If they know where to get coke, they know where to get other stuff

Hang around a dive bar and look for people who work in kitchens.

The decision was 8-2. There are 13 judges, so 3 abstained. 5 were nominated by Trump. 2+3=5. Hard to believe that is a coincidence.

Oh he definitely hates Eric.

This is made with the Cook Swingometer as shown here.

https://www.reddit.com/r/fivethirtyeight/comments/1k2eap4/2024_presidential_election_if_only_men_voted/

This isn’t based on the actual election results of 2024, but projections based on 2020 election data.

It’s common knowledge that Trump hates all nonwhites.

I also think that the people who actually write the laws make them as hard to read and understand as possible so legislators have to rely on what they are told is in them.

Another one of those worthless do-nothing resolutions. They probably didn’t even read beyond the title.

Sniper MD

It’s like Trump broke all the ten commandments and now he’s trying to break all the Amendments.

I think the government has learned a lot about suppression of protests in the last 20 years.

Find (or create) an excuse to call the protest violent, apply less-than-lethal weapons liberally, and subvert the message of the protest to turn the public against it.

https://www.amazon.com/Disposable-Cleaning-Replacement-Bathroom-Maintenance/dp/B0D28YKSC8?source=ps-sl-shoppingads-lpcontext&psc=1&gQT=1

“Oh, you could only afford one watch?”

Mary Miller represents district 15 which surrounds but does not include both Springfield and St. Louis. It is 90% white, 2.9% black, and 2.8% Hispanic. There are basically no non-Republican elected officials above the county level and voted overwhelmingly for Trump. This district became home of the second resurgence of the KKK in Illinois in the 1920s and has stayed their home through resurgences in the 1950s and 1990s.

your reasoning has become little more than conspiracy theories mixed with bigotry.

Oh please tell me who I am being bigoted towards.

You have absolutely no idea what her financial situation is,

And neither do you. You don’t even know what it costs to retain multiple top law offices for years on end.

All it says is that members of the majority group have the same rights to bring discrimination lawsuits as anyone else.

Which reverses previous SC precedent which was put in place to protect minorities.

Jesus Christ, please read what I wrote again because you obviously failed to understand what I was explaining.

Not just any case gets before the SC. They choose cases for a reason, usually because it involves an aspect of the law they wish to clarify or (increasingly commonly) overturn. Special interest groups shop around for cases that they can find a defense for to make the political changes they want (for example Masterpiece Cakeshop v Colorado was funded by Alliance Defending Freedom). As you said this case began in 2017. There is NO WAY a middle manager at a state agency can afford to pay some of the best lawyers in the country for 8 years. She’s not some secret billionaire. Yes, her funding is unknown but that’s exactly why it is relevant. Dark money groups pushing political agendas are manipulating the justice system.

This woman is just a convenient tool to weaken minority protections. Previous SC precedent from 1973 holds that Title VII cases consider a history of discrimination of groups in question when determining how much evidence is required to prove the case. There is no history of straight discrimination but there is significant past history and current LGBT discrimination. It makes NO SENSE to treat these events as equally probably but that is exactly what overturning this decision does.

This strips protections for LGBT, black, disabled people, non-Christians, and other protected minority groups. Now to prove they are discriminated against, they cannot rely on the well-proven precedent of this fact. This makes discrimination against these groups easier which of course is the point of all this anti-DEI stuff. It is Christian white supremacy in action.

I know the white part doesn’t matter because the actual suit is for being straight alone. The justices (unnecessarily) added the discussion of race.

I know the suit is an attack on DEI because it made it to the Supreme court. It takes years and tens (or hundreds) of thousands of dollars to maintain a court case. Private individuals usually can’t afford this. The client, who works for the Ohio Department of Youth services, certainly couldn’t. Most SC cases are funded by special interest groups looking to push a particular change in the law. Trump and the Conservatives have made it very clear that they are against DEI because it makes it harder to discriminate against minorities. This decision weakens the protections for those groups.

I know she’s awful because no decent person would bring such an obviously bigoted suit.

The white part doesn’t even matter. This is just an awful person blaming DEI for their failures.

He did work for the Heritage Foundation, so he knows all about those terrorists.

I would bet she was passed over for the promotion because of her attitude, because you have to be an awful person to sue for this.