• @SmurfDotSee
    link
    -31 year ago

    There’s no mental gymnastics in this one. You just don’t agree with them.

    • @FinnFooted
      link
      21 year ago

      Oh honey, Kavanaugh literally made a ruling about a week ago that contradicts this one. But yeah. You’re actually right. They didn’t use mental gymnastics. They were too lazy for even that. They’re just saying no and contradicting themselves with almost zero justification as to why.

      • @SmurfDotSee
        link
        -51 year ago

        Yea, i mean, if you can’t read, i could certainly see how you could conflate the two cases. But they’re not the same. So…

        Dumb point.

        • @FinnFooted
          link
          11 year ago

          What? I didn’t conflate them. I said the foundational arguments contradict each other and thus their own precedent.

          • @SmurfDotSee
            link
            -41 year ago

            Yea, but that’s the thing. You’re saying that doesn’t mean it’s true. And if you can read, you’ll understand why they came to two separate decisions in two separate cases that have totally different underlying facts.

            But, you know… You seem to either be ABLE to read and choose not to, or you are just saying shit to say shit without having read anything.

            • @FinnFooted
              link
              11 year ago

              “States can’t sue the government just over ‘indirect’ harm from a federal policy” is literally applicable to both. Are you unable to extrapolate that information outside of the context of a single case? Does precedent mean absolutely nothing to you? because it sure doesn’t to the supreme court anymore.