Supreme Court’s Conservatives Issued a Decision Too Extreme for Clarence Thomas

[OfTheCross]

The Supreme Court’s Conservatives Issued a Decision Too Extreme for Clarence Thomas

On Friday, the Supreme Court pulled off a heist decades in the making. In TransUnion v. Ramirez, five conservative justices seized Congress’ power to create new individual rights and protect victims by authorizing lawsuits when those rights are violated. Instead, the court awarded itself the power to decide which rights may be vindicated in federal court, overturning Congress’ own decisions about which harms deserve redress. Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s opinion for the court was so extreme it prompted Justice Clarence Thomas to write a furious dissent, joined by the liberals, that accused the majority of infidelity to the Constitution. But because of the court’s 6–3 conservative supermajority, Thomas’ defection from the conservative bloc did not change the outcome. And now, thanks to Friday’s decision, a huge number of Americans harmed by a flagrant violation of the law will be locked out of the federal judiciary altogether.




Get your SCOTUS nominee stolen and don't retaliate, brehs.

Refuse to resign and die in office, brehs.

 

[ogc163]

After reading the opinion and the dissents, the article is hyperbolic, even though I disagree with the majority's opinion I would recommend reading Kagan's dissent for a more even-tempered response.

The major implications relate to the future of privacy cases where courts have to decide on the concrete harm standard vs the increased risk of future harm standard.

However, this article and parts of Thomas's dissent will lead you to believe that statutory-based rights have been substantially undermined with this decision, and I think that's an exaggerated concern.

 

[BigMoneyGrip]

It’s still fukk RBG… old bytch should’ve retired