SCOTUS 5-4 allows ballroom to continue

They didn't rule on whether or not it was allowed but said the agency that objected to it didn't have standing and can't just object becase they found it offensive.

The 3 liberal justices were joined in the dissent by Justice Roberts who called it "likely illegal" and said Trump was exceeding his authority as POTUS and that just because he'd already demolished the East Wing it didn't mean they should allow him to continue. But 5 Conservatives ruled he can continue

We are so screwed, even the Conservative as hell Chief Justice thinks it's illegal but the other 5 still allow it?

Follow Ups:

• bunker* TheHappyBurgermeister 12:59:34 09/01/26 (1)
  • I think the courts already separated the bunker from the ballroom blindness 13:38:51 09/01/26 (0)
• Simply common sense wwood2 06:54:31 09/01/26 (0)
• I think it's pretty clear, whenever there is wiggle room in Bruinfan4ever 16:22:26 08/31/26 (8)
  • I think it's less about there being wiggle room or the law being blindness 16:29:57 08/31/26 (6)
    • It’s catch-22 in its most distilled undiluted undisguised form Dr.J 20:39:30 08/31/26 (0)
    • The FEDSOC SCOTUS is just judicial Calvinball-not adjudication Dr.J 20:20:15 08/31/26 (0)
    • if that were the case then they would have ruled Bruinfan4ever 16:39:18 08/31/26 (3)
      • They're just playing with us blindness 17:02:40 08/31/26 (2)
        • If it was about political victory they wouldn't be toying. Bruinfan4ever 17:13:31 08/31/26 (1)
          • Thery could have overturned the Voting Rights Act all at once blindness 17:50:08 08/31/26 (0)
  • "Not ruled in his favor"* Bruinfan4ever 16:23:20 08/31/26 (0)
• they use the standing question as their out blindness 15:26:06 08/31/26 (0)

Post a Followup