deuce-ish

deuce-ish
[ deuce-ish ]

SCOTUS: “arrive in” means being IN the country

Posted by Potomac <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Potomac' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 25, 2026, 11:51:40

Important decision for asylum seekers. The US is like many other countries, such as England and Canada, like it or not. Congress can change the policy if it wants to. If the port of entry is on native soil, you are in the country.

Dumbest SC Justice in history.

Posted by AceFrehley <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=AceFrehley' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 13:47:41, in reply to "SCOTUS: “arrive in” means being IN the country "

And likey written by AI.

Not in this case; her interpretation of 14 is better than Thomas’s*

Posted by Potomac <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Potomac' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 15:07:32, in reply to "Dumbest SC Justice in history. "

Previous Message

And likey written by AI.

besides the fact that it's likely written by AI

Posted by AceFrehley <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=AceFrehley' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 16:39:47, in reply to "Not in this case; her interpretation of 14 is better than Thomas’s*"

She used the phrase "understood the assignment" in an acutal Supreme Court decision. Are you kidding me?

Pretty cringey.*

Posted by Lexillini <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Lexillini' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 19:09:54, in reply to "besides the fact that it's likely written by AI"

Previous Message

She used the phrase "understood the assignment" in an acutal Supreme Court decision. Are you kidding me?

Guns. Have them.

The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants.

Socialism is the gospel of envy.

100*

Previous Message

She used the phrase "understood the assignment" in an acutal Supreme Court decision. Are you kidding me?

So help me out here: "Jackson, J, concurring"... is that her initial? Or Justice?

Posted by osklister <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=osklister' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 14:49:14, in reply to "Dumbest SC Justice in history. "

Ketanji Onyika Brown Jackson
per Wiki.

Again, have Alito and Thomas retire and appoint the most fire-breathing conservatives in their 30's you can find. Every time someone objects, hold up a picture of this utter pinhead Poopy Pants put on SCOTUS for the rest of her life (if she chooses).

I believe it’s “Ms Jackson”…if you’re nasty… *

Posted by haighter <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=haighter' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 16:24:21, in reply to "So help me out here: "Jackson, J, concurring"... is that her initial? Or Justice? "
Boo Haighter

Previous Message

Ketanji Onyika Brown Jackson
per Wiki.

Again, have Alito and Thomas retire and appoint the most fire-breathing conservatives in their 30's you can find. Every time someone objects, hold up a picture of this utter pinhead Poopy Pants put on SCOTUS for the rest of her life (if she chooses).

If that’s a real question, J = Justice

Posted by Potomac <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Potomac' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 15:06:15, in reply to "So help me out here: "Jackson, J, concurring"... is that her initial? Or Justice? "

The justices identify themselves that way in opinions, with name followed by J.

Previous Message

Well, I learned something today. Thx.

Posted by osklister <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=osklister' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 2, 2026, 20:28:43, in reply to "If that’s a real question, J = Justice"

Thought about it: why wouldn't it be J Jackson? And for Roberts, CJ Roberts?

Oh well. Gotta admit I was thinking "does she go by Ketanji but perhaps she has a real first name of say, Jennifer or Jxchilgol or anything... however she has preferred Ketanji since like, junior high?

So, here we are. Guess I added something new to my personal body of knowledge here in my old age. :-O

Previous Message

The justices identify themselves that way in opinions, with name followed by J.

"C.J." is the chief, and "JJ." is justices plural

Posted by Potomac <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Potomac' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 3, 2026, 6:31:22, in reply to "Well, I learned something today. Thx."

Here is a relevant example:

ROBERTS, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which SOTOMAYOR, KAGAN, BARRETT, and JACKSON, JJ., joined. JACKSON, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which SOTOMAYOR, J., joined as to the introduction and Part I.

If Congress limited birth tourism, it might survive the Court

Posted by Potomac <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Potomac' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 13:25:05, in reply to "SCOTUS: “arrive in” means being IN the country "

There are exceptions, and I saw nothing in the opinions that made it obvious that the Court would reject legislation that dealt with temporary visitors. The POTUS can't do it; that's obvious. They might get the votes for something where the child of two non-citizen, non-resident parents would only get citizenship if the child and the parents (maybe you need both) stayed in the country legally for X days.

This could address birth tourism and the "accidental" birth to people here temporarily but not for the purpose of having a child. That would include the parents of US soccer player Balogun, who were here visiting and then returned to England.

There is no way the intention of that part of the Constitution was to

Posted by AceFrehley <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=AceFrehley' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 13:30:41, in reply to "If Congress limited birth tourism, it might survive the Court"

include illegal aliens.

Nor does the language of the 14th Amendment compel birthright citizenship.

Posted by Lexillini <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Lexillini' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 13:56:46, in reply to "There is no way the intention of that part of the Constitution was to "
weiner sleeve

This was a chickenshit decision from the Court.

Guns. Have them.

The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants.

Socialism is the gospel of envy.

The Court did not agree with you; so consider next steps to refine the rules*

Posted by Potomac <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Potomac' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 13:39:33, in reply to "There is no way the intention of that part of the Constitution was to "

Previous Message

include illegal aliens.

A horrible decision. It happens. I thought Trump was only going to lose on

Posted by AceFrehley <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=AceFrehley' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 13:46:13, in reply to "The Court did not agree with you; so consider next steps to refine the rules*"

"you don't have the authority" issue. Oh well.

Duplicate *

Posted by Potomac <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Potomac' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 15:08:16, in reply to "A horrible decision. It happens. I thought Trump was only going to lose on"

Previous Message

"you don't have the authority" issue. Oh well.

They certainly could have made a narrow decision*

Posted by Potomac <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Potomac' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 15:08:14, in reply to "A horrible decision. It happens. I thought Trump was only going to lose on"

Previous Message

"you don't have the authority" issue. Oh well.

So, what is the absolute end date for getting people to the Electoral College?

Posted by osklister <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=osklister' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 30, 2026, 17:00:48, in reply to "SCOTUS: “arrive in” means being IN the country "

From AI:

Previous Message

The meeting of the electors takes place on the first Tuesday after the second Wednesday in December after the general election. The electors meet in their respective States, where they cast their votes for President and Vice President on separate ballots.

So states like CA and NY and others can just count ballots for most of November and part of December before they have to call a winner??

Gonna be fun in those mid-term elections.

They still have to be postmarked by election day and received and processed no later than...

Posted by haighter <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=haighter' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 13:46:15, in reply to "So, what is the absolute end date for getting people to the Electoral College?"
Boo Haighter

...7 days after election day.

Previous Message

From AI:

Previous Message

So states like CA and NY and others can just count ballots for most of November and part of December before they have to call a winner??

Gonna be fun in those mid-term elections.

I am pretty sure that there is language by which there is a certain date

Posted by AceFrehley <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=AceFrehley' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 13:31:53, in reply to "So, what is the absolute end date for getting people to the Electoral College?"

for the election to be certified. It was a big deal in Bush v Gore. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm no Taz.

Maryland law is 30 days after Election Day; with local jurisdictions earlier for the state rollup*

Posted by Potomac <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Potomac' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 13:43:30, in reply to "I am pretty sure that there is language by which there is a certain date "

Previous Message

for the election to be certified. It was a big deal in Bush v Gore. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm no Taz.

That is far too long. I am ok with up to approximately a week.*

Posted by Lexillini <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Lexillini' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 13:57:50, in reply to "Maryland law is 30 days after Election Day; with local jurisdictions earlier for the state rollup*"
weiner sleeve

Previous Message

for the election to be certified. It was a big deal in Bush v Gore. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm no Taz.

Guns. Have them.

The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants.

Socialism is the gospel of envy.

That’s the local limit; state limit must allow for some time to challenge *

Posted by Potomac <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Potomac' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 15:10:04, in reply to "That is far too long. I am ok with up to approximately a week.*"

Previous Message

for the election to be certified. It was a big deal in Bush v Gore. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm no Taz.

Well, the Supreme Court taketh away with one hand and giveth with the other.

Posted by Lexillini <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Lexillini' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 30, 2026, 13:36:51, in reply to "SCOTUS: “arrive in” means being IN the country "

The Court is going to tackle AR-15 bans next term. I would argue that it has already resolved the issue in both Heller and Bruen.

Guns. Have them.

The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants.

Socialism is the gospel of envy.

Damn, we have to wait another whole year? *

Posted by kokomojo <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=kokomojo' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 30, 2026, 13:53:25, in reply to "Well, the Supreme Court taketh away with one hand and giveth with the other."

Previous Message

The Court is going to tackle AR-15 bans next term. I would argue that it has already resolved the issue in both Heller and Bruen.

Unfortunately. And I expect the liberal tyrants to bitterly cling to their patently . . .

Posted by Lexillini <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Lexillini' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 30, 2026, 13:55:14, in reply to "Damn, we have to wait another whole year? *"
weiner sleeve

. . . unconstitutional bans until the bitter end. Tyrants going tyrant.

Guns. Have them.

The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants.

Socialism is the gospel of envy.

Dude, did you read about the Glock ban in CA?

Posted by AceFrehley <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=AceFrehley' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 13:32:50, in reply to "Unfortunately. And I expect the liberal tyrants to bitterly cling to their patently . . ."

That one is going to be turned around as soon as a group takes up the case.

There are multiple Glock bans making the rounds. Patently ridiculous.

Posted by Lexillini <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Lexillini' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on July 1, 2026, 13:58:55, in reply to "Dude, did you read about the Glock ban in CA? "
weiner sleeve

Demonstrating once again that liberal politicians do not care about the law and are downright dangerous.

Guns. Have them.

The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants.

Socialism is the gospel of envy.

The U.S. Constitution compels us to reward people for breaking the law.

Posted by Lexillini <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Lexillini' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 30, 2026, 12:26:33, in reply to "SCOTUS: “arrive in” means being IN the country "
weiner sleeve

No, it most certainly does not.

Guns. Have them.

The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants.

Socialism is the gospel of envy.

anyone else getting the trump passport? pretty sweet*

Posted by Playoff Rondo <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Playoff+Rondo' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 26, 2026, 19:12:50, in reply to "SCOTUS: “arrive in” means being IN the country "

Previous Message

F ATL

Lots of bitching at the Court for what are statutory interpretations

Posted by Potomac <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Potomac' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 26, 2026, 12:51:13, in reply to "SCOTUS: “arrive in” means being IN the country "

So much of what I've read about these cases is blaming the Court for what the statutes say.

If Congress wants to allow asylum seekers AT the border to apply, then do so.

If this decision helps provoke illegal immigration away from the ports of entry, that is not the Court's problem.

The Roundup cancer claims case was pretty easy I thought

Posted by Potomac <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Potomac' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 25, 2026, 12:12:41, in reply to "SCOTUS: “arrive in” means being IN the country "

How can states decide on their own that a chemical causes cancer when the federal agency charged with doing that says no? That occasional dimwit KBJ dissented. Sure, whatever. I am curious to learn about the other dissent and whether I missed something subtle or interesting.

Previous Message

"...occasional dimwit KBJ..." Well, to each his own. Still waiting for a genius opinion from her.

Posted by osklister <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=osklister' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 25, 2026, 14:22:51, in reply to "The Roundup cancer claims case was pretty easy I thought "

She's pretty young, still has time to grow into the job. :-O

One of my favorite hobby horses: Thomas and Alito should resign ASAP. Replace them with fire-breathing right wingers in their 30's (if not younger).

A couple of good decisions from the Supremes today.

Posted by Lexillini <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Lexillini' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 25, 2026, 11:58:18, in reply to "SCOTUS: “arrive in” means being IN the country "
weiner sleeve

Unfortunately, a really bad one is likely coming.

Guns. Have them.

The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants.

Socialism is the gospel of envy.

C'mon Lex, don't make me go to another website to find out which one is REALLY BAD. *

Posted by osklister <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=osklister' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 25, 2026, 12:10:54, in reply to "A couple of good decisions from the Supremes today."

Previous Message

Unfortunately, a really bad one is likely coming.

Birthright citizenship. May lose on executive order powers alone.

Posted by Potomac <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Potomac' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 25, 2026, 12:16:07, in reply to "C'mon Lex, don't make me go to another website to find out which one is REALLY BAD. *"

If I were on the Court I would likely dismiss his order as outside his authority - he could lose 9-0 on that. Then the question of birthright citizenship lives until there is a direct challenge. Like if Congress passed some law, then individuals would have clear standing to sue.

Previous Message

Unfortunately, a really bad one is likely coming.

This is what I think is going to happen. And as much as I hate the current design

Posted by AceFrehley <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=AceFrehley' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 25, 2026, 12:18:19, in reply to "Birthright citizenship. May lose on executive order powers alone."

it doesn't seem the President can just go ahead and change that.

one of our two major parties is largely anti-american.*

Posted by arthurkirkland <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=arthurkirkland' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 25, 2026, 21:01:58, in reply to "This is what I think is going to happen. And as much as I hate the current design"

Previous Message

it doesn't seem the President can just go ahead and change that.

And profoundly mentally ill to boot.*

Posted by Lexillini <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=Lexillini' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 26, 2026, 14:48:38, in reply to "one of our two major parties is largely anti-american.*"
weiner sleeve

Previous Message

it doesn't seem the President can just go ahead and change that.

Guns. Have them.

The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants.

Socialism is the gospel of envy.

to wit

Posted by arthurkirkland <iframe src='https://members.boardhost.com/onedeuce/info/user=arthurkirkland' width='330' height='300' border=0 style='border:none;'> on June 27, 2026, 12:21:18, in reply to "And profoundly mentally ill to boot.*"

https://x.com/spencerpratt/status/2070881975221784796

Previous Message

it doesn't seem the President can just go ahead and change that.

Gosh! What a swell political movement!*

Previous Message

https://x.com/spencerpratt/status/2070881975221784796

Previous Message

it doesn't seem the President can just go ahead and change that.

Guns. Have them.

The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants.

Socialism is the gospel of envy.

Anchor babies*