The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent term ended with a flurry of conservative-leaning decisions that have been met with shock and disapproval, particularly from the left. This conservative trend is seen as a reflection of the 6-3 conservative majority established during Trump’s presidency. Noteworthy rulings include siding with a web designer who refused services to same-sex couples, ending affirmative action in colleges, and dismissing President Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan.

  • MasterOBee Master/King
    link
    01 year ago

    It takes a lot of logical leaps to go from ‘someone paid for his vacation’ to say 'they’re just ruling with whatever rich person is sending them money! I can’t point to any specific people…or cases they ruled on, BUT THEY ARE!!"

    • @S_Roman
      link
      11 year ago

      I can’t explain something to somebody who doesn’t want to listen to the explanation.

      • MasterOBee Master/King
        link
        01 year ago

        You can’t explain anything because you can’t prove what you need to about your statement. You made a statement, but you failed to prove any part of it. I’ve read every single word you’ve wrote and gone to each of your sources.

        Show me how money has altered any of the sitting current justices opinions.

        • @S_Roman
          link
          11 year ago

          I’ve read every single word you’ve wrote and gone to each of your sources.

          Reading something doesn’t mean anything if you don’t understand it.

          Show me how money has altered any of the sitting current justices opinions.

          See above and actually read in good faith.

          • MasterOBee Master/King
            link
            01 year ago

            Reading something doesn’t mean anything if you don’t understand it.

            Hahaha, come back with an actual argument, instead of some loose ‘see he went on a paid vacation, therefore he just gets paid to rule court cases for rich people.’

            You made the claim, I asked which case you thought that they ruled on based on corruption, and what their flawed legal reasoning was.

            You can’t back anything up that you’ve said. If you want to be convincing, you gotta back up your claims.

            • @S_Roman
              link
              11 year ago

              you gotta back up your claims.

              I did, see above.

              • MasterOBee Master/King
                link
                -21 year ago

                You did not note 1 single case ruling that can be related to corruption nor that the ruling had poor law.

                If that’s all your back up was, it’s not convincing.