Latest Breaking News

SunSeeker

(57,405 posts)

39. You started this be saying no dissents were noted. What was your point other than to suggest they flipped?

Sun Dec 7, 2025, 04:53 PM

Sunday

You cryptically suggested you found that "interesting."

You ignore that the vote on the granting of a writ of certiorari is internal and generally not disclosed to the public. The Court's order list for December 5, 2025, simply announced that the petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment was granted in the case Trump v. Barbara, without specifying the vote count or which justices voted against the grant.

Your post suggested they all voted in favor and that there were no dissents. There is no evidence to support that. Spare me the "wow just wow" pearl clutching. Yes, facts matter.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

48 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Supreme Court agrees to decide if Trump may end birthright citizenship [View all] muriel_volestrangler Dec 5 OP

SCOTUS Sycophant Six plan to tamper with birthright citizenship, otherwise dobleremolque Dec 5 #1

Pretty sure we all know the answer Endlessmike56 Dec 5 #2

You're exactly right. PSPS Dec 5 #7

13th, 14th and 15th are invalid? Retrograde Dec 5 #13

He'll cite another 17th century Brit jurist wolfie001 Dec 5 #25

'Executive Orders as Lawmaking' needs to end C_U_L8R Dec 5 #3

This court, this regime 31st Street Bridge Dec 5 #4

They are making their move to completely take over our laws bluestarone Dec 5 #5

Precedence... Republicans say that Hitler did some good things. Norrrm Dec 5 #6

I have to believe they will rule against Trump iemanja Dec 5 #8

Impeaching them would just have the Republicans blocking it (nt) muriel_volestrangler Dec 5 #9

I didn't mean now iemanja Dec 5 #14

Impeachment needs two thirds in the Senate muriel_volestrangler Dec 5 #17

You're probably right. iemanja Dec 5 #21

Such a ruling would instantly make the court powerless and irrelevant Fiendish Thingy Dec 5 #11

Has a transition team been assigned for when he, well, you know, croaks. twodogsbarking Dec 5 #10

Roughly like this? muriel_volestrangler Dec 5 #12

No dissents to the grant of certiorari were noted. onenote Dec 5 #15

SCOTUS already granted certiorari months ago for the injunction issue (with vociferous dissents from the 3 liberals). SunSeeker Dec 5 #29

You are mistaken. onenote Dec 5 #32

It is you who is mistaken. There is absolutely no basis to suggest that Sotomayor, Jackson and Kagan have flipped. SunSeeker Dec 6 #33

I'm absolutely, positively not wrong. onenote Dec 6 #35

Sotomayor, Jackson and Kagan have not flipped. You are dead wrong in suggesting they did. nt SunSeeker Dec 6 #36

Wow. Just wow. onenote Dec 6 #38

You started this be saying no dissents were noted. What was your point other than to suggest they flipped? SunSeeker Sunday #39

My point was to make clear no one had noted a dissent. Nothing more or less. onenote Sunday #40

So you just made a pointless post. Got it. nt SunSeeker Sunday #41

And you stand by your lie about when cert was granted. Got it. nt onenote Sunday #43

I didn't lie about when cert was granted. I'm not the one telling lies here. nt SunSeeker Monday #44

Yeah you did. onenote Monday #45

No I didn't. As I said, the prior ruling, with 3 dissents, involved the exact same Executive Order. SunSeeker Monday #46

You said certiorari had been granted. It hadn't and you have to know that by now. Not even the same case. onenote Tuesday #47

The cases are all about the same birthright citizenship EO. It's all a bullshit game by the SCOTUS conservatives. SunSeeker Tuesday #48

john brown's body struggle4progress Dec 5 #16

Battle Cry of Freedom struggle4progress Dec 5 #18

Marching Through Georgia struggle4progress Dec 5 #19

Nazi Punks Fuck Off struggle4progress Dec 5 #20

This is the litmus test case I have been fearing. TomSlick Dec 5 #22

Originalists, my ass! WTF is there to decide? OMGWTF Dec 5 #23

While they are at it just give him immunity..............oh yeah the 6 maga POS already did that........... turbinetree Dec 5 #24

Absolutely disgusting. There is no reason to take up Trump's patently ridiculous argument. SunSeeker Dec 5 #26

They took this case in order to overturn the law. johnnyfins Dec 5 #27

It just takes four to agree to take a case Dangling0826 Dec 5 #28

Asking seriously: which is easier... Shipwack Dec 5 #30

Expansion is by simple Congressional legislation. Blasphemer Dec 6 #34

Practical Aspect Considerations DallasNE Dec 5 #31

Imo, fwiw, which is nothing... lonely bird Dec 6 #37

These people are partisan political operatives... RetiredParatrooper Sunday #42