Rob Rogers for July 05, 2022

  1. Brain guy dancing hg clr
    Concretionist  3 months ago

    The have gone up where McConnell cannot (yet) go. Because they know that “god” is on their side and anyway, they HATE freedom, religious or otherwise. Except for their class of people, of course.

     •  Reply
  2. Large triumph
    Daeder  3 months ago

    Hunting precedent for sport!

     •  Reply
  3. Sammy on gocomics
    Say What Now‽ Premium Member 3 months ago

    Here’s a thought; stack the court with sensible judges and correct the mess those rightwingnuts are making. My bet is that the Democrats will overwhelm the rebugnants in all elections.

     •  Reply
  4. Large avat
    Radish the old word monger Premium Member 3 months ago

    The rapist court are not scientists, they are religious fascists.

     •  Reply
  5. Photo
    S&C = Dismayed&Depressed   3 months ago



     •  Reply
  6. Peace sign 2
    rionmorrison69  3 months ago

    Nailed it! That court needs purging.

     •  Reply
  7. Question 63916 960 720
    knutdl  3 months ago

    The shi***le

     •  Reply
  8. 20150712 095628
    LookingGlass Premium Member 3 months ago

    The “Supreme” Court??!!! I thinkNOT!!!


     •  Reply
  9. Albert einstein brain i6
    braindead Premium Member 3 months ago

    When will cartoonists draw the coat hangers the way they are used for abortions?

     •  Reply
  10. Mooseguy
    moosemin  3 months ago

    Having Congress and, possibly, the White House was not enough. Now, the Wealthy Elite own the SCOTUS, and many more laws and regulations will be scuttled, and a few cabinets will probably be defunded.

     •  Reply
  11. Missing large
    WaitingMan  3 months ago

    You ain’t seen nothing yet!

     •  Reply
  12. 7bf81e16 8ef8 4134 8774 9ce680cc41b6
    The Nodding Head  3 months ago

    The climate has changed on the Court

    ”Stare decisis”, we snort

    The people be cursed

    Ideology first!

    Watch while the law we contort.

     •  Reply
  13. Missing large
    Valiant1943 Premium Member 3 months ago

    Now comes the theocracy

     •  Reply
  14. Bbb
    NeoconMan  3 months ago

    I find it surprising that Americans, supposedly Bible-believing, are oblivious to the fact that before Israel first chose a king, it was always ruled by judges. And that’s what you’re returning to.

     •  Reply
  15. 704fe3d1 4a7d 495f a742 2d8456861f60
    admiree2  3 months ago

    Starting to get the feeling that the next coup attempt will be orchestrated by the Dirty Half Dozen. Ginny probably already told them what cabinet positions they will hold while not giving up their SCOTUS seats.

    Citizens with abrogated rights and breathing polluted air get shot in malls, schools, churches and at parades. SCOTUS puts up high chain link fencing around their workplace, demand more personal security and call badged and armed brown shirts to disperse protesters near their homes who exercise free speech (or what used to be protected speech).

     •  Reply
  16. Kaioc
    artmer  3 months ago

    Why only 4 Stacks? There are 6 piece of sh%t conservative right wingnuts.

     •  Reply
  17. Plsa button
    Richard S Russell Premium Member 3 months ago

    America is a tremendously diverse nation, but whom do we have on the Supreme Court? Still mostly men (5). Mainly white (7). Mainly non-Hispanic (8). Exclusively elites (4 Harvard Law, 4 Yale, 1 Notre Dame). Heavily Catholic (6, plus 1 Episcopalian raised Catholic, to go with the token Protestant and Jew; 0 atheists, 0 Muslims, 0 Hindus, 0 Buddhists, 0 Confucians, 0 Mormons, 0 Sikhs, and 0 pantheists). Mainly East Coasters (3 from New York, 2 from DC, 1 each from New Jersey and Georgia, the other 2 from Colorado and Louisiana). 0 rurals. 0 foreign-born. All (probably) straight. Mainly married (7 + 1 divorced). Almost all millionaires (8).

    Obviously, they’re all intelligent, well educated, articulate, and able-bodied, which one can hardly hold against them (unless you’re Roman Hruska), but it diminishes their chances of being able to empathize with millions of Americans who aren’t.

     •  Reply
  18. Plsa button
    Richard S Russell Premium Member 3 months ago

    To give you an idea of how scrupulously previous Supreme Court justices observed the principle of stare decisis, consider the landmark school-desegregation case Brown v. Board of Education (1954). The justices then could’ve explicitly said that the pro-segregation ruling in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) was “wrongly decided” (to quote “Justice” Alito), but they didn’t. They wrote that the Plessy ruling permitting “separate but equal” railroad cars was still constitutional but that, as a practical matter in real life, separate educational facilities could never be truly equal, therefore they were forbidden.

     •  Reply
  19. Missing large
    thelordthygod666  3 months ago

    Andrew Jackson’s response to a Supreme Court decision he didn’t like was to ignore it, the result was The Indian Removal Act that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands …not exactly a good precedent for a current solution.

     •  Reply
  20. Missing large
    wellis1947 Premium Member 3 months ago

    The recent decisions of the Court reflect a “political” decision, not a “legal” one – America has lost its mostly unbiased final decision-makers in favor of decisions which now bear a decidedly political stench.

    The most direct (though not the most common) reference to this “turn” occurred in 1920s and 1930s German courts where decisions were often used to support political moves by the National Socialist political party – I know it’s considered “bad form” to reference ANY move by the American Right in terms of the “Nazis” – but it’s very difficult to continue ignoring “the elephant in the room”.

     •  Reply
  21. Attitude on lap
    cactusjack99 Premium Member 3 months ago

    An evil man packed the court with equally evil men, and now we pay for an ideology that was in vogue in 1800’s. Sad, truly sad. I remember in the 60’s, hearing almost daily about a young woman dead from a botched abortion. trumpass didn’t do anything good for the country, and now we live with his crap. Those morons aren’t going to stop abortion, they have just driven it back underground, to fester and kill. You simply cannot force women to have babies.

     •  Reply
  22. 2019063095133708
    rs0204 Premium Member 3 months ago

    President Biden cannot control the SCOTUS, despite what some partisan posts would have you believe. He can’t wave his hand and return what has been taken.

    We are reaping the decades of low/poor voter turnout on the Left. If people had voted for Hillary and not sat out the election, we would not be in this mess. However, enough didn’t show up, and we are.

    It is going to take a lot more than one election cycle to regain what the SCOTUS took away this year. I hope those who value women, who worry about the environment and the encroachment of religion on our democracy, especially in the Red States, get engaged.

     •  Reply
  23. Myfreckledface
    VegaAlopex  3 months ago

    All hail the corporate state…not!

     •  Reply
  24. Zombie geoff
    Safety Fast Premium Member 3 months ago

    It’s all of those danged “Rogue Judges legislating from the Bench” that the right-wingers have been complaining about for all these years! Wait a minute…why aren’t their panties in a knot now!?

     •  Reply
  25. Mooseguy
    moosemin  3 months ago

    To wellis1947 and all of you, ESPECIALLY Trump supporters; . . Below are two Utube links to the 1960’s movie “Judgement at Nuremburg”, one of which I have not posted before. I hope you Trump supporters will view them, especially the first one. I would like to know your . . . the first, actor Burt Lancaster, portraying a noted, once respected jurist, explaining to the Tribunal the reasons why he took part in the new climate in Germany. I can substitute some of his words: “Only when you understand… can you imagine what Trump meant to us. ‘Lift up your heads! Be proud to be White! There are Devils among us! (Libs, Blacks, Hispanics). Once we do away with these Devils, your troubles will be gone!”In the second, actor Spencer Tracy*, as the leading judge of the Tribunal, explains the verdict.In the final scene of this fine, dramatic movie, Judge Haywood* visits the cell of defendant Ernst Janning. Janning (B.Lancaster) tells him that he never thought that it would come to that (mass murders, gassing, cremation), that Judge Haywood MUST believe that, please. Judge Haywood replies “It came to that the first time you sentenced a man you knew to be innocent.”

     •  Reply
  26. Large avat
    Radish the old word monger Premium Member 3 months ago

    Paul Krugman: The US Supreme Court is promoting a climate change ‘apocalypse’

    Krugman continues, “Anyone who believes that the recent series of blockbuster Court rulings reflects any consistent legal theory is being willfully naïve: Clearly, the way this Court interprets the law is almost entirely determined by what serves Republican interests. If states want to ban abortion, well, that’s their prerogative. If New York has a law restricting the concealed carrying of firearms, well, that’s unconstitutional. And partisanship is the central problem of climate policy.”

    The Times columnist points out that “letting the planet burn” and promoting a “looming apocalypse” wasn’t always a “key GOP tenet.”

    “The Environmental Protection Agency, whose scope for action the Court just moved to limit, was created by none other than Richard Nixon,” Krugman notes. “As late as 2008 John McCain, the Republican nominee for president, ran on a promise to impose a cap-and-trade system to limit greenhouse gas emissions. Republican positioning on the environment is also completely unlike that of mainstream conservative parties in other western nations.”

    Krugman makes a distinction between “mainstream conservative parties” and “authoritarian” far-right parties like “Hungary’s Fidesz or Poland’s Law and Justice,” arguing that the GOP has more in common with Fidesz.

    “Why, exactly, are authoritarian right-wing parties anti-environment?” Krugman writes. “That’s a discussion for another day. What’s important right now is that the United States is the only major nation in which an authoritarian right-wing party — which lost the popular vote in seven of the past eight presidential elections yet controls the Supreme Court — has the ability to block actions that might prevent climate catastrophe.”

     •  Reply
  27. Animals being weird
    wildthing  3 months ago

    The Fox News of Justice………..good one Jon. They’ve given up any appearance of impartiality. Reveling in their cruelty, what have they done……..saved the fetus, not the mother, allowed everyone the freedom to shoot anyone with a concealed weapon, forced uninvited religion on us agnostics, and finally prevented ANY action on Climate Change……….PS in the 2 years since scientists predicted we had until 2030 to cut emissions drastically or face irreparable climate disruption, now that’s 2026. Instead of heating 3 times faster than the rest of the planet, the arctic is heating 7 times faster. And we’ll keep pumping out more C02 every year until the very end……….2024?

     •  Reply
  28. Smokey
    Zuhlamon Premium Member 3 months ago

    Maga logic: Climate Change wasn’t mentioned in the Constitution so only each State can regulate their piece of the ecosphere we all share. And if the State upriver or upwind craps in your river and pollutes your air… too bad. Move.

     •  Reply
  29. 22ebfcac ced8 4f81 81ab 38a9544c0f83
    ragsarooni Premium Member 3 months ago

    This kinda sums it up……

     •  Reply
  30. Missing large
    AtomicForce91 Premium Member 3 months ago

    Praying after a game is toxic…Now I have heard everything.

     •  Reply
  31. Foggie
    yimhere  3 months ago

    Welcome to the new Disrespected State of American Women

     •  Reply
Sign in to comment

More From Rob Rogers