SCOTUS Thread (News and Discussion) III: Abandoning 90 Years of Precedent

[Tyrath]

Again, I never said things aren't bad. That's your projection because I believe that, at least regarding court cases, the Court's will call out unconstitutional actions, which they have.

But again, outside of supporting candidates who will stand up to Trump's policies, and trying to help those I can, what else can I do? Because you can't be suggesting a civil war uprising right now. Because that's the only other option I see.

Well if you stop saying the word doom I'll stop saying the word courts.

The rest we are essentially on the same page.

[Kaslo]

Well if you stop saying the word doom I'll stop saying the word courts.

The rest we are essentially on the same page.

[Milkster]

Everybody go touch snow and grass

[Lucavi]

They can't. The people on this forum are ancient now. Its been a long time since 2005, lol.

[Tyrath]

I went sledding a couple days ago thank you very much

[Outlaw]

I say we just go full Doomer! I like me some Doom Metal.

[Cantih]

[kuronosan]

Well if you stop saying the word doom I'll stop saying the word courts.

The rest we are essentially on the same page.

This is essentially where I am.

[Sirious]

Ill never stop screaming don't worry the courts will save you.

When we're in the concentration camp, my cell mate is gonna love hearing it's ok the courts will save you any day now. It'll brighten his day.

When they start the mass executions in the streets, i'll have the biggest posterboard saying it's ok, the courts will save you.

It is the single funniest thing in 202X that anyone thought (still thinks) courts (even the Hague, or any international courts etc) will be our knights in shining armor.

It makes me wonder, how often Jews lamented the lack of Judges ruling it was illegal. If only one judge had had the courage to speak out, the whole thing would've just ended.

[kuronosan]

Ill never stop screaming don't worry the courts will save you.

When we're in the concentration camp, my cell mate is gonna love hearing it's ok the courts will save you any day now. It'll brighten his day.

When they start the mass executions in the streets, i'll have the biggest posterboard saying it's ok, the courts will save you.

It is the single funniest thing in 202X that anyone thought (still thinks) courts (even the Hague, or any international courts etc) will be our knights in shining armor.

Shhh. Don't fuck up the Matrix.

[Kaslo]

Can I, at least, call Sirious a doomer? lol

[Tyrath]

Can I, at least, call Sirious a doomer? lol

Although fascist wannabe is more like it

[Tymon]

Being a fascist wannabe is actually harder than being an actual fascist rn. It's pretty easy to be a fascist. There's even a sign up bonus.

[6souls]

[Qalbert]

rare W?
https://deadline.com/2026/03/supreme...ny-1236765341/

The Supreme Court on Wednesday sided with internet provider Cox Communications, holding that it cannot be held liable for music piracy even if it did not take adequate steps to curb the copyright infringement.

The justices, in a 9-0 ruling, were weighing in on a lengthy legal fight between Cox and Sony Music Entertainment, which had sought huge damages against the internet provider for not blocking service to those who egregiously downloaded protected works.

“Under our precedents, a company is not liable as a copyright infringer for merely providing a service to the general public with knowledge that it will be used by some to infringe copyrights,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the ruling.

[Salodin]

Rare W.

But only cause tech companies are doing the illegal downloading and paid off scotus to protect them

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk

[Yabby]

If they had ruled the other way, it would have opened the floodgates to a massive wave of lawsuits that could seriously destabilize the internet as we know it.

Once ISPs like Cox Communications are treated as liable for user behavior, every rights holder, from companies like Sony to smaller creators, would have a clear path to go after them for damages. And it would not be occasional cases. It would be constant, high-stakes litigation tied to the actions of millions of users.

At that point, the cost of doing business starts to look a lot like what is happening with insurers in Florida. When the risk and legal exposure outweigh potential profits, companies do not adapt, they leave. ISPs would either raise prices significantly to cover legal risk, heavily restrict or monitor user activity, or exit certain markets altogether.

On top of that, enforcement would not even be effective. People who want to get around restrictions would just use encryption, VPNs, or other tools, while everyday users get caught in the crossfire through false positives or overly aggressive enforcement. So you end up with high costs, reduced access, and no meaningful reduction in piracy.

In that kind of environment, the internet stops functioning like an open, broadly accessible utility and starts looking more like a heavily restricted, high-risk service. That kind of pressure would not break things overnight, but it would slowly erode availability, affordability, and openness.

[Yabby]

I'm not even going to go into what would happen to datacenters and hosting services.

[6souls]

https://apnews.com/article/supreme-c...source=threads

LGBTQ conversion therapy is a go in an 8-1 decision with Jackson desenting.

[6souls]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...me-court-case/

The DoJ is now citing Jim Crow laws in it's case against birthright citizenship.