Posts Made By: James Brown

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

You've responded to a number of points but, rather than quote and respond individually to each post, I'll try to respond in a single posting.

First, if, in fact, Kavanaugh is detailing the majority opinion rather than his own, then I'd agree that CNN and other reporting erred in their statement that the court did not provide the explanation but I would not state(or accept) they lied about it. Initial reports can either incorrect or partially correct, and then updated at a later time to reflect more accurate information. If, in fact, Kavanaugh is writing his own opinion, then it does not necessarily speak for the majority nor does it necessarily provide a majority explanation for a decision even though he concurs with it. The majority of justices may have other reasons for their decisions. 

That said, if in fact, ICE operates in a manner so-described by Kavanaugh in his opinion, then I'd agree it's operating optimally under the pressures of Tom Homan, Stephen Miller and Noem to fulfill Miller's daily quotas. If, on the other hand, it functions as described in a contrary manner described by the minority justices in the case as well as the court that initially rendered its decision, then I'd agree that Kavanaugh would need to revisit this again as you so stated in your response.

That said, I'd disagree that this is specific to the districts in California and agree with CNN reporting that other districts elsewhere will take the decision as tacit approval for their actions. So, I think we all hope they function in a manner described by Kavanaugh in his opinion....

Originally Posted by James Lacey

Using Grok, I conducted an analysis to determine how often the SCOTUS has sided with Trump versus pushed back on him, and Trump, as it turns out, has been limited by the SCOTUS far more than enabled. Trump has gotten a lot of leniency on immigration enforcement and national security issues, but plenty of pushback on regulatory and domestic policy issues (DACA, adding citizenship question to census, immunity from state subpoenas, etc.).

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

You've responded to a number of points but, rather than quote and respond individually to each post, I'll try to respond in a single posting.

First, if, in fact, Kavanaugh is detailing the majority opinion rather than his own, then I'd agree that CNN and other reporting erred in their statement that the court did not provide the explanation but I would not state(or accept) they lied about it. Initial reports can either incorrect or partially correct, and then updated at a later time to reflect more accurate information. If, in fact, Kavanaugh is writing his own opinion, then it does not necessarily speak for the majority nor does it necessarily provide a majority explanation for a decision even though he concurs with it. The majority of justices may have other reasons for their decisions. 

That said, if in fact, ICE operates in a manner so-described by Kavanaugh in his opinion, then I'd agree it's operating optimally under the pressures of Tom Homan, Stephen Miller and Noem to fulfill Miller's daily quotas. If, on the other hand, it functions as described in a contrary manner described by the minority justices in the case as well as the court that initially rendered its decision, then I'd agree that Kavanaugh would need to revisit this again as you so stated in your response.

That said, I'd disagree that this is specific to the districts in California and agree with CNN reporting that other districts elsewhere will take the decision as tacit approval for their actions. So, I think we all hope they function in a manner described by Kavanaugh in his opinion....

Originally Posted by Jim Moscheck

Definitely off topic, but thought you guys may be interested in it. 

My older sister just stopped by and made my day, month, year, and, well, she made me very happy. She brought over a scrapbook that my Mom put together of her brother Andy Seminick, whom I think I've mentioned before who played for the Phillies in the late 40's and 50's. His career was over before I was born and in my 68 years I had no idea this scrapbook existed. I can't believe Mom never showed it to me, but judging by how well preserved the newspaper clippings are not too many others have seen it either. There are lots of clipping from the 1950 team, known as the Whiz Kids, who were all in their twenties with Andy at 29 years old and the oldest was nicknamed Grandpa Whiz, They won the pennant in 1950 for the first time in 35 years and my uncle was a huge part of it. There are also ads Andy did for Camel cigarettes (along with a bunch of other players) and an ad for coffee featuring my Aunt Gussie and Andy, and a program from Andy Seminick Day at the Florida Institute of Technology in Melbourne, FL when they renamed the ball field Andy Seminick Field for his contributions getting the athletic dept. started including starting the baseball program.

The scrapbook is rather old on the outside and the plastic holding the photos and newspaper clippings are deteriorating so I'm going to get a new one and redo it and will include the little bit of memorabilia that I've accumulated of the years, mostly from Andy when I was a kid, but every time I visited him in Florida he'd give me something new up until he died in 2004. I even somehow ended up with his spring training uniform from 2004, where he helped out the pitchers every spring when he was into his eighties, but he died the February of that year before spring training started. I have a signature bat and should have bought a signature catcher's mitt I found on Ebay a couple of years ago.

Think I'm also going to digitally scan everything and save it all to a thumb drive to be able to share it with the rest of the family. I'm retired and it'll give me something fun to do this winter while waiting for next season.

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

Definitely on topic!: Breaking news! add Trump's latest SCOTUS win today (shocking!), delivered by John Roberts himself!

"Chief Justice John Roberts on Tuesday temporarily kept in place the Trump administration’s decision to freeze nearly $5 billion in foreign aid. The high court order is temporary, though it suggests that the justices will reverse a lower court ruling that withholding the funding was likely illegal."

https://apnews.com/live/donald-trump-news-updates-9-9-2025

And the hits just keep on coming...

Originally Posted by David Cotterell

Well, here we are, something like 30+ hours since the death of Mr. Kirk and there is no one in custody.  

So rage from anyone about the motivations of the shooter at this point is complete and utter bullshit.  Will any commentator say, "Well we know nothing about the shooter so we will reserve comment until we do have some facts at our disposal."  I highly doubt that. 

I'm very saddened by EVERYONE commenting:  The Dems did this!!  Kirk's words led to this.  This is war!  He was a vile person with vile opinions.

And so on and so forth.

Is there anyone anywhere among the left, the right, the moderates, who is not trying to take advantage of the situation to score points for their tribe? 

Nope.

Dave

Originally Posted by Maurice Clark

Hi All,

Sorry to hijack the forum again by actually mentioning < gasp> astronomy, but comet Swan 2025R2 is putting on a good show low in the evening sky and last night the clouds cleared enough for me to image it. 

A combination of 60 20 second images using my 5" f/5 refractor and a Canon D60.  The very bright star is Spica.

Now back to your usual programming! 

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

"The Supreme Court on Friday allowed President Trump's administration to withhold more than $4 billion in foreign aid funding, granting its request for emergency relief in a dispute over money that Congress has already approved."

"The high court's decision follows an order that Chief Justice John Roberts had issued earlier this month, which temporarily froze a district court injunction requiring the Trump administration to spend the money Congress appropriated for foreign-aid projects by the end of September. The court appeared to divide 6-3, with Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, the court's three liberals, dissenting."


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-trump-foreign-aid-funding/

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

Getting down to cases here, I think we need to add some context specific to SCOTUS and it current modus operandi.

In regards to "preliminary rulings", herein lies the problem.

Case in point:

1. Kavanaugh defended the shadow docket rulings as essentially not being complete and fully articulated decisions and certainly not at the level of a precedent.

2. Alito and Gorsuch issued a warning to a lower court judge that their rulings decided in such dockets should not be obviated by his actions.

3. The lower court judge responded that while he was sorry and didn't intend to undo a SCOTUS decision, he didn't  realize the shadow docket decision that evidently superseded his decision that was based upon his citation of a precedent did, in fact, constitute a new precedent!  Ouch!