User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 46 of 46

Thread: Notable & Ignoble Supreme Court rulings

  1. #41
    Points: 26,334, Level: 39
    Level completed: 53%, Points required for next Level: 616
    Overall activity: 18.0%
    Achievements:
    VeteranTagger First Class25000 Experience PointsSocial
    waltky's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    5031
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    7,576
    Points
    26,334
    Level
    39
    Thanks Given
    1,559
    Thanked 1,508x in 1,205 Posts
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Westboro loses protest case...

    Supreme Court Leaves in Place Nebraska Funeral Protest Law
    27 Nov 2017 | WASHINGTON Members of the Kansas-based Westboro Baptist Church challenged the law but have lost in lower courts.
    The Supreme Court is leaving in place a Nebraska law that bars protests around funerals. Nebraska enacted the law in 2006. It prohibits protests near a cemetery, mortuary or church from one hour before the beginning of a funeral to two hours after.

    Members of the Kansas-based Westboro Baptist Church challenged the law but have lost in lower courts. Members of the church routinely conduct anti-gay protests outside military funerals. The protests have been a way of drawing attention to their incendiary view that U.S. deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq are God's punishment for the nation's tolerance of homosexuality.

    The Supreme Court said Monday it would not take up the church's challenge to Nebraska's law.

    http://www.military.com/daily-news/2...otest-law.html

  2. #42
    Points: 4,282, Level: 15
    Level completed: 47%, Points required for next Level: 268
    Overall activity: 56.0%
    Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points3 months registered
    Kacper's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    757
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    1,806
    Points
    4,282
    Level
    15
    Thanks Given
    384
    Thanked 747x in 548 Posts
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by waltky View Post
    Westboro loses protest case...

    Supreme Court Leaves in Place Nebraska Funeral Protest Law
    27 Nov 2017 | WASHINGTON — Members of the Kansas-based Westboro Baptist Church challenged the law but have lost in lower courts.
    A little surprising actually since the SCOTUS is usually very bipartisan in its defense of free speech, not that I personally wouldn't like Westboro to get clipped by a semi when they are standing on the side of the road.

  3. #43

    tPF Moderator
    Points: 27,677, Level: 40
    Level completed: 56%, Points required for next Level: 573
    Overall activity: 24.0%
    Achievements:
    Recommendation Second ClassSocial50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class1 year registered
    DGUtley's Avatar tPF Moderator
    Karma
    161249
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    8,276
    Points
    27,677
    Level
    40
    Thanks Given
    3,408
    Thanked 6,511x in 3,827 Posts
    Mentioned
    304 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm a little surprised by this as well, though I haven't read the briefs or rationale.
    Any time you give a man something he doesn't earn, you cheapen him. Our kids earn what they get, and that includes respect. -- Woody Hayes​

  4. #44
    Points: 1,313, Level: 8
    Level completed: 21%, Points required for next Level: 237
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points3 months registered
    barb012's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    382
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    533
    Points
    1,313
    Level
    8
    Thanks Given
    348
    Thanked 372x in 226 Posts
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It cost tax payers $45,000 a year for every person in the prison system. As a tax payer, do you prefer to shoulder this expense verses prefer they get the death penalty for murder? If a person murdered one of your loved ones, why would you want the murderer to live out his life? I certainly would want the death penalty.

  5. #45
    Points: 4,355, Level: 15
    Level completed: 61%, Points required for next Level: 195
    Overall activity: 29.0%
    Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points3 months registered
    Captdon's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    924
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    South Carolina now.
    Posts
    1,997
    Points
    4,355
    Level
    15
    Thanks Given
    1,207
    Thanked 914x in 667 Posts
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by exploited View Post
    The death penalty is a barbaric practice that will inevitably be declared cruel and unusual by the Supreme Court. It is only a matter of time before it is banned forever.
    How? Capital punishment is in the Constitution. Only a liberal Court could find a way around that. Scalia had it right: "As long as the method of execution is less than or equal to hanging, the death penalty is Constitutional."

  6. #46
    Points: 26,334, Level: 39
    Level completed: 53%, Points required for next Level: 616
    Overall activity: 18.0%
    Achievements:
    VeteranTagger First Class25000 Experience PointsSocial
    waltky's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    5031
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    7,576
    Points
    26,334
    Level
    39
    Thanks Given
    1,559
    Thanked 1,508x in 1,205 Posts
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Question

    Granny says dey need to get to the bottom o' who threw Billy Joe McCallister offa Tallahatchie bridge...

    Supreme Court to hear Florida-Georgia Apalachicola water case
    Jan. 7, 2018 -- The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a longstanding battle between Florida and Georgia about water flow in the Apalachicola River on Monday.
    In the case Florida v. Georgia, the state of Florida is asking the Supreme Court to cap the amount of water Georgia can use from the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint river system. Florida claims oyster fisheries in in the Apalachicola Bay have been damaged by Georgia's water use. "It affects the whole economy," said Joseph Parrish, a commissioner in Florida's Franklin County. "It affects people's ability to buy groceries, provide for their family. You know, it'd be like a small town that relies on steel mills or relies on coal and all of a sudden there ain't no more." Florida officially filed its suit in 2013, but the battle between the two states over the distribution of water has been going on for nearly 30 years.


    Ralph Lancaster, a court-appointed special master, ruled in February that Florida failed to prove that a cap on Georgia's water usage would help the estuaries in the bay. Florida then requested the special master develop a more "equitable" distribution of water between the states. "For decades, Florida has done everything it could to avert that result -- and Georgia has fought it at every turn," a Florida brief said. "This litigation represents Florida's last opportunity to stem Georgia's inequitable consumption, and protect these irreplaceable natural resources, by apportioning the waters equitably between the states."



    The Supreme Court will hear arguments in a lawsuit between Florida and Georgia regarding distribution of water in the Apalachicola River, pictured above, on Monday


    Tom Cunningham, chief economist at the Metro Atlanta Chamber, argued a strict water usage limit in Atlanta would stunt population growth, drive away new businesses and lower property values. Georgia filed its own brief arguing the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers effectively controls "the spigot at the state line," therefore a new water distribution plan wouldn't guarantee Florida would receive more water. In his ruling, Lancaster said the court couldn't "assure Florida the relief it seeks" because the Corps wasn't party to the lawsuit.


    Florida cited comments from the Corps stating it would adjust its water policies in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint river system based on the court's ruling. "It is at the very least reasonable to predict that the Corps would respond to an equitable apportionment by this court just as one would expect -- by adjusting its operations to effectuate that decree consistent with this court's decision and other applicable law," Florida said. Supreme Court Justices will hear arguments on Monday and make their own decision, independent of Lancaster's recommendation, later this year.


    https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2018...p&utm_medium=1

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


Critical Acclaim
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO