General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums#BREAKING: Justice Jackson has issued an "administrative" stay, temporarily pausing Trump's requirement to pay SNAP bene
#BREAKING: Justice Jackson has issued an "administrative" stay, temporarily pausing a district court order that would've required the USDA to continue using contingency funds to pay SNAP benefits.
— Steve Vladeck (@stevevladeck.bsky.social) 2025-11-08T02:25:17.084Z
The stay expires 48 hours after the First Circuit rules on USDA's request for a stay pending appeal.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
dweller
(27,644 posts)When some who have received those funds , spent them for food , and the grocer finds the funds are frozen … fuckery abounds
😑
✌🏻
Lovie777
(21,385 posts)the money is null and void?
dweller
(27,644 posts)Today when they became available , from (checks notes) DHS …
And other states were probably processing them before this new stay came down .. i seriously don’t know anymore
But I would not be surprised $$ starts being thrown around and at some later point we hear the Pisswig’s flunkies saying $$ was taken from Dec Social Security payouts to provide SNAP $$ and anyway
WHATYA GONNA DO ABOUT ??
whaddamess
✌🏻
Response to Lovie777 (Reply #2)
choie This message was self-deleted by its author.
Deuxcents
(25,137 posts)For this decision..especially from Justice Jackson
choie
(6,497 posts)thinking of any of these people as "heroes".
Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)
BeerBarrelPolka
(2,173 posts)You don't know any of us so how dare you besmirch our character. You have ZERO clue how much compassion, brains, and knowledge anyone of us have. Stop being a sycophant.
yardwork
(68,771 posts)I don't have a clue what this ruling means but I have the sense not to immediately assume that Justice Jackson is wrong or corrupt.
Geez.
BlueKota
(4,989 posts)This is just wrong. Doesn't she realize people are suffering? Why won't any hold tsf accountable to the law? Why even bother having the lower courts hear any cases as their decisions are always stalled or overturned completely by the SC?
onenote
(45,931 posts)Before saying what she did was a wrong, take a moment to read those posts.
orangecrush
(27,824 posts)Fuck every single one of them.
They ain't gonna go hungry
Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)
Irish_Dem
(78,697 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)Irish_Dem
(78,697 posts)If there is a good reason she is making a horrible looking decision, she should
have made that more clear.
She doesn't work for the rich and the evil GOP.
She works for the American people and owes us an explanation.
Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)But read the analysis first that explains her actions and show us how that is wrong.
Irish_Dem
(78,697 posts)My argument is solid.
The Supreme Court Justices work for the American people.
An explanation must be given that is not legal bullshit to explain a decision that looks evil and cruel.
Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)Tell us how she should have been smarter and more knowledgeable.
Tell us where the legal analysis detailed in this thread is legal bullshit.
angrychair
(11,608 posts)That the poor and disenfranchised must suffer so the rich and entitled are not inconvenienced.
TommyT139
(2,118 posts)...making the decision herself, Instead of giving the case to the whole Supreme Court. If she had passed the buck, so to speak, it was very very likely that the corrupt justices would pause SNAP benefits indefinitely, holding off on an actual decision as has happened in other cases.
There are a bunch of big cases where lower courts ruled for plaintiffs, states, etc., but when those made it to Supreme Ct, the cases were put in hold: Trump got what he wanted, with a vague open-ended timeline for arguments and decision. Trump's "delay delay delay" tactic working again for him.
Read any of Justice Jackson's recent opinions and you can tell where her heart is: with us, in the midst of a system decaying rapidly into evils no one would have imagined. (Except for the trumpists.)
some_of_us_are_sane
(2,640 posts)That's the best explanation of her actions I've heard.
NEVER THINK jUSTICE JACKSON is ANYTHING but for the PEOPLE and for actual JUSTICE. 
yardwork
(68,771 posts)choie
(6,497 posts)Has everyone gone fucking crazy???? I have just about had it with this country. Even Jackson thinks that an administration should be granted a stay while millions and millions of people need SNAP to eat?
Response to orangecrush (Reply #55)
Post removed
some_of_us_are_sane
(2,640 posts)It was the ONLY OPTION.
unblock
(55,841 posts)"This administrative stay will terminate forty-eight hours after the First Circuit's resolution of the pending motion, which the First Circuit is expected to issue with dispatch."
Basically, she's letting the lower court do their job, and not too subtly telling them to do it quickly.
gab13by13
(30,902 posts)Most likely Justice Jackson followed the fastest route to get the money flowing.
I never watch Jen Psaki but I turned her on at 9:30 to get the legal opinion. The person she had on couldn't have been a lawyer because all she said was it was Trump's fault.
BlueKota
(4,989 posts)so people could eat tomorrow not 48 hours from now.
But Justice Jackson had a meal today, so why should she care if they wait 48 hours.
BlueKota
(4,989 posts)food for another two days? It's more important to let tsf keep defending the indefensible, which almost every legal expert says is illegal. Maybe they should remind the SC of that.
onenote
(45,931 posts)I don't expect most DUers to understand the intricacies of Supreme Court procedure. But I also don't expect them to attack Justice Jacksonn when they don't understand the intricacies of Supreme Court procedure.
If she had denied it, the order coming from someone like Thomas or Alito -- the Justice to whom the administration would have turned -- would have delayed things for much much longer.
See Page 4, second paragraph. https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/reportersguide.pdf
Jose Garcia
(3,399 posts)BlueKota
(4,989 posts)the President has the power to refuse to distribute funds allocated by Congress. The Supreme Courts job is to see the Constitution is upheld, and if it doesn't say he has the power he doesn't.
Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)
FBaggins
(28,608 posts)It’s what happens when the funds that Congress has allocated run out and Congress refuses to appropriate more.
This case is over whether a single judge can require the distribution of funds that Congress did not allocate.
choie
(6,497 posts)that there are emergency funds that could be available for SNAP allocations if the administration would agree to do so.
FBaggins
(28,608 posts)The problem with the court’s order is apparently that the law actually limits SNAP spending to what was appropriated (which would arguably exclude the emergency funds) and more importantly… there apparently aren’t enough funds in the emergency bucket to cover what the court has ordered
choie
(6,497 posts)Even if the funds only partially fund November's SNAP allocation, they should be released pronto.
FBaggins
(28,608 posts)When the administration was laying off large number of people - there was a valid argument regarding whether or not presidents have the authority to not spend money that Congress had appropriated. There were times that this was a useful/relevant argument... and times that it wasn't. But it was at least valid.
In this case, there are NO funds left that Congress has appropriated for these benefits. So there's no constitutional question of whether he has to spend those dollars. The question is whether or not he can spend other dollars (in two categories of funds) and whether or not a court can force him to do it.
Both conversations are interesting - but neither is particularly relevant because KBJ didn't have a choice. I'm hoping that the debate is quickly moot (because we win concessions and the government reopens) - but it's unlikely that we can win on either point (with this court). So she did the best that she could with the few options she had.
Fiendish Thingy
(21,772 posts)There is a thread on SCOTUS watcher Steve Vladeck’s take on what he views as a strategic stay by Jackson to force a final ruling sooner rather than an extended stay that would result in benefits being suspended for even longer.
vanlassie
(6,207 posts)Is unseemly, here on DU where, if you’re not an expert on, say, the Supreme Court, you can take some relaxing breaths and someone will BE ALONG VERY SOON TO EXPLAIN IT.
Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)choie
(6,497 posts)choie
(6,497 posts)Because I have many older adult clients who do, and waiting ANOTHER two-three days for them to receive it is immoral.
Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)Response to Bernardo de La Paz (Reply #68)
Post removed
rzemanfl
(31,058 posts)FBaggins
(28,608 posts)Perhaps the entire thing becomes moot
Rocknation
(44,959 posts)in California, Wisconsin, Alaska, Illinois, Louisiana, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont -- and last but not least, New Jersey, where Dems took the governor's seat by 13 points.
Rocknation
What about the other states in the union? Our governor, Kathy Hochul, will probably release state funding for SNAP, so I should just forget about the rest of the country?
valleyrogue
(2,503 posts)My brother received his benefit in full today.
Beringia
(5,308 posts)Dangling0826
(47 posts)If this decision wasn't from Jackson, I would be worried. This is just a administrative" stay as someone posted earlier it's letting the first circuit do their job.
BlueKota
(4,989 posts)when all of us here get to eat. You think it's okay to little kids continue to be deprived of food for at leat another 48 hours, while the courts continue to allow tsf to keep up his non stop appeals? I don't care if the decision came from a Liberal judge or not. Letting people continue to suffer for any length of time when you can stop it is wrong, end of story. I care about the human beings who are suffering while they play their useless games.
She could have ended it tonight and she didn't.
Dangling0826
(47 posts)BlueKota
(4,989 posts)but what about those who didn't? Many will still be going without food for at least another two days if not more.
Jackson shouldn't have allowed this.
Dangling0826
(47 posts)If she lets the first circuit handle it there is a better chance, they will not get involved. Jackson isn't stupid
choie
(6,497 posts)what about people in other states?
gab13by13
(30,902 posts)that would have been the end of it, right? Are you a lawyer? I'm not and I haven't heard a legal opinion yet.
I would bet that what Justice Jackson did was the quickest way to get the money out.
BlueKota
(4,989 posts)that said the money was already allocated by Congress and tsf had no legal grounds to deny distributing those funds. So why are the courts, especially the SC, continuing to let him fan his nose at the law, especially when there are people suffering? There is no excuse that makes that acceptable. It's illegal, unconstitutional, and immoral period.
The President does not have the power to withhold money Congress has already allocated.
In It to Win It
(12,171 posts)Because he keeps stalling with appeals.
So far, he has lost at the lower courts. Justice Jackson is basically telling the 1st Circuit to hurry up and resolve this.
The 1st Circuit denied his administrative stay request.
Either Justice Jackson was going to enter the stay, or the full court would have. I'd rather have this decision in the hands of Justice Jackson and 1st Circuit than the full Supreme Court right now. The full Court may not have given the same nudge to resolve this quickly like Justice Jackson did.
BlueKota
(4,989 posts)He doesn't have the power under the Constitution to refuse to spend the money Congress has allocated. There is nothing his lawyers can point to that says he does. So why do the courts keep letting him keep argue a settled issue? Why bother to even pretend we have a separation of powers anymore? Why bother to keep up the pretense that the Constitution still matters anymore?
In It to Win It
(12,171 posts)The 1st Circuit has to review and make a decision. They don't have a choice.
The 1st Circuit has denied an administrative stay.
There is also a "stay pending appeal" request. The 1st Circuit has not issued an order on that yet. Justice Jackson's order is nudging them to move on that.
Fiendish Thingy
(21,772 posts)Perhaps getting more information would be a good idea- see post #26 for additional info and context on why this was the better move under the circumstances.
BlueKota
(4,989 posts)There is absolutely nothing that states a President has the right to withhold the funds authorized by Congress. So why are the courts continuing to appeal something when there is no legitimate argument that can be presented that says he does?
Fiendish Thingy
(21,772 posts)Go read post #26 so you understand the strategy and context behind KBJ’s ruling.
BlueKota
(4,989 posts)the President has the power to refuse to allocate the funds already approved by Congress? They are given the power of the purse not him. There is no validity to his claim that he does.
Fiendish Thingy
(21,772 posts)It outlines due process, and the appeals process.
Trump isn’t even claiming he has the power to stop the payments- his buffoons are claiming he doesn’t know where the discretionary funds would come from or how to disburse them.
So, basically, the constitution says we the people have to wait for both the first circuit and SCOTUS to say “we know you’re stupid, but we know you’re not THAT stupid - release the funds now”.
That’s the constitutional reality of the situation, and indignant, uninformed ranting won’t change it.
BlueKota
(4,989 posts)Last edited Sat Nov 8, 2025, 12:43 AM - Edit history (2)
I am getting overly emotional because all I can think of is all the people who are suffering because there seems to be no line in the sand that anyone refuses to let him cross. If that's wrong I am guilty but in the end that's all that matters to me. I hate seeing vulnerable people especially children being hurt by a bully and feeling like he is just going to keep getting away with it. I don't want anyone being made to feel like they don't matter. I was never left hungry but I know the pain of people, who don't have many people willing to stand up for them.
Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)An angry warrior is a dead warrior and has to be carried off the field dying from their wounds which takes time and energy away from the battle which makes victory less likely.
EdmondDantes_
(1,248 posts)I can't do anything about the Supreme Court, but I can do a shift at a food reclamation non-profit. This morning we picked up 16 boxes of bread, 2 boxes of prepared sandwiches, 4 boxes of produce, and 2 boxes of frozen food to be distributed to local community food pantries. And we loaded up 2 vans of food to go out to be distributed this morning. That's tangible good I can see every Saturday morning and be done in 2 hours. I'm not saving everyone who needs food, but I'm saving some. Find a group in your community where you can see the impact.
It's so huge looking at a nationwide program, especially when you can't influence it. Find a place you can influence. It makes me feel so much better when I can act on my values.
BlueKota
(4,989 posts)I have been donating to the Check Out Hunger campaign at our local supermarket. I don't drive but my cousin just retired so maybe he would be willing to drive me once a week to a place where I can volunteer.
EdmondDantes_
(1,248 posts)It's obviously still a good thing to do, but I get such a more positive feeling when I can see the results. Obviously everyone's situation is different, whether it's time or ability to get to a volunteer shift is different, or funds to donate.
I know because my company is hybrid, we do some volunteer projects that can be done remotely. I don't have any off the top of my head for food, but I believe we have done some assembling care packages for homeless people, so maybe someplace local to you has an opportunity they can deliver you boxes of supplies that need to be bundled together into a kit.
There's so much to be angry about right now, but we also need to balance that by finding good and beauty in things too. I don't blame you for being upset at any of this and it's often incredibly overwhelming. But I think that's what they want. They want us to stop fighting. But we got past slavery, Jim Crow, women not being able to vote or have bank accounts, etc. It sucks we have to keep fighting for things that should be obvious like people should be able to get food, but we need people like you pushing for more just as much as anyone else. It's great to follow the system, but to steal from Obama, we've also got the fierce urgency of now. We can use both sides because both are true. We do have to work through a slow system, and we've got people who need help now.
Fiendish Thingy
(21,772 posts)Compassion is a strength, not a weakness, but we must also face the cold, stark reality of this administration’s daily atrocities without any illusions or mythology about how our institutions could or should respond.
BlueKota
(4,989 posts)onenote
(45,931 posts)See posts 26 and 28.
vanlassie
(6,207 posts)BlueKota
(4,989 posts)to deny the issuing of funds already allocated by Congress. Why are the courts acting like he has anything to prove that he does? There is no basis for appeal.
valleyrogue
(2,503 posts)
Wiz Imp
(8,469 posts)Key points here:
Instead, by keeping the case for herself and granting the same relief, in contrast, Justice Jackson was able to directly influence the timing in both the First Circuit and the Supreme Court, at least for now. She nudged the First Circuit (which I expect to rule by the end of the weekend, Monday at the latest); and, assuming that court rules against the Trump administration, she also tied her colleagues’ hands—by having her administrative stay expire 48 hours after the First Circuit rules. Of course, the full Court can extend the administrative stay (and Jackson can do it herself). But this way, at least, she’s putting pressure on everyone—the First Circuit and the full Court—to move very quickly in deciding whether or not Judge McConnell’s orders should be allowed to go into effect. From where I’m sitting, that’s why Justice Jackson, the most vocal critic among the justices of the Court’s behavior in Trump-related emergency applications, ruled herself here—rather than allowing the full Court to overrule her. It drastically increases the odds of the full Supreme Court resolving this issue by the end of next week—one way or the other.
I am, of course, just speculating. But if so, I think it’s both a savvy move from Justice Jackson and a pretty powerful rejoinder to the increasingly noisy (and ugly) criticisms of her behavior from the right. Given the gravity of this issue, it makes all the sense in the world for a justice in Jackson’s position to do whatever she could to ensure that the underlying question (must the USDA fully fund SNAP for November?) is resolved as quickly as possible—even if that first means pausing Judge McConnell’s rulings for a couple of days. If the alternative was a longer pause of McConnell’s rulings, then this was the best-case scenario, at least for now. And regardless, imposing this compromise herself, rather than forcing her colleagues to overrule her, is, to me, a sign of a justice who takes her institutional responsibilities quite seriously, indeed—even when they lead away from the result she might otherwise have preferred if it were entirely up to her.
onenote
(45,931 posts)but I also don't expect them to attack Justice Jackson when they don't know the intricacies of SCOTUS procedure.
BlueKota
(4,989 posts)the power of the purse. He has no argument to say he does. So why is he allowed to keep arguing that he does.
I am not meaning to attack Justice Johnson. I just am fucking sick to death of his pissing on the Constitution and he's just being allowed to continue to do it. Even more important to me is little children and the elderly are having to suffer because the Fucking adults are too afraid to stand up to the bully. I won't apologize for feeling that in the end they are all that should matter.
bluestarone
(20,967 posts)and the laws. YOU need to understand that THIS court WILL give TSF everything he wants, plain and simple. That's the reality we have to face. Judge Jackson, I KNOW is 100% doing exactly the ONLY thing she can do here. WE need to stop screaming at her, and start by knowing she is our FIGHTER!! I'm 100% sure she had communications with other judges, and KNOWS exact what their vote will be. I SUPPORT her a million percent!!
BlueKota
(4,989 posts)You're right. I shouldn't have blamed her. I reacted emotionally and not rationally.
I was mistaken in my belief that any appeal could be denied, if there was no legal error in the original court's decision, and the evidence was not strong enough to uphold the plaintiff's claims for requesting an appeal. IMHO that should be the way it works, but understand now that isn't the reality in all cases.
All I could think is once again, he gets to do wants, while others people get hurt.
bluestarone
(20,967 posts)So much hate in my heart, since these terrorists are controlling our great country. We have lots of bad times ahead of us, that's for sure!! I hope we can keep it together until TSf is GONE for good. 
for everyone here!!
Fiendish Thingy
(21,772 posts)The willful ignorance and recreational outrage on this thread is appalling.
BlueKota
(4,989 posts)the Constitution is being ignored. You show me where in the Constitution it says the President has the right to withhold funds already allocated by Congress. I'll wait.
The power over the purse was given to them not him.
Response to Fiendish Thingy (Reply #39)
Post removed
orangecrush
(27,824 posts)WHEN I START GOING HUNGRY.
Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)Arrogance makes everything worse always.
BeerBarrelPolka
(2,173 posts)Don't tell starving people in this country how they should feel. I happen to be on SNAP. Your opinion is meaningless. You are not an American and have no dog in this fight personally.
orangecrush
(27,824 posts)Enough to read, I understand that she made the best of a bad hand.
Thank you.
mahatmakanejeeves
(67,847 posts)Reposted by Point Blank Sandwich Hat
https://bsky.app/profile/kenwhite.bsky.social
@mjsdc.bsky.social
This is the correct explanation of what happened tonight👇
Mike Sacks
@mikesacks.bsky.social
· 9h
KBJ threaded the needle thanks to CA1’s unfinished business.
-if she denied the admin stay, the full SCOTUS woulda stepped in to override her.
-if she immediately referred the case to the full Court, they coulda dragged feet.
-instead she boxed them in to act quickly once she does refer the case.
November 7, 2025 at 10:35 PM
This is the correct explanation of what happened tonight👇
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjsdc.bsky.social) 2025-11-08T03:35:33.046Z
@mikesacks.bsky.social
KBJ threaded the needle thanks to CA1’s unfinished business.
-if she denied the admin stay, the full SCOTUS woulda stepped in to override her.
-if she immediately referred the case to the full Court, they coulda dragged feet.
-instead she boxed them in to act quickly once she does refer the case.
November 7, 2025 at 10:14 PM
KBJ threaded the needle thanks to CA1’s unfinished business.
— Mike Sacks (@mikesacks.bsky.social) 2025-11-08T03:14:40.640Z
-if she denied the admin stay, the full SCOTUS woulda stepped in to override her.
-if she immediately referred the case to the full Court, they coulda dragged feet.
-instead she boxed them in to act quickly once she does refer the case.
allegorical oracle
(6,096 posts)Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson temporarily halted an order requiring the Trump administration make full Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) November payments by Friday.
Jackson’s ruling pauses some of the payments until the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit can decide the administration’s motion to block the order pending its appeal.
It does not reflect a ruling on the underlying legal merits of the case, but it provides a temporary reprieve to the Trump administration, which went to the Supreme Court earlier Friday evening.
“Given the First Circuit’s representations, an administrative stay is required to facilitate the First Circuit’s expeditious resolution of the pending stay motion,” Jackson wrote.
Jackson ruled on the immediate request because she handles emergency appeals arising from the First Circuit by default.
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/5596200-supreme-court-halts-snap-order/
Scrivener7
(58,007 posts)Isn't it nice when you can trust a SC justice to do the right thing? So rare these days.
dweller
(27,644 posts)Apparently if she had not stayed with a 48 hr timeline , the full SCROTUS 6 could have stayed and taken weeks to decide
✌🏻
orangecrush
(27,824 posts)Other than they just don't give a fuck.
well , it was quasi explained there at the link
✌🏻
Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)Irish_Dem
(78,697 posts)her look like part of the evil system starving children?
Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)I'm sure that if there was a solution such as you describe she would have taken it. From the analysis I have read, she did the best she could under the circumstances to shorten it to two or three days instead of six weeks as would be likely if she had let another justice respond.
Irish_Dem
(78,697 posts)Hiding behind legal technicalities is not a sign of a leader.
She needs to tell us why the hell she is aligning with those who starve children.
Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)Your posts indicate to me you have not read the analysis posted in this thread or do not understand it because you have refused several invitations for you to refute it.
Irish_Dem
(78,697 posts)It is hard for people from other countries to understand the profound and ingrained
idea here in the US that the power belongs to WE THE PEOPLE.
Everyone in the US government works for the American people.
Not a King or Queen like in your country.
It is hard for other countries to understand the concept of American democracy
on the deep emotional level we feel it here.
And yes in the US, our leaders need to explain themselves when they appear 100% and doing evil.
Hiding behind a law degree and legal mumbo jumbo doesn't cut it in the US.
Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)Still waiting for your detailed rebuttal of the legal analysis of the constraints on Jackson and why she had to do what she did. Distracting by talking about King Charles is gaslighting the issue at hand.
Jackson is busy doing what she has to do and writing legal opinions where they are warranted.
Ilikepurple
(421 posts)It obviously exist within the confines of USSC procedure. She had grounds to deny the stay, but as you and others have pointed out either another Justice or the entire Court would probably have granted a less time-constrained administrative stay if she didn’t. She It’s a bet. A bet that the 1st circuit doesn’t grant a stay pending appeal and the USSC doesn’t grant an administrative stay if it does. I hope it works, but it seems it might just delay the inevitable. I do think this is probably the best Jackson could do in the circumstances. Not really that sophisticated. What she has is a much greater understanding of the culture of the current court as any of us do. It’s disappointing, but I trust her to know best how to handle this appeal.
yardwork
(68,771 posts)She is one of only a few votes on the Court defending democracy. They have almost zero power because of the corrupt justices Trump put there. She's doing what little she can. She's using strategy to hold onto shreds.
The posts in this thread attacking her are very discouraging.
Response to orangecrush (Reply #56)
Bernardo de La Paz This message was self-deleted by its author.
tritsofme
(19,757 posts)Attacking Justice Jackson for a procedural action like this is just ridiculous.
W_HAMILTON
(9,967 posts)I have much more faith in Justice Jackson's ability to make the best decision given the circumstances than I do those that are driven by short-sighted emotions that have often resulted in the WORST decisions being made in the mid- to long-term.
Would you feel better if Justice Jackson ruled how you wanted, but then the full Supreme Court overruled her decision within the next few days and then sat on their ultimate ruling for months?
I trust Justice Jackson.
orangecrush
(27,824 posts)And was beyond reason after hearing the news.
It's a shame that the minority of honorable Judges on the court cannot change what the court now represents as an institution.
W_HAMILTON
(9,967 posts)It's all the more reason we can't have any slip-ups when it comes to stopping this fascism in its tracks.
It's days like today where I especially get mad at those that said, "don't threaten me with the Supreme Court!" in 2016 when we actually WARNING them of future outcomes like this. And then in 2024, our entire nation had a four-year firsthand experience of the destructive nature of these MAGA Republican bastards and enough of our fellow citizens didn't vote in a way to prevent this from happening all over again...
It's so damn frustrating.
orangecrush
(27,824 posts)And thanks again.
CatWoman
(80,219 posts)RandySF
(80,471 posts)Samael13
(109 posts)But I also understand those responding that are upset. To alot of people this isnt just a legal battle caught up in the process of the legal system. This is reality life and death to them. Some people crowing oh well I received mine cause their state is funding it fully. Some states are doing that but a majority aren't. I say all that to say maybe dont chastise people for being emotional over this because their feelings matter because they're real people who may be suffering themselves because of this.
NickB79
(20,203 posts)I don't see this as an unlikely outcome anymore.
The fastest way to see society unravel is to starve people. Especially in a country with more guns than citizens.
tavernier
(14,146 posts)stepped in first (Johnny Roberts and da guys), they would have delayed it for weeks or months. Justice Jackson checkmated them by a 48 hour delay. Then it will have to be resolved.