Jackson dissented because she’s afraid of being laid off.

(07-08-2025 03:04 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Jackson dissented because she’s afraid of being laid off.

I don't think that's the case, Jim. I think she's just dumb and she suffers from chronic stage 4 TDs.

You just don't get humor or sarcasm do you andybible?

When your colleagues on the court publicly reprimand you for not knowing the law, you have to be questioning your job security.

(07-08-2025 03:10 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  You just don't get humor or sarcasm do you andybible?

Nope, not at all.

I'm sorry. Life must be tough.

Here comes Tanq to remind us again how brilliant and qualified Ketanji is!

This seems to be the only thread he hasn't invaded today.

Knock on wood.

Judicial opinions are only of interest to a very small % of the population. I honestly doubt if even most lawyers ever read them.

But GOP’s need to distribute KBJ’s opinions — especially the 8-1, 7-2 cases — as far and as wide as they possibly can. People need to know what’s waiting behind Door #2 if — God help us — her views ever become the majority.

(07-08-2025 03:16 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  I'm sorry. Life must be tough.

Not really. I actually have a sense of humor, it's just dark one. Sarcasm? None whatsoever.

Dark humor is perfectly acceptable.

Assuming it actually makes you laugh.

(07-08-2025 03:20 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  

(07-08-2025 03:16 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  I'm sorry. Life must be tough.

Not really. I actually have a sense of humor, it's just dark one. Sarcasm? None whatsoever.

No dark sarcasm in the classroom?

BREAKING: U.S. Supreme Court Greenlights Trump’s Federal Government Purge — Mass Layoffs and Overhaul Back On Track in 20 Federal Agencies

Quote:The U.S. Supreme Court has overturned a radical Clinton-appointed judge’s ruling, allowing mass layoffs and sweeping restructuring efforts across 20 federal agencies to move forward immediately.

The 8-1 ruling — with only Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissenting — obliterates Clinton-appointed District Judge Susan Illston’s May 22 Temporary Restraining Order, which had halted thousands of Reduction-in-Force (RIF) notices and stalled Trump’s sweeping Executive Order to downsize federal agencies.

The judge’s TRO comes in response to a lawsuit filed by the anti-American AFL-CIO and American Federation of Government Employees.

Back in February, Trump signed an executive order directing the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to conduct a top-to-bottom “critical transformation” of 20 executive-branch agencies.

The goal: eliminate redundant offices, shutter legacy programs, and slash payrolls at agencies long captured by entrenched left-wing unions.

Judge Illston outrageously claimed that President Trump required congressional permission to overhaul his own Executive Branch.

“It is the prerogative of presidents to pursue new policy priorities and to imprint their stamp on the federal government. But to make large-scale overhauls of federal agencies, any president must enlist the help of his co-equal branch and partner, the Congress,” the judge wrote in her order.

“As a group of conservative former government officials and advisors have written to the Court, “Unchecked presidential power is not what the Framers had in mind,” the radical Clinton judge said, scolding Trump’s decision to overhaul agencies in the Executive Branch.

With the Supreme Court’s green light, the Trump administration is set to resume its plan to slash unnecessary programs and eliminate up to hundreds of thousands of taxpayer-funded federal jobs.

Targets of the layoffs include:

Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce
Health and Human Services
Department of State
Treasury
Veterans Affairs
And more than a dozen additional federal bureaucracies

Reuters reported:

The U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way on Tuesday for President Donald Trump’s administration to resume carrying out mass job cuts and the restructuring of agencies, elements of his campaign to downsize and reshape the federal government.

The justices lifted San Francisco-based U.S. District Judge Susan Illston’s May 22 order that had blocked large-scale federal layoffs called “reductions in force” affecting potentially hundreds of thousands of jobs, while litigation in the case proceeds.

[…]

The Supreme Court in recent months has sided with Trump in some major cases that were acted upon on an emergency basis since he returned to office in January.

It cleared the way for Trump’s administration to resume deporting migrants to countries other than their own without offering them a chance to show the harms they could face. In two cases, it let the administration end temporary legal status previously granted on humanitarian grounds to hundreds of thousands of migrants.

It also allowed Trump to implement his ban on transgender people in the U.S. military, blocked a judge’s order for the administration to rehire thousands of fired employees and twice sided with his Department of Government Efficiency.

wasn't this issue settled when Regan laid off all the air traffic controllers?

(07-08-2025 03:24 PM)PlainTiger Wrote:  

(07-08-2025 03:20 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  

(07-08-2025 03:16 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  I'm sorry. Life must be tough.

Not really. I actually have a sense of humor, it's just dark one. Sarcasm? None whatsoever.

No dark sarcasm in the classroom?

Hey teacher leave those kids alone….

(07-08-2025 03:17 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  Here comes Tanq to remind us again how brilliant and qualified Ketanji is!

Compared to Tanq, then... nevermind.

So whenever the Trump admin gets a SCOTUS win over district judges, does it effectively mean the Trump admin actually knows more about the law than these particular judges?


Rhetorical

(07-08-2025 03:28 PM)fsquid Wrote:  wasn't this issue settled when Regan laid off all the air traffic controllers?

It’s not even over when the SCOTUS issues a ruling. Some twisted Leftist judge in some blue sh!thole gets their panties in a wad and decides to overrule the Supreme Court.

Quote:For the second time in two weeks, a Supreme Court justice is using her opinion to scold Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson for not understanding what she is talking about.

Twist: This time, it's progressive Justice SONIA SOTOMAYOR doing it, patiently explaining that the Court can't declare an order of President Trump's to be unconstitutional if the order does not actually exist yet.

Imagine how much of a drag it must be to have the DEI justice embarrassing your side.