SCOTUS Ruling on Biden's Student Loan Forgiveness...struck down

[andy58-in-nh]

And don't forget to thank Donald J. Trump on your way out!   

He deserves much of the credit. 

[The_Reader_David]

Exactly...no matter what you think of McConnell he did push these 3 Justices through the Senate.

And kept a seat from being filed with Merrick Garland.  The fact that the phrase "Associate Justice Merrick Garland" does nooto apply to realtity and only belongs to some alternate universe should be enough to earn McConnell the gratitude of all American conservatives.

[Kamaji]

And kept a seat from being filed with Merrick Garland.  The fact that the phrase "Associate Justice Merrick Garland" does nooto apply to realtity and only belongs to some alternate universe should be enough to earn McConnell the gratitude of all American conservatives.

 

[Maj. Bill Martin]

And don't forget to thank Donald J. Trump on your way out!   

By the way, isn't this the exact same Supreme Court (other than switching out Breyer for KBJ...) that rejected all of Trump's election challenges in 2021?

[Right_in_Virginia]

From his predictably hard core supporters, sure.  Wouldn't expect anything else.

The acknowledgement and credit are coming from more than supporters of Trump.  Venture beyond anti-Trump bubbles and discover this for yourself.  Prepare to be surprised.

[Kamaji]

The acknowledgement and credit are coming from more than supporters of Trump.  Venture beyond anti-Trump bubbles and discover this for yourself.  Prepare to be surprised.

Simply McConnell following Reagan's advice:  one can get a lot accomplished if one does not care who gets the credit.

McConnell is responsible for the current Court and the justices on it; Trump is not, except in the almost meaningless sense that he rubber-stamped what he was told to do.  He can claim all the credit he wants; that doesn't make him resonsible for the makeup of the Court.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Simply McConnell following Reagan's advice:  one can get a lot accomplished if one does not care who gets the credit.

McConnell is responsible for the current Court and the justices on it; Trump is not, except in the almost meaningless sense that he rubber-stamped what he was told to do.  He can claim all the credit he wants; that doesn't make him resonsible for the makeup of the Court.

I agree it says absolutely nothing about the primaries.  It is an argument (in my opinion, the only one) for voting for him in the general election in 2024.

[Smokin Joe]

Now the real fight begins ......

Well, all the offended still have two months of hot summer to burn down neighborhoods, and the power grid is shaky enough with more demand than ever...

[Kamaji]

I agree it says absolutely nothing about the primaries.  It is an argument (in my opinion, the only one) for voting for him in the general election in 2024.

What?  That he follows orders from McConnell?  That's a reason for voting for him?

The only reason I can see for voting for him would be if the GOP was stupid enough to nominate him for the general, because at that point, better a twit like Trump than an epic disaster like Biden or any other democrat.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

What?  That he follows orders from McConnell?  That's a reason for voting for him?

The only reason I can see for voting for him would be if the GOP was stupid enough to nominate him for the general, because at that point, better a twit like Trump than an epic disaster like Biden or any other democrat.

Well, that's why I said it was an argument for voting for him in the "general election" in 2024....

[Kamaji]

Well, that's why I said it was an argument for voting for him in the "general election" in 2024....

Ok; fair enough.  Although I wouldn't really call it voting for him so much as voting against the democrat.

[Smokin Joe]

Poor little orange baby. Everybody always picks on him....

McConnell holding the Republican Senate firm to deny Garland's appointment in 2020, and to confirm those three nominees had nothing to do with Trump.  That was all McConnell.

The only reason he was able to hold the Senate GOP together was because he called in all the markers he had on people like Murkowski and other RINO senators.  Basically, he told the members of that caucus that he had always stuck by them, and this was the time for payback.

That's the reason why he always supports incumbents in the primaries.  He views loyalty to members of his caucus as a two-way street that gives him massive leverage when whenever he needs to go to the arm-twisting mat.

I  think it is more basic than that. If either side of the aisle lets the government go full-on totalitarian, one side or the other will be picking up rifles.

Keeping the swamp going is ultimately about balance.

Even small steps down the road to totalitarianism are just fine with a public that has been trained to forget yesterday among the use-and-discard life they lead, but too big of a step will rile even the most somnolent masses.

With a future of Democrat legislative power and likely the White House, too, the SCOTUS is all that's left to put the brakes on and avoid the sort of overstep that would have the peasants storming the Bastille.

Democrats around Power go into a feeding frenzy, so something had to be done.

[Cyber Liberty]

That's the reason why he always supports incumbents in the primaries.  He views loyalty to members of his caucus as a two-way street that gives him massive leverage when whenever he needs to go to the arm-twisting mat.

Apparently he really liked Incumbent Mark Kelly in Arizona.  That might explain why he screwed Blake Masters over and handed Senate control over to Schumer.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Simply McConnell following Reagan's advice:  one can get a lot accomplished if one does not care who gets the credit.

McConnell is responsible for the current Court and the justices on it; Trump is not, except in the almost meaningless sense that he rubber-stamped what he was told to do.  He can claim all the credit he wants; that doesn't make him resonsible for the makeup of the Court.

 

[Kamaji]

As long as the little orange bitch does what he's told by people who actually know how to lead, things get done.  I know you hate that fact, but it is a fact nonetheless.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Apparently he really liked Incumbent Mark Kelly in Arizona.  That might explain why he screwed Blake Masters over and handed Senate control over to Schumer.

Top notch.

[DCPatriot]

By the way, isn't this the exact same Supreme Court (other than switching out Breyer for KBJ...) that rejected all of Trump's election challenges in 2021?

And your point is....???

Stop pissing in the punch bowl.

[DCPatriot]

Simply McConnell following Reagan's advice:  one can get a lot accomplished if one does not care who gets the credit.

McConnell is responsible for the current Court and the justices on it; Trump is not, except in the almost meaningless sense that he rubber-stamped what he was told to do.  He can claim all the credit he wants; that doesn't make him resonsible for the makeup of the Court.

Don't be a jerk.

If Donald Trump didn't beat Hillary Clinton, McConnell wouldn't even be in the argument.

[Kamaji]

Don't be a jerk.

If Donald Trump didn't beat Hillary Clinton, McConnell wouldn't even be in the argument.

Wonderful.  That just means that Trump was only instrumentally useful - useful like a rubberstamp, nothing more, and that he is entitled to no more credit than a rubberstamp is for the content of the document on which it leaves its stamp.

Trump was not responsible for this Court's composition, McConnell was, along with the Federalist Society.  Trump was nothing more than a tool to be used by McConnell.

[Bigun]

By the way, isn't this the exact same Supreme Court (other than switching out Breyer for KBJ...) that rejected all of Trump's election challenges in 2021?

  Including Texas vs Pennsylvania in which they had original jurisdiction!

Thus driving the final nail in the coffin of this once great republic!

It is also the very same court that just days ago ignored the plain language of the constitution in Moore vs Harper.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Including Texas vs Pennsylvania in which they had original jurisdiction!

Thus driving the final nail in the coffin of this once great republic!

It is also the very same court that just days ago ignored the plain language of the constitution in Moore vs Harper.

So does Trump get credit for this being a good Court, or not?  Because there are some pro-Trump people doing exactly that right now, though many of the same people were singing a different time as rece.tly as yesterday.  Do we respect the decisions they reach, or not?

In my opinion, far too many people look at a case and ask whether the result was fair, just, or right, instead of looking at the case and asking whether or not it was consistent with the applicable law.

Sometimes the law itself just sucks.  But good judges should enforce sucky laws just the same as they enforce well written ones.  Because deciding which laws are good, in which one suck, is not a determination entrusted to the judicial branch, but rather to the elected branches of our government.

[Kamaji]

So does Trump get credit for this Court, or no?  Do we respect the decision they reach, or not?

In my opinion, far too many people look at a case and ask whether the result was fair, just, or right, instead of looking at the case and asking whether or not it was consistent with the applicable law.

So.eti.es the law just sucks.  But good judges should enforce sucky laws just the same as they enforce well written ones.  Because deciding which laws are good, in which one suck, is not a determination entrusted to the judicial branch, but rather to the elected branches of our government.

[DCPatriot]

Wonderful.  That just means that Trump was only instrumentally useful - useful like a rubberstamp, nothing more, and that he is entitled to no more credit than a rubberstamp is for the content of the document on which it leaves its stamp.

Trump was not responsible for this Court's composition, McConnell was, along with the Federalist Society.  Trump was nothing more than a tool to be used by McConnell.

Nope.  it means that had if Hillary had won, today, the 2nd Amendment wouldn't exist 'legally' in its present form.

It means that the Court would be 6-3 DEM today.

Keep digging....   

[Right_in_Virginia]

As long as the little orange bitch does what he's told by people who actually know how to lead, things get done.  I know you hate that fact, but it is a fact nonetheless.

Your bitterness is showing, and it's ugly.  Just thought you'd like to know. 

[Right_in_Virginia]

Including Texas vs Pennsylvania in which they had original jurisdiction!

Thus driving the final nail in the coffin of this once great republic!

It is also the very same court that just days ago ignored the plain language of the constitution in Moore vs Harper.

I'd like to know what/who really spooked the hell out of Roberts.  @Bigun

[bigheadfred]

I'd like to know what/who really spooked the hell out of Roberts.  @Bigun

I'd put my money on Obama (and whomever controls him)

[Bigun]

So does Trump get credit for this being a good Court, or not?  Because there are some pro-Trump people doing exactly that right now, though many of the same people were singing a different time as rece.tly as yesterday.  Do we respect the decisions they reach, or not?

In my opinion, far too many people look at a case and ask whether the result was fair, just, or right, instead of looking at the case and asking whether or not it was consistent with the applicable law.

Sometimes the law itself just sucks.  But good judges should enforce sucky laws just the same as they enforce well written ones.  Because deciding which laws are good, in which one suck, is not a determination entrusted to the judicial branch, but rather to the elected branches of our government.

The ONLY thing that matters to me is whether or not what they do is, to the letter, consistent with the United States Constitution as written. @Maj. Bill Martin

[Maj. Bill Martin]

The ONLY thing that matters to me is whether or not what they do is, to the letter, consistent with the United States Constitution as written. @Maj. Bill Martin

That may be.  But plenty others just seem more concerned with whether or not they rule the "right" way.

The other factor to consider is that the Constitution itself isn't perfect.  It's got some gaps and ambiguities in it that makes reasonable disagreement possible.  Of course, there is plenty of unreasonable disagreement as well.

[Kamaji]

That may be.  But plenty others just seem more concerned with whether or not they rule the "right" way.

The other factor to consider is that the Constitution itself isn't perfect.  It's got some gaps and ambiguities in it that makes reasonable disagreement possible.  Of course, there is plenty of unreasonable disagreement as well.

And, there are plenty of things that, rightly or wrongly, are left up to the other two branches of the government.  The so-called "political question" doctrine, for example.

[mountaineer]

Yet another flipflop from Joe.
Biden, 2019: “But why should, in fact, these people out here pay for the fact that my kids had a significant debt, but they went to Yale and they went to Penn and they went – for incredibly high tuitions.”

https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1674844381629513737

[mystery-ak]

Shannon Bream
@ShannonBream
·
3m
POTUS speaking on GOP opposition to student loan debt forgiveness program says they couldn’t stand the thought of helping the middle class.

Shannon Bream
@ShannonBream
·
1m
Replying to
@ShannonBream
POTUS says #SCOTUS got it wrong today on the forgiveness decision. Announces new plan to forgive debt under a different law.

[mystery-ak]

https://twitter.com/W7VOA/status/1674872754560987136

[mystery-ak]

Sahil Kapur
@sahilkapur
·
21s
Biden says he'll now invoke Higher Education Act to "provide student debt relief to as many borrowers as possible, as quickly as possible."

Ed Dept can use it to "compromise, waive or release loans under certain circumstances."

Says it's "legally sound" but will "take longer."

[Kamaji]

Here we go again.

[mystery-ak]

Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
·
6m
...President Biden insists that "the hypocrisy is stunning" in failing to write off billions in loans. It is a curious objection in light of this decision. Biden himself (and figures like Speaker Nancy Pelosi) previously indicated that this effort would be unconstitutional.


Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
·
2m
Replying to
@JonathanTurley
...The NEA is focused on the Public Service Loan Forgiveness, Teacher Loan Forgiveness or the Total and Permanent Disability Discharge and does not reach the full scope of the program.


Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
·
1m
Replying to
@JonathanTurley
...The President just said that the Court "misinterpreted the Constitution." Yet, that also means the Justice Department previously misinterpreted the Constitution as did Pelosi and himself.

[mystery-ak]

Philip Melanchthon Wegmann
@PhilipWegmann
·
2m
Biden: "I think the Court misinterpreted the Constitution."

[mountaineer]

Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley

...The NEA is likely to be a dog that will not hunt for the President if he wants to replicate the current scope of the loan program. It is trying another novel means rather than going back to Congress as contemplated under Article I and Article II.

[mystery-ak]

RNC Research
@RNCResearch
·
5h
“People think that the president of the United States has the power for [student loan] debt forgiveness. He does not.”   — Nancy Pelosi (July 2021)

[bigheadfred]

Biden is a Constitutional scholar so he knows. /s

[Bigun]

Sahil Kapur
@sahilkapur
·
21s
Biden says he'll now invoke Higher Education Act to "provide student debt relief to as many borrowers as possible, as quickly as possible."

Ed Dept can use it to "compromise, waive or release loans under certain circumstances."

Says it's "legally sound" but will "take longer."

What Joe Biden, and many others, proclaim "legally sound" should be taken with very large grains of salt.

[mountaineer]

Michael Stratford
@mstratford
🚨 NEWS: Biden admin will begin regulatory process to enact student debt relief under Higher Education Act, per notice posted today on Ed Dept's website:

https://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2023/negregpublichearingannouncement.pdf
3:59 PM · Jun 30, 2023

[mystery-ak]

https://twitter.com/DailyCaller/status/1674875174716416001

[corbe]

   Since there is a lot of pretend in this Thread, IMHO the Court would be packed to the roof with better Judges than Barrett, Kavanaugh and Gorsch had we had 6 years of Pres. Cruz, by now.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

   Since there is a lot of pretend in this Thread, IMHO the Court would be packed to the roof with better Judges than Barrett, Kavanaugh and Gorsch had we had 6 years of Pres. Cruz, by now.

I think the three of them are okay, though I think Gorsuch generally is the best of the three.  Like all textualists, though, he comes up with some results that folks just aren't going to like....

[bigheadfred]

Huh

Twitter is now requiring I log in to view these posts. Anyone else getting that?

[Kamaji]

Huh

Twitter is now requiring I log in to view these posts. Anyone else getting that?

I was getting that as well.

[mystery-ak]

https://twitter.com/WarMachineRR/status/1674872885716951040

[mystery-ak]

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1674879817890578433

[bigheadfred]

Hillary Clinton
@HillaryClinton
The Supreme Court's recent rulings were sadly predictable for anyone who understands the hard-right agenda. Their goal has always been to install Justices whose job is to turn back the clock on our freedoms, on decades of constitutional decisions, and on our continuing struggle to “form a more perfect union” that includes all of us.

Let's vote out their political enablers and rein in the dark, subversive money that supports them in their quest to reverse a century of progress.

[Kamaji]

Hillary Clinton
@HillaryClinton
The Supreme Court's recent rulings were sadly predictable for anyone who understands the hard-right agenda. Their goal has always been to install Justices whose job is to turn back the clock on our freedoms, on decades of constitutional decisions, and on our continuing struggle to “form a more perfect union” that includes all of us.

Let's vote out their political enablers and rein in the dark, subversive money that supports them in their quest to reverse a century of progress.

Wow.  The lies and bullshit in that statement are unbelievable.