@Metal-Brain saidI did:
I never called it an "injustice". Maxwell is probably a horrible person that deserves it. Read what I wrote, not what you imagine I wrote.
MB: Not hearing a case is the best way to avoid making a mockery of the SCOTUS that is an obvious injustice.
@Metal-Brain saidYour words are right here in this thread for all to see.
I never called it an "injustice". Maxwell is probably a horrible person that deserves it. Read what I wrote, not what you imagine I wrote.
@no1marauder saidI was generally speaking. I was not saying that about Maxwell. I would never say that about her. Many of her victims say she was worse than Epstein. I have said that on this forum several times.
I did:
MB: Not hearing a case is the best way to avoid making a mockery of the SCOTUS that is an obvious injustice.
@Suzianne saidNot hearing a case can result in an injustice. I never said that about Maxwell specifically. Since you are a democrat you might not like guns much, but since you have such high regard for SCOTUS I know you will accept this as fair.
Your words are right here in this thread for all to see.
From the link below:
"The majority did not explain its reasoning in turning down the cases over high-capacity magazines and state bans on guns like the AR-15, popular weapons that have also been used in mass shootings."
https://www.ap.org/news-highlights/spotlights/2025/supreme-court-rejects-2-gun-rights-cases-but-assault-weapons-ban-issue-may-be-back-soon/
I am sure they had their reasons. Far be it from you to question not hearing gun cases. They are the SCOTUS. They know better than a peon like you.
@Metal-Brain saidNot THIS Supreme Court. They decided the Dobbs case by ignoring fifty years of precedent. 50 years. Because they wanted the outcome they wanted, no matter what. Nothing was going to slow them down.
Not hearing a case can result in an injustice. I never said that about Maxwell specifically. Since you are a democrat you might not like guns much, but since you have such high regard for SCOTUS I know you will accept this as fair.
From the link below:
"The majority did not explain its reasoning in turning down the cases over high-capacity magazines and state bans o ...[text shortened]... m you to question not hearing gun cases. They are the SCOTUS. They know better than a peon like you.
Where you been for the last 8 years?
@Suzianne said"They decided the Dobbs case by ignoring fifty years of precedent. 50 years"
Not THIS Supreme Court. They decided the Dobbs case by ignoring fifty years of precedent. 50 years. Because they wanted the outcome they wanted, no matter what. Nothing was going to slow them down.
Where you been for the last 8 years?
What is your source of information?
@Metal-Brain saidSometimes denying cert causes an injustice.
I was generally speaking. I was not saying that about Maxwell. I would never say that about her. Many of her victims say she was worse than Epstein. I have said that on this forum several times.
Sometimes granting cert and issuing a poor decision causes an injustice.
@Metal-Brain saidReality?
"They decided the Dobbs case by ignoring fifty years of precedent. 50 years"
What is your source of information?
@no1marauder saidI agree. We both know the SCOTUS is flawed. They do not always make unbiased rulings that are based on the constitution alone. The best way to hide what would be a poor decision is to not accept the case.
Sometimes denying cert causes an injustice.
Sometimes granting cert and issuing a poor decision causes an injustice.
The SCOTUS should be required to explain why they reject cases in comprehensive detail. Can we agree on that?