Holy Fuck DACA Survived

[Steve of phpBB]

5-4 decision.

[tennbengal]

John Roberts is having a series of moments...

[Steve of phpBB]

5-4 decision.

It looks like the Court ruled that the Acting Secretary of DHS did not perform a sufficient analysis to support the rescission of DACA. In other words, DHS *could* rescind DACA if they dotted their i’s and crossed their t’s.

Which is probably a legally correct decision. And it also means that if Trump wins, DACA will be rescinded again. And if the Dems can’t take power and enact a statutory fix, the Dreamers will be at risk in the future.

[Steve of phpBB]

(But tell me how “ethics” requires the Dems to leave the GOP in control of the Senate if one of their candidates does bad things.)

[brian]

If you'll allow me to put my tinfoil hat on, one of the reasons Roberts might have joined the majority isn't only the narrow scope of the ruling, but to provide more campaign fodder for Trump this year.

[The Sybian]

If you'll allow me to put my tinfoil hat on, one of the reasons Roberts might have joined the majority isn't only the narrow scope of the ruling, but to provide more campaign fodder for Trump this year.

I don't know this for a fact, but I don't believe Roberts is a Trump fan. He is 90s version of Far Right and a strict constructionalist, but I don't think he is going out of his way to help Trump's campaign.

[brian]

If you'll allow me to put my tinfoil hat on, one of the reasons Roberts might have joined the majority isn't only the narrow scope of the ruling, but to provide more campaign fodder for Trump this year.

I don't know this for a fact, but I don't believe Roberts is a Trump fan. He is 90s version of Far Right and a strict constructionalist, but I don't think he is going out of his way to help Trump's campaign.

I don't think he did it FOR Trump but I doubt he's displeased it's a happy accident the ruling will put wind in Trump's sails.

(Sotomayor's opinion for the majority was awesome, by the way. She's the real star of the Supreme Court if you ask me.)

[brian]

Also before we start sucking Roberts' dick, the court has yet to still rule on allowing the House access to Trump's taxes, which could be a devastating blow to any kind of congressional oversight of the executive branch for decades to come. The DACA and LGBTQ rights rulings are great, but this one could essentially codify the position of President as an emperor, not a co-equal branch of government.

[degenerasian]

If you'll allow me to put my tinfoil hat on, one of the reasons Roberts might have joined the majority isn't only the narrow scope of the ruling, but to provide more campaign fodder for Trump this year.

I dont see how it's campaign fodder. The way Trump is tweeting this morning he is really saying the supreme court is not politically charged enough and we need more justices who are bound by their politics.

I don't know why this doesn't drive progressives to fully support Biden. For all the talk that Biden is no different than Trump to their lives, these Supreme court decisions make real differences to real people. RBG probably won't survive a second Trump term and if her vote is flipped, then these decisions and all future decisions would assuredly go the other way.

[brian]

The reason it matters is because the reason a LOT of people held their nose and voted for Trump in 2016 was because of the empty seat on the bench that he would get to fill on Day One and the court's ideology has shifted to the right now with two new conservative justices, but he can still say "Look, we still need another conservative justice on the bench!" which he'll get because RBG isn't living another four years. I hope she lives another 20 years whether Biden wins or not, but I'll be stoked if she lives through the election to tell you the truth.

[degenerasian]

Sure but I think those voters are already accounted for, and some are sick of Trump that this issue might not be enough.

Progessives should be more scared and there are more of them.

[brian]

Sure but I think those voters are already accounted for, and some are sick of Trump that this issue might not be enough.

Progessives should be more scared and there are more of them.

I'm not ready to assume anything. There's a lot of hateful people out there and this might be enough to get a lot of them off of the sidelines.

[mister d]

I think someone posted this here yesterday:

(Not that exact tweet from today, as it would be impossible, but the polling numbers.)

[The Sybian]

I find it really hard to believe 73% of Republicans believe children people brought here illegally as children should be allowed to stay. Seems awfully high.

[Steve of phpBB]

I find it really hard to believe 73% of Republicans believe children people brought here illegally as children should be allowed to stay. Seems awfully high.

I think those results depend a lot on how a question is framed and what questions come before it. If the question brings up the fact that these kids have never known any home but the US,” and “are only eligible if they don’t commit crimes,” more people will agree with DACA.

[P.D.X.]

"...in cages?"

[Square Rob]

Just noting that Scalia died in Feb if an election year. It’s June, almost July. I know, MM has no decency or consistency, but I honestly am not convinced that they’d be able to rush a nomination through AND get the requisite votes at this point. Maybe I’m naive, but I don’t think Mitt would go out of his way to allow Donald to appoint another judge. Given also that DJT has now hammered on one of his nominees, he also might not listen to the same people on who should be nominated. Highly probable he would want to pick someone who would be loyal to him and not necessarily who normal R’s would want. Not a great recipe for a fast track nomination.