play you for a fool.

Biden doesn't give a **** about minorities (remember the racial jungle) or for the rights of gay people...

"Marriage is between a man and a woman and states must respect that.... why do we need a constitutional amendment?"

or any of the other groups the Democrats pander to.


He uses them and in doing so actually hurts them...


Just like the student loan issue.... Biden knew it had little to no chance of getting past the SC but why should he care if it doesn't? Because he'll use it as an election cudgel.

Even Pelosi knew years ago that no president, including Biden, had the power to cancel debts and that an act of congress would always be needed.

Biden knew he was acting in an unconstitutional manner but pushed on none the less because, as his record shows, he a fraudulent con man