Reply 1 - Posted by:
Catherine 11/26/2020 8:44:33 PM (No. 617398)
Wanna' bet it's on orders from the magic negro? Since when does one justice chastise the others and make it public to boot.
220 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
Quigley 11/26/2020 8:45:00 PM (No. 617399)
How wise she is in her ways, with this new science. For is not a stone heavier than wood? And yet a stone bridge doth remain above water. Tell us more o wise latina.
119 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
JL80863 11/26/2020 8:47:49 PM (No. 617402)
Democrats always find the Constitution inconvenient Practically every Wana be tyrant is a democrat/commie.
168 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
RuckusTom 11/26/2020 8:51:09 PM (No. 617404)
The wise Latina speaks.
48 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
Trump'sCousin 11/26/2020 8:54:30 PM (No. 617406)
The Ignorant Latina passes gas...
Everyone hears it...and it stinketh!
161 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
SavageRider 11/26/2020 8:57:39 PM (No. 617407)
There is no coronavirus exception in the Constitution. The first amendment is clear. Sotomayor is a political hack.
213 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
Safari Man 11/26/2020 8:57:51 PM (No. 617408)
My only qualm is that it should have been 9:0.
203 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Jethro bo 11/26/2020 9:00:59 PM (No. 617411)
An Associate Just-Us of the SCOTUS and not once did she mention the Constitution. Just that the Court should give unlimited power over We the People all based on conjecture and wishful thinking. She is everything we have come to expect from cowards to scared to run for office but power mad making laws from their Black Robed tower. Not once did she mention the Constitution. Not once!
141 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
tsquare 11/26/2020 9:02:48 PM (No. 617412)
It is the FIRST amendment. There is a process to amend our constitution...it does not flow through SCOTUS or any mouthy person on it.
132 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
JimBob 11/26/2020 9:15:45 PM (No. 617416)
Consider if ol' Ginsburg had NOT kicked the bucket last summer.
She would of course have voted the other way.
It would have been 5-4 to Restrict going to Church.
One of our PRIMARY, GOD-GIVEN RIGHTS would have been..... abolished.
THANKS AGAIN to President Trump and Mitch McConnel for acting promptly and filling the Supreme Court seat with a Constitutionalist.
Also, the court affirming people's RELIGIOUS RIGHT to attend church does NOT Mandate going to church. People have the Freedom to choose..... to attend, or stay home, as they wish.
165 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
janjan 11/26/2020 9:16:30 PM (No. 617417)
They are playing a dangerous game with the Constitution. We will not stand for it.
126 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
FormerDem 11/26/2020 9:19:42 PM (No. 617420)
Did she comment on COVID risks of the BLM demonstrations? If not, can she explain why overlooking those supposed risks while rebuking those of church attendance is anything other than a self-unaware bigotry that she ought to have examined by now? If she will not do the work to identify and challenge her own bigotry she ought not be a judge.
115 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
mizzmac 11/26/2020 9:38:51 PM (No. 617431)
Just what SCOTUS needs: a chief-scold. "Karen" Sotomayor needs to keep it to herself.
90 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
privateer 11/26/2020 9:39:02 PM (No. 617432)
FTA: Notably, the Catholic Sotomayor was joined in her dissent by Justice Elena Kagan, who is Jewish and rarely joins with her colleague’s more acerbic dissents. Correction: who is Jewish, and not a total idiot. I have more respect for a Latina that cleans motel rooms, or grinds her own corn for her 4X4 Taqueria than for this overpaid, under-qualified, opinionated Jenny.
78 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
PostAway 11/26/2020 9:44:24 PM (No. 617434)
Let’s play “Are You Smarter Than a Wise Latina Supreme Court Justice?”. It’s not even hard to win. First, the job of a Supreme Court Justice is to consider the constitutionality of proposed laws and not their medical efficacy. The spirit of the Constitution is to allow American citizens to decide how to conduct their own lives. Laws that prohibit certain activities are intended to prevent anyone from recklessly or intentionally causing harm to others. The asymptomatic going to religious services in a world where humans can contract deadly viruses by going about their daily lives has not traditionally been seen as such an activity. Citizens are aware of COVID and its dangers and have the right to decide to peaceably assemble to practice their religion.
Her ridiculous comparison between Jews and Christians attending services in the U.S. and the Trump administration temporarily banning visas for travel to the U.S. from Muslim countries that have openly threatened the safety of Americans smacks of activism, obtuseness or malevolence.
We in the U. S. have been badgered into submission for over fifty five years and have allowed generations of immigrants to come to this country and immediately assert their preferences on the native population. This has got to stop.
88 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
pilot222 11/26/2020 9:51:24 PM (No. 617435)
This pot is coming to a boil. God help us.
70 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
JunkYardDog 11/26/2020 10:09:40 PM (No. 617437)
Hey Sonia, take off your judge's robes and resign, then try on a lab coat and do some work involving immunology, then you can talk about viruses. But as long as you are a SC Justice, stick to the law, chica.
82 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
Avanti1 11/26/2020 10:16:32 PM (No. 617440)
FTA: “Justices of this Court play a deadly game in second guessing the expert judgment of health officials ..."
Sotomayor contradicts her own "argument" when she refers to experts. Gorsuch is an expert on legal issues yet Sotomayor saysd he is wrong. The same applies to medical experts; some of them are wrong,
45 people like this.
Reply 19 - Posted by:
Nimby 11/26/2020 10:17:54 PM (No. 617441)
Hypocrisy! Thy name is Sotomayor
45 people like this.
Reply 20 - Posted by:
Laotzu 11/26/2020 10:22:00 PM (No. 617442)
So now I know Justice Sotomayor is playing a deadly game.
43 people like this.
Reply 21 - Posted by:
planetgeo 11/26/2020 10:22:03 PM (No. 617443)
This woman has no business being a Justice of the Supreme Court. She has no regard whatsoever for the Constitution, but is consumed with emotion and and a false sense of what constitutes science, like pretty much all Democrats these days. THEY are the ones playing the deadly game.
83 people like this.
Reply 22 - Posted by:
zephyrgirl 11/26/2020 10:23:48 PM (No. 617445)
The "Wise Latina" needs to shut her pie hole.
46 people like this.
Reply 23 - Posted by:
anniebc 11/26/2020 10:30:24 PM (No. 617448)
Babykiller.
45 people like this.
Reply 24 - Posted by:
BeatleJeff 11/26/2020 10:40:10 PM (No. 617454)
Proving why it was imperative to get ACB on the Court before the election ...
84 people like this.
Reply 25 - Posted by:
Shmowry1 11/26/2020 10:42:44 PM (No. 617456)
Freedom is such a stubborn obstacle for tyrants.
83 people like this.
Reply 26 - Posted by:
watashiyo 11/26/2020 10:57:25 PM (No. 617461)
Boo hoo hoo!
25 people like this.
Reply 27 - Posted by:
Trigger2 11/26/2020 10:57:26 PM (No. 617462)
Who died and left her supreme ruler of the Supreme Court?
40 people like this.
Reply 28 - Posted by:
GoodDeal 11/26/2020 11:01:17 PM (No. 617464)
A health issue does not take away Constitutional rights. As a Supreme Court Justice it might be an idea to learn about the Constitution and Bill of Rights before going to work. Your law clerks apparently aren’t giving you solid background law.
62 people like this.
Reply 29 - Posted by:
SALady 11/26/2020 11:01:54 PM (No. 617465)
"Justice Sotomayor has a major hissy fit and threatens to hold her breath until she turns blue..."
There, corrected the headline to match reality!!!
Nobody is forced to go to church. But if you want to practice your constitutional right to do that, no dictator-wanna-be mayors or governors have the right or power to prevent you from choosing to practice your constitutional rights!!!!! Especially over a virus with a 0.04% fatality rate!!!!!
60 people like this.
Reply 30 - Posted by:
PChristopher 11/26/2020 11:04:50 PM (No. 617468)
And just think...Commucrats want to pack the SC with more Just. Like. This. Be afraid.
56 people like this.
Reply 31 - Posted by:
gramma b 11/26/2020 11:08:16 PM (No. 617469)
She's a dimwit. She is what affirmative action produces.
64 people like this.
Reply 32 - Posted by:
Rumblehog 11/26/2020 11:16:37 PM (No. 617470)
Hey, "wise" Latrina, don't flap your lips and pontificate, cite the U.S. Constitution, and if you can't then shut up.
45 people like this.
Well stated #25.
19 people like this.
Reply 34 - Posted by:
Obviousity 11/26/2020 11:24:35 PM (No. 617472)
To be lectured by a sitting comorbidity . . .
39 people like this.
Reply 35 - Posted by:
confused 11/27/2020 12:27:51 AM (No. 617481)
"infects a people million weekly". What does that mean? one million test positive (yes). one million have symptoms (no). one million are incapacitated (no) Remember, 99% of those million will recuperate. How many actually die?
The way the MSM reports the news (1000 new cases or 1000 positive tests) does not mean 1000 new infections or 1000 newly incapacitated new patients. This does not even mention the age range for new sick patients (mostly over 75 years),
Lawyers tend to read the headlines and not look at the details. The propagandists know this and grossly inflame the headlines. The lawyers and propagandists deserve each other but the rest of us deserve some common sense.
36 people like this.
Reply 36 - Posted by:
CDR 11/27/2020 1:28:12 AM (No. 617482)
But not a word with regard to LIFE when any issues before the bench regarding abortion which has killed in excess of 50,000,000 little ones.
Your shedding crocodile tears....."judge"
40 people like this.
Reply 37 - Posted by:
RedWhite&Blue2 11/27/2020 1:34:24 AM (No. 617485)
She is what’s radically wrong with
“judges”........
28 people like this.
Reply 38 - Posted by:
Mushroom 11/27/2020 1:55:48 AM (No. 617489)
Madam Justice,
Your task is not to act as a medical professional, but only as you were appoint to do..That very narrow topic is the contents of the US Constitution. You are to evaluate items brought to your attention and determine if they meet the set restrictions on government action against the people the contract covers, citizens of the US.
Your source document is the US Constitution as amended. You are not to read 'between' the lines, nor interpret the meaning of what, in your opinion, it should have said (Looking at you Roberts) but WHAT was presented.
Simple example. The 1st Amendment limits the government. In case you forgot it is:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
So, Since these fine people are exercising their religious requirements, and for that matter peaceably assemble. The government isn't allowed to limit that. (I would note that permits are unconstitutional, but that's another matter).
Do you see any exceptions? I don't. And I didn't even take out a student loan to go to law school ( a Training Institution).
There is no Federal limitation period.
So IF it's not *specified* in the Constitution, who has the say so on that? Well golly gee, someone added that (you might have not read that far once you decided abortion was a right)..
It's the 10th Amendment, the last of the original limitations on government. It says:
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Ok, so did you understand the word 'delegated'? Ok so it falls to the individual State or the People.
So the State can say No! You can't assemble! , Well wait a sec there is that second phrase.. Nor *prohibited* by it to the States. What is "it", well our contract. And any decent lawyer should understand basic contract law. This is the 'clean up' of a very well defined document, it says " Hey, if the world changes or we missed something it's is a right of the State or the People,(key phrase) UNLESS, we already told you 'No.'
Ok, So 'Justice' Sotomayor, I jumped out of my comfort zone of fixing things for people to try to help you do your job, I'm sorry if my words don't match yours, but I know and have read the document my forefathers (ok, I'm an immigrant that had NO rights here until my grandparents jumped through the legal hoops to BE citizens..) So be it the founders/representative of the REAL power (the States and People) signed this contract and I understand the simple words. It doesn't say 'Oh, you must look at Black's sithxth edition to learn what a term of art is, these words are in black and white before Black was a twinkle in his father's eye.
You are lying. Flat out. It may not be a bother to you, but your ilk ten to reuse bad judgement as 'fact'
This needs to stop.
Signed,
A party to our contract, and proud Citizen.
Addendum: My apologies and thanks to Mrs Goldburg and crew , I promised to drop more in the collection box next time it comes round. (consider that 'cup of coffee' thing..I kinda like that) Bless you all and I am happy we had the money to cook the dinner we always wanted.
44 people like this.
Reply 39 - Posted by:
smokincol 11/27/2020 2:46:27 AM (No. 617498)
it's a shame that, over the years, the Supreme Court has gotten so political. I don't think that our Founders had that in mind in the construction of our government.
28 people like this.
Reply 40 - Posted by:
Timber Queen 11/27/2020 4:02:43 AM (No. 617508)
#39 - They were political from the beginning. Look up Marbury v. Madison (1803).
22 people like this.
Reply 41 - Posted by:
DCGIRL 11/27/2020 4:34:25 AM (No. 617516)
If I remember correctly, she bragged about creating law not interpreting the law. We have five justices that are on our side.
28 people like this.
Reply 42 - Posted by:
judy 11/27/2020 5:36:44 AM (No. 617535)
The dems & media stole the election with covid ... now they think they can bully the SC toooo!!! Did they object to Biden's so called victory rallies, Ginsberg's week long viewing, DC protests...
26 people like this.
Reply 43 - Posted by:
dst4life 11/27/2020 6:59:05 AM (No. 617562)
She's upset over inadvertent COVID transmissions, a disease with a survival rate of 99.6% But completely unfazed over abortion, a deliberate act of killing, and with a survival rate of 0%. Just as a reminder, with the exception of only a few who survive a botched abortion, the batting average is as follows: Abortionists 61,000,000, unborn children 0.
33 people like this.
Reply 44 - Posted by:
philsner 11/27/2020 7:32:12 AM (No. 617589)
Go pound sand.
19 people like this.
Reply 45 - Posted by:
Rinktum 11/27/2020 7:43:26 AM (No. 617594)
Quite frankly, I question the expert judgment of many health officials. They have driven this train wreck and the country has suffered by listening to their expertise. Clearly, the only truth she seeks comes from the opinion of medial experts who agree with her philosophy of government control while she ignores the basic fundamental right of every American to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness regardless of what else is going on in the country. Those rights are given to us by God and are not to be trifled with by SCOTUS. Their job is to affirm those rights, not to impede them in any way. Once again, the left is driven by feelings and believe they are entitled to rule over the rest of us and ignore the Constitution.
27 people like this.
Why did Roberts join this dissent? What Constitution is he looking at?
26 people like this.
Reply 47 - Posted by:
Venturer 11/27/2020 7:47:35 AM (No. 617599)
Justices on the Supreme Court are supposed to Judge a case on the law.
Not their personal opinions, and they are never to chastise the other Justices,
If they have a complaint on a case they should write their complaint bearing on the law.
Neither Kagan or Sotomeyer belong on the highest court in the land.
32 people like this.
Reply 48 - Posted by:
Edgelady 11/27/2020 7:53:01 AM (No. 617605)
Let’s hear from all four dissenters - that’s fine, it’s all written on record. Point being in all this, people have a right to choose whether they want to go to church, synagogue, etc., and pray. They have a right to weigh the evidence according to where they live, where they worship and their own physical conditions, just like the choices they make when going to grocery stores. There’s something sinister afoot when denying people’s religious rights.
24 people like this.
Reply 49 - Posted by:
edgar 11/27/2020 7:59:51 AM (No. 617608)
How dare you over rule a dictator!
18 people like this.
Reply 50 - Posted by:
WhamDBambam 11/27/2020 8:00:56 AM (No. 617609)
The Fat Latina burps.
16 people like this.
Reply 51 - Posted by:
franq 11/27/2020 8:31:47 AM (No. 617629)
Why, #47? Roberts will never again issue a conservative opinion. Another Bush failure.
28 people like this.
Leftist judges are already untethered from the Constitution or even the plain meaning of English words but their greater sin may be their weather-vane adherence to groupthink.
Covid is not a threat. We have nearly a year of evidence, not that we needed it.
The gloom and doom routine is so artificial and hollow that not even leftists believe it.
15 people like this.
Reply 53 - Posted by:
franq 11/27/2020 8:43:58 AM (No. 617641)
Who gives a hoot what this floozy says or thinks? Do we really think 9 people are going to change the way this country is going? Even if Trump wins, which I fervently pray happens, the left never rests. Tom Wolf and his drag queen will still run PA into the ground. Many other examples could be given.
14 people like this.
Reply 54 - Posted by:
MickTurn 11/27/2020 8:45:56 AM (No. 617644)
AND YOU are a COMMUNIST! Your Reply?
11 people like this.
Reply 55 - Posted by:
Jebediah 11/27/2020 8:51:41 AM (No. 617648)
There is NO question in my mind that Sotomayor is on the Court because she is a Hispanic female, and probably gay. She is a quota, and did/does NOT have any kind of sterling qualifications. She has also, not more than a brief handful of times, ever voted after considering a case constitutionally but ALWAYS votes along Democratic party lines. The Republicans, in their unerring deferment to a President's choice, allowed her in. When are we going to wise up.....this is no longer, it is so obvious you could trip on it, an ethical, play by the rules society anymore............there is no question that there was widespread fraud in the Presidential election and now we are trueing to lock the barn door after the horse has been stolen. (And as to John Roberts, what a disgrace, given us by the President who also refused to pardon Scooter Libby!)
24 people like this.
Reply 56 - Posted by:
Dodge Boy 11/27/2020 9:02:07 AM (No. 617666)
Justice Sotie, if you are now choosing to politicize things, then you don't belong in the SCOTUS. Resign from the bench now so the President can nominate someone of stature. McConnell and team should be able to confirm your replacement by the end of December.
15 people like this.
Reply 57 - Posted by:
bigfatslob 11/27/2020 9:18:04 AM (No. 617680)
So the Supreme Court has moved from dissenting arguments to scolding. Are we going to hear from the 'wise Latina' on every judgement by the SCOTUS this could get tiring? Justice John Bater Roberts gave his dissent so shut up Justice Chacita.
14 people like this.
Reply 58 - Posted by:
LC Chihuahua 11/27/2020 9:27:59 AM (No. 617688)
Butt she's the wise Latina! We must prioritize her opinion over the rest of the Supreme Court. We would be unworthy not to do so. (/sssssss)
Sotowhatever is just another partisan hack masquerading as a professional, and that is precisely what Obama wanted when he appointed her to the Supreme Court. The rule of law be damned which is Obama's belief in damning America. Obama believes in 'God damn America', and he made that his policy for 8 long years.
13 people like this.
Reply 59 - Posted by:
Red Ghost 11/27/2020 9:34:37 AM (No. 617693)
I worked with Sonia Sotomayor. She is way, way over her head sitting on the Supreme Court. She is probably the most public and best example of why affirmative action hires are unwise. But then, she is a Democrat. What else needs to be said.
29 people like this.
Reply 60 - Posted by:
Kafka2 11/27/2020 9:38:09 AM (No. 617695)
Sotomayor shows her contempt for the Constitution she swore to defend. The Constitution does not say the right to gamble at a casino or go to liquor stores is protected. Yet this is allowed, while the right to worship, that is in the Constitution, is to be prohibited.
16 people like this.
Reply 61 - Posted by:
udanja99 11/27/2020 9:49:48 AM (No. 617706)
Want to do something about Covid19, Sonia? May I suggest that you do something about your own comorbidity? Put down the fork and get off the sofa.
15 people like this.
Reply 62 - Posted by:
pmcclure 11/27/2020 10:12:37 AM (No. 617724)
So our Constitution should be overridden when the end - unchallenged tyranny - justifies the means? She is yet another illustration that evil and supernatural stupidity are inextricably linked.
11 people like this.
Reply 63 - Posted by:
swarfer 11/27/2020 10:18:41 AM (No. 617729)
SCOTUS has ruled and that’s all there is to it. They reaffirmed the Constitution says what it says and that petty dictators cannot pick and choose to whom and when it applies. Typical of the left to try to try to subvert the Constitution by using “experts” to deprive some people but not others of their rights. There is no end to this type of logic and it stopped with this ruling.
This is far more significant than most people realize. For example “experts” could say that gun owners are more likely to be mentally disturbed than non-gun owners therefore they have to have annual mental health examinations to keep their gun permits and if they refuse they loose their rights. With a little imagination you can see how this could be used against any group of people to deprive them of their rights.
14 people like this.
Reply 64 - Posted by:
Strike3 11/27/2020 10:21:03 AM (No. 617731)
Sotomayor is simply worried because her body type is in the high-risk category - fat and stupid.
12 people like this.
Reply 65 - Posted by:
LC Chihuahua 11/27/2020 10:26:08 AM (No. 617734)
The dissenters were Sotomayor, Kegan, Breyer, and ROBERTS. Not much comment on that yet.
Our big government Republicans are starting to show their hands. Rather than hiding behind the Democrats, they are publicly siding with them. With regard to that, we may well be reaching a tipping point in our country. We will either follow the rule of law or the rule of tyrants.
13 people like this.
Reply 66 - Posted by:
Zigrid 11/27/2020 10:27:50 AM (No. 617738)
This is not a surprise.... she's throwing a hissy fit because lefties are always angry.... wait till the court has to decide the election finals... she'll have a stroke...
13 people like this.
Reply 67 - Posted by:
MDConservative 11/27/2020 10:31:28 AM (No. 617743)
"“Justices of this Court play a deadly game in second guessing the expert judgment of health officials about the environments in which a contagious virus, now infecting a million Americans each week, spreads most easily.”
What "expert judgement"...the judgement and pronouncements that change from day to day? Judgements based from the beginning on false data and premises? The simple fact, Madam Justice, is that there is no expert consensus. People should have enough brains and sense to act responsibly as they see the threat. The whole idea was never to STOP the illness, but to "flatten the curve". Thank you for your panic on my behalf.
11 people like this.
Reply 68 - Posted by:
DennisM 11/27/2020 10:39:31 AM (No. 617754)
Hypocrisy at it's finest she is. Want's to restrict attendance at churches but not at retail stores riots and terrorist demonstrations. Who's controlling her.
9 people like this.
Reply 69 - Posted by:
Italiano 11/27/2020 10:44:27 AM (No. 617759)
The Affirmative Action-propelled Wide Latina is far and away the dumbest Justice in Supreme Court history.
13 people like this.
Reply 70 - Posted by:
Arby 11/27/2020 10:48:56 AM (No. 617763)
She was never as wise as she thought she was.
12 people like this.
Reply 71 - Posted by:
Highvoltage 11/27/2020 10:56:42 AM (No. 617770)
The sinful nature of tyrants to rule others exists in all but some more than others. Now Sotto sit down and shut up!
8 people like this.
Reply 72 - Posted by:
iraengneer 11/27/2020 11:58:55 AM (No. 617820)
Detestable and vile beast. First appointed to a federal bench by the equally worthless George H. W. Bush. It figures.
But, when the nomination to SCOTUS sent by Ovomit was being considered, what of the "stalwarts" of the Republicrat cabal?? Well, consider the "yea" votes, from low down skunks sporting an (R) sweater:
Lamar Alexander (spit, spit)
Kit Bond
Susan Collins ( spit, spit, spit)
Lindsey Graham (spit, spit)
Judd Gregg
Richard Lugar
Mel Martinez
Olympia Snowe (retch)
George Voinovich
Never again should the creeps in the RNC and that gang of creeps and treasonous illegitimate seek systemic support. Hang them next to the Dumbocraps. A murrain upon them all.
9 people like this.
Reply 73 - Posted by:
cold porridge 11/27/2020 12:13:14 PM (No. 617834)
Sotomayor's job is not to decide cases based on her feelings about disease or exaggerations of disease. Her job is to decide cases based on the constitution. I hate leftists more and more as time goes by.
8 people like this.
Reply 74 - Posted by:
TennDon 11/27/2020 12:32:15 PM (No. 617848)
inJustice Sodakracker should resign or learn what the Constitution really says. Since Xhe will not do so resignation in extreme disgrace— as should all libtards.
6 people like this.
Reply 75 - Posted by:
DVC 11/27/2020 12:58:59 PM (No. 617868)
Freedom trumps your inexpert "experts", every single time, you foolish woman.
7 people like this.
Reply 76 - Posted by:
Connor 11/27/2020 1:21:28 PM (No. 617885)
Sotomayor is out of order.
8 people like this.
Reply 77 - Posted by:
lakerman1 11/27/2020 1:36:51 PM (No. 617895)
The two cunning linguists are now speaking to each other and themselves, after the appointment of Barrett to the Court.
When Sotomayor was nominated for the 3rd circuit, she brought her beard to the Judiciary hearing. She didn't even bother to do that, when she was nominated for the Supreme Court.
I had hoped for some rationality from Sonia, and I was proven wrong.
Now as she awaits the consequences of her morbid obesity - bad for everyone, but especially lethal for a Type I diabetes sufferer - I will hope she has an epiphany, on her road to perdition.
Elena Kagen is unworthy of an insult.
10 people like this.
Reply 78 - Posted by:
msjena 11/27/2020 1:38:25 PM (No. 617896)
She makes these statements in her dissent, not in an out-of-court statement. She apparently doesn't understand the Constitution because she compares the strict scrutiny given in free exercise of religion cases to lack of heightened scrutiny given to the so-called Muslim ban. People trying to enter the United States do not have Constitutional protections. They are not entitled to claim discrimination at all.
10 people like this.
Reply 79 - Posted by:
DCGIRL 11/27/2020 3:15:44 PM (No. 617968)
Justice Sotomayor is the justice that said she believes in making law not interpreting law. She needs to be removed as soon as possible along with Roberts.
7 people like this.
Reply 80 - Posted by:
Luandir 11/27/2020 3:22:24 PM (No. 617973)
#2, if she weighs the same as a duck...
3 people like this.
Reply 81 - Posted by:
Lawsy0 11/27/2020 5:19:20 PM (No. 618044)
This gynattorney baby murderer needs to shut her pie hole. Doesn't she have any law clerks who have passed the bar? (Dittos on the Affirmative Action hire!)
2 people like this.
Reply 82 - Posted by:
Hugh Akston 11/27/2020 6:54:51 PM (No. 618092)
I could have 'liked' most of the comments, but I did 'like' #78 for this...
Elena Kagen is unworthy of an insult.
4 people like this.
Reply 83 - Posted by:
web 11/27/2020 7:50:57 PM (No. 618120)
She may be wise, but she isn't too bright, if she believes all this COVID hype.
1 person likes this.
Reply 84 - Posted by:
PrayerWarrior 11/27/2020 10:54:03 PM (No. 618197)
This is what "Ruling by Emotion" looks like. Get another job, you are no lawyer! You are acting like an out of control emotional liberal female. Who picked you for this position? Oh, Obama. That explains everything.
3 people like this.
Comments:
Unwise Latinexa will be throwing lots of fits over the next few years.