8543
Comments (710)
sorted by:
732
Schiffblower 732 points ago +743 / -11

So they go from cucked to semi-uncucked for a change

424
Seenev 424 points ago +434 / -10

It won't last.

365
errydaktal 365 points ago +367 / -2

Notice how whenever the case happens to mean trump winning the election, they suddenly have a different view, despite it being the same situation in law

222
Wtf_socialismreally 222 points ago +224 / -2

Because they are clearly trying to make it seem like "oh no no Democrats you don't need to pack the courts see sometimes you lose some sometimes you win some we helped you win the Presidency please don't pack the courts"

Also they plan to just make illegals citizens anyway

91
Only_Rosie_ODonnell 91 points ago +92 / -1

Hopefully the Trump admin has a plan so that the lackey's in the Census Bureau won't sabotage and dominionize it

36
LawlfulEvil 36 points ago +36 / -0

Have an updoot for "dominionize it"; I could see that becoming a commonly-used phrase in the future.

"John Smith won the 2064 election by a landslide, but rumors abound that the vote was dominionized."

"California school districts report ten-point increase in average test grades over the past year, but those reports are clouded by accusations of dominionization."

"Yeah, but if we weaken election security, won't someone just end up dominionizing the vote again, like in 2020?"

22
deleted 22 points ago +22 / -0
8
AngrySerb1 8 points ago +8 / -0

There will be a great purge and a new party.

3
IAmNotAnAutist 3 points ago +5 / -2

Yeah, fuck the faggot Federalist Society.

2
SiBear117 2 points ago +2 / -0

That was the plan of the RINOs & "cuckservative movement" all along.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
12
deleted 12 points ago +12 / -0
6
sirtra 6 points ago +6 / -0

Heres my laymen explanation..

  1. Trump admin say "we gunna exclude aliens" but not exactly how
  2. Liberals file lawsuit saying "nooo you cant do that, it be harmful!"
  3. Court says, "Trump aint said how he gunna do it yet, gtfo til its clear it be harmful"

Which is inline with recent rulings IMO, ppl shouldnt read too far into it.. its a win for Trump admin in the same way the left consider all the election fraud case dismissals a win.

3
ADAM_SCHITT 3 points ago +3 / -0

They need to finish the count by the end of the year but the cucks conveniently say they aren't going to make it. They're trying to buy time until they hope Biden gets in there

47
SpezIsDead 47 points ago +47 / -0

No, they plan on making citizenship meaningless

83
Patriot6969 83 points ago +83 / -0

I want the $50,000, and 20 years of scrutiny and bureaucracy my family had to go through to become citizens back. I also want whatever loan forgiveness theyre gonna offer lesbian dance therapy majors for my car loan. Its only fair that if commie libtards and illegals get these benefits then citizens should too.

13
Rainman 13 points ago +13 / -0

Figure out a way to stop paying taxes until you recover your money. That's what I'm doing if they forgive student loans

26
Patriot6969 26 points ago +26 / -0

Im willing to do that if millions of other people do, but im not gonna be the loan dumbfuck who falls through the cracks and gets victimized by the government.

1
CheekyBastard 1 point ago +3 / -2

Every Patriot should by now how to legally not pay "federal income" taxes. The 16th Amendment granted no new powers of taxation to the fed.gov.

https://www.losthorizons.com/

6
BobDolesBanana 6 points ago +6 / -0

"Lesbian dance therapy majors" ??? lol That is some hilarious imagery, sir Patriot!

6
LawlfulEvil 6 points ago +6 / -0

...you laugh, but it's entirely possible that's an actual major in Commiefornia.

"This just in: three college students, all of whom were majoring in Lesbian Dance Therapy, committed suicide after some random person on the internet made fun of their major. According to SCIENTISTS!!!!!, these deaths were all caused by coronavirus, which means that we clearly need harsher mask mandates and looser election security."

5
deleted 5 points ago +6 / -1
3
sth1d 3 points ago +3 / -0

I think big mike must have missed that important class.

1
Wtf_socialismreally 1 point ago +1 / -0

Tomato tomato

9
SpezDispenser 9 points ago +10 / -1

Probably have a back door deal with Chiden. Leave us be oh Chinese one, we will guarantee your power, if you guarantee ours.

See these dems onky care about lining their pockets. Creepy Joe is awaiting his ride across Stygian. Just needs to line his pockets to keep his pedo son ankle deep in teens for eons to come.

4
booblitchutz 4 points ago +4 / -0

Dominioncrats want illegals to be slave labor in America. They just try to put a cute face on it. If they can get slave voters out of it, so much the better!

6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
2
PinkoFaggot 2 points ago +2 / -0

Tbh I’m looking forward to the undocumented package and it’s benefits.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
2
iHackLiberalsForFun 2 points ago +2 / -0

They can just prevent the packing by not helping the democrats win lol

30
fthecoup 30 points ago +30 / -0

"...Instead, the justices by a 6-3 vote said it was “premature” to rule the issue because it was unclear how or whether the Census Bureau would furnish data on residents who were not in “lawful status.” The decision most likely punts the issue to the Biden administration, which is expected to oppose a plan that many critics call unconstitutional. ..."

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
14
fthecoup 14 points ago +14 / -0

[SCREAMING] THIS IS A FUCKING LOSS FOR US!!!

3 of the nine voted to fuck Trump and America right now -- the other 6 said --no -- let's wait -- we'll let President Biden fuck Trump and America on letting the census include illegals OR we'll do for President Biden later.

"...The court’s majority did not squarely address the legality of excluding from the count all foreigners illegally in the country, but said that it appears impractical to do so.

“Everyone agrees by now that the Government cannot feasibly implement the memorandum by excluding the estimated 10.5 million aliens without lawful status,” an unsigned opinion from the court’s majority read. “Yet the only evidence speaking to the predicted change in apportionment unrealistically assumes that the President will exclude the entire undocumented population.”

The court’s three Democratic appointees dissented, saying that the dispute is ripe for review, and that the court should declare now that Trump’s policy seeking to remove foreigners from the count violates the Constitution. ...":

16
HillarysBeaverMunch 16 points ago +16 / -0

"the estimated 10.5 million aliens without lawful status..."

Ha ha, very funny. Try 52 million illegal invaders, which is a more accurate estimations.

3
ADAM_SCHITT 3 points ago +3 / -0

They didn't fuck us (yet). They're just waiting until the count is actually finished to who was excluded. However the census bureau is delaying the count hoping Trump will leave before it's done. That's the real problem right now.

7
fthecoup 7 points ago +9 / -2

Bla bla bla bla????????????? Go read the opinion NOT THIS TWEET!!!!!

The Supreme Court fucked US again!!!

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
1
fthecoup 1 point ago +1 / -0

6 SCOTUS want a President Biden to overturn Trump with another EO. If Trump somehow takes office and excludes illegals from the census, they would then overrule Trump.

3 SCOTUS would have overruled Trump right now.

It is that simple.

This sucks.

16
Ghostof_PatrickHenry 16 points ago +16 / -0

SERIOUS QUESTION:

What happens if I decided to renounce my US citizenship, continue living in the country as an undocumented illegal, and stop paying taxes? Then tell the politicians to suck my balls? And give me free shit?

What happens if we all decide to do it?

8
OneAmerican 8 points ago +8 / -0

The Ghost of Patrick Henry would roll over in his grave, and arise once again...with words that beckon Patriots....

"...millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Beside, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of Nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us.”

“The battle, Sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, Sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable; and let it come! I repeat, Sir, let it come!”

“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”

1
DirtyName 1 point ago +1 / -0

Wow.

Worth reading again and again.

5
FluhanWu 5 points ago +5 / -0

If you vote dominioncrat once you become an person of undocumented invader status, you will be protected.

3
Thiswillbeintheexam 3 points ago +3 / -0

You SHOULD renounce your US Citizenship.

The "country" of the United States of America ceased to existed some time ago, but was confirmed dead when they stripped you of your vote.

2
CmonPeopleGetReal 2 points ago +2 / -0

Well if you own any property you are totally fucked.

3
booblitchutz 3 points ago +3 / -0

I would have said “in strict interpretation of the constitution, cases will not always be won by the republican side” but then there is documentation backing up the claim that Roberts said “that motherfucker will be out of office”, so that constitutionalist bullshit ties right out the fucking window.

2
jpower 2 points ago +2 / -0

No SCROTUS is simple deciding to never take a case again. Hence the rejection of all cases.

They realized they don't need to work if they aren't getting COVID pay.

30
Chopblock 30 points ago +31 / -1

Yet another case of hiding behind ‘standing’ procedural issues.

This is what a Court looks like when it is untethered to a fixed set of principles, and guided instead by outcome justification and political maneuvering.

1
Patriot6969 1 point ago +4 / -3

I was trying to explain to my friends that if the courts were to rule in favor of Trump then many people in the country would perceive it as an "overturning" of the election and it would lead to extreme violence and all these nice middle class families are not going to fight in a civil war over it, evidence or no evidence. The justices consider the real world effect of their rulings and not the legal merits. Obviously trannies aren't women but ruling that way would lead to "discrimination" therefore they ruled in their favor, regardless of objective reality

10
Chopblock 10 points ago +10 / -0

If they let an obvious election fraud stand that is this blatant, corrupt, and foreign enemy state assisted, it leads directly to even worse violence — and that’s before you factor in MAGA patriot’s responses.

Installing Biden as President leads quickly and inevitably to disarmament, occupation by foreign military and criminal gangs, and genocide of U.S. citizens.

This outcome can be arrived at using logical deduction, game theory, historical precedents, and ‘tea leaves’-reading, or simply by examining the stated policy positions, goals, and previous & contemporary actions of the prospective leadership China is trying to place into power.

3
keeponwinning 3 points ago +3 / -0

A little violence today vs a civil war and/or death camps tomorrow.

2
Chopblock 2 points ago +2 / -0

“The time is now near at hand which must probably determine whether Americans are to be freemen or slaves; whether they are to have any property they can call their own; whether their houses and farms are to be pillaged and destroyed, and themselves consigned to a state of wretchedness from which no human efforts will deliver them. The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage and conduct of this army. Our cruel and unrelenting enemy leaves us only the choice of brave resistance, or the most abject submission. We have, therefore, to resolve to conquer or die.” – General George Washington

-1
MoldyLocksNesMonste -1 points ago +1 / -2

yeah bud. Better to let a fraudulent election stand in which a lot of people know is fraudulent, than justice and kowtow to the criminal element which perpetuated the fraud.

Are you a shill tard?

0
Patriot6969 0 points ago +1 / -1

You gonna do something about it? No? Just talk shit like a child? Yeah thats what I thought tool. Its not up to you what happens and trying to start arguments with people online to relieve your angst isn't going to keep trump in office. But maintain your self righteous superiority complex, im sure its really productive

0
MoldyLocksNesMonste 0 points ago +1 / -1

You're the one siding with the terrorists.

6
deleted 6 points ago +7 / -1
8
fthecoup 8 points ago +8 / -0

This

Trump wants to exclude illegals from the census. Lower courts rule AGAINST Trump, The three liberal dissenters said the case was ripe and they would rule against Trump right now. The other six said they would probably vote against Trump but they wanted to wait to see if the illegals were actually excluded from the final census numbers -- which will happen AFTER Biden is sworn in. Then, Biden would reverse Trump's EO anyway.

4
Sugar4Brains 4 points ago +4 / -0

they'll appeal it to the UN which they'll say is more important than the Supreme Court

1
DirtyName 1 point ago +1 / -0

So? What's the UN gonna do?

0
MoldyLocksNesMonste 0 points ago +1 / -1

The UN will make a ruling, and all the global commies in power in the US will point to it and say that's what we have to do.

3
CahalTheMad 3 points ago +3 / -0

It'll be moot if Zhou Buyden is allowed to usurp the presidency since he'll give amnesty to all foreign invaders current and future. Illegal aliens won't exist as a demographic anynore; break into America, get rewarded with citizenship and "freebies" for life. Only white immigrants will be forced into the 10-year-long naturalization process only to be rejected at the end, like it is now.

130
Mr-J 130 points ago +130 / -0

They dont care anyway cause they expect Biden to flood the country with "refugees"

77
Berglewits 77 points ago +77 / -0

Or just give them amnesty, don't have to worry about counting them counting if they are citizens.

48
bck- 48 points ago +48 / -0

Biden didn’t even say he was going to give them amnesty. He’s just going to give them direct citizenship.

Meanwhile he’ll raise the federal minimum wage. The economy would literally upend itself over night with this retard in office.

19
JuicyfearsMAGA 19 points ago +19 / -0

We already give illegals thousands a month in average in welfare benefits on top of their other benefits. Not bad for.law breakers

15
bck- 15 points ago +15 / -0

The funny thing is, illegal immigrants probably don’t want to be citizens because they benefit more from being illegal. Way more benefits, like paying zero income tax. I wouldn’t be surprised if you’d see a large amount start leaving the country and bringing all the money they made back to Mexico

Theres no doubt that some of these illegals work very hard, so them obtaining citizenship would benefit the country greatly. They need to obtain it the right way however, not with a declaration of just anyone who is illegal is now legal. We need to know who they are, because often times, “they aren’t sending their best!”

2
JuicyfearsMAGA 2 points ago +3 / -1

They all need to leave and get out. We can't round them up, from a logistical and optics standpoint, but we need to deport the criminals and those who are blatantly caught abusing the systems.

Our policy should be border security which Trump succeeded in, fighting sanctuary policies which trump attempted, and then creating factors which would externally push illegals away and discourage them form attempting the come illegally. Citizenship and amnesty is a nice idea but Reagan proved it doesn't work. But either does allowing them to cost the taxpayer thousands a month either.

6
Sugar4Brains 6 points ago +7 / -1

just kill 100 a day and they'll start leaving. Yeah I am fed up.

1
booblitchutz 1 point ago +1 / -0

That’s why Chiden is trying to entice them with the offer of “free” healthcare (which they already get).

9
deleted 9 points ago +9 / -0
11
Meddlesom 11 points ago +11 / -0

Giving citizenship to foreign citizens just because they happened to illegally sneak across the border without getting caught is insanity to us, but it's all part of the democrat's grand strategy of seizing total control of the country.

We should hire the illegals to execute the democrats.

6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
1
MoldyLocksNesMonste 1 point ago +2 / -1

It's the same as giving an election away to someone just because they cheated well enough to "win".

1
SpezDispenser 1 point ago +1 / -0

Hes not going to give them onky citizenship, but out homes. Americans shipped to Liberia, and if yiu disagree, ye aint Merican.

1
flashersenpai 1 point ago +1 / -0

the ghost of pinochet frowns

0
Patriot6969 0 points ago +1 / -1

Not for the globalist mega corps, so who cares.

23
OrangeElvis 23 points ago +23 / -0

Bingo.

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
7
deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
4
HillarysBeaverMunch 4 points ago +4 / -0

You mean turn us into an immoral cultural cesspool far removed from our own moral ethos?

Yeah, I get it now. I did not always get it.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
Sugar4Brains 3 points ago +3 / -0

yeah, bring the troops home now to show them they were defending the wrong place the whole time

1
Truthdose 1 point ago +1 / -0

They already died for nothing when the WAR ON TERROR happened...

Did you know that Bush KEPT the boarders open after the attacks?

There was an article on t_D about it

8
bluewolf77vii 8 points ago +8 / -0

yes but less incentive for cities/ counties to take on 'sanctuary' status cause less $ for them unless citizens r 'legal'.

6
fthecoup 6 points ago +6 / -0

THIS WAS A FUCKING LOSS at worst and a punt to later at best!!!

The three dissenters wanted to agree with the lower court and overrule Trump's policy right now.

"...The court’s majority did not squarely address the legality of excluding from the count all foreigners illegally in the country, but said that it appears impractical to do so.

“Everyone agrees by now that the Government cannot feasibly implement the memorandum by excluding the estimated 10.5 million aliens without lawful status,” an unsigned opinion from the court’s majority read. “Yet the only evidence speaking to the predicted change in apportionment unrealistically assumes that the President will exclude the entire undocumented population.”

The court’s three Democratic appointees dissented, saying that the dispute is ripe for review, and that the court should declare now that Trump’s policy seeking to remove foreigners from the count violates the Constitution. ...":

6
ca18det 6 points ago +6 / -0

Estimated 10.5 my fucking ass. These weasels admitted to 22m and they keep trying to go back to the 10 when we all know it's easily over 30.

2
jetjetjet 2 points ago +2 / -0

Step 1: build a big bus

Step 2: put all the illegals on it

Step 3: drive it to Mexico

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
2
fthecoup 2 points ago +3 / -1

[SCREAMING] THIS IS A FUCKING LOSS FOR US!!!

3 of the nine voted to fuck Trump and America right now -- the other 6 said --no -- let's wait -- we'll let President Biden fuck Trump and America on letting the census include illegals OR we'll do for President Biden later.

"...The court’s majority did not squarely address the legality of excluding from the count all foreigners illegally in the country, but said that it appears impractical to do so.

“Everyone agrees by now that the Government cannot feasibly implement the memorandum by excluding the estimated 10.5 million aliens without lawful status,” an unsigned opinion from the court’s majority read. “Yet the only evidence speaking to the predicted change in apportionment unrealistically assumes that the President will exclude the entire undocumented population.”

The court’s three Democratic appointees dissented, saying that the dispute is ripe for review, and that the court should declare now that Trump’s policy seeking to remove foreigners from the count violates the Constitution. ...":

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
4
fthecoup 4 points ago +4 / -0

EXACTLY!!!!!!!! 3 of the 9 said fuck Trump now. The other 6 said -- no, we'll let President Biden fuck Trump. That tweet above is misleading bullshit and it is sad how people here are buying into that.

1
CokeOrPepe 1 point ago +1 / -0

They are already on the way.

47
WilliamHRacy 47 points ago +47 / -0

This was low-hanging fruit for them. They are still cucked in my book until they start to hear these actual cases and make judgements on actual fraud that took place.

9
Schiffblower 9 points ago +9 / -0

That’s why I said semi

4
vote_for_MAGA_2020 4 points ago +4 / -0

My question is, is this one of those rulings that actually means something and illegals are now excluded? Or is it like the womens drsft, where a judge said it’s unconstitutional to exclude women from the draft, but we have to wait for legislation to change it, thus women still dont have to apply for the draft?

2
SmolPedeBestPede 2 points ago +2 / -0

Closer to the second. The ruling says it’s too early to bring a suit, so no standing. They said they could bring the suit again later after the commerce department finished its analysis.

1
FightTheSWAMP 1 point ago +1 / -0

Agreed. Biden already said he was going to give them citizenship.

37
LiquidVapor 37 points ago +37 / -0

Like Cucker Carlson after fox started tanking...

8
deleted 8 points ago +8 / -0
463
deleted 463 points ago +471 / -8
147
Johnfox13 147 points ago +149 / -2

Illegal votes aren’t votes

Vote counting is sacred, if that confidence is broken we don’t have representation and therefore we are taxed without representation

70
deleted 70 points ago +72 / -2
52
JeremiahKassin 52 points ago +52 / -0

Look around, man. We're told we can't go to church without government permission. We can't leave the house without a diaper strapped to our heads. Can't go out for a drink. Not allowed the free expression of ideas.

Taxation without representation is kiddie pool stuff. We're drowning in the deep end of tyranny. And, ironically enough, it seems only a dictator will be able to drain it.

13
deleted 13 points ago +14 / -1
5
FromSethWithLove 5 points ago +5 / -0

My body is ready for Dictator Trump

4
Fabian 4 points ago +4 / -0

And, ironically enough, it seems only a dictator will be able to drain it.

As I am interested in history I can confirm that history itself has a great sense for irony!

23
bck- 23 points ago +23 / -0

Vote counting should be sacred, but this election has opened the door that it’s most likely been rigged all along, we just never noticed. Just think how much cheating goes on in deep blue states as well as the swing states, but everyone just goes, “Well it’s CA, of course it’s blue.”

The days leading up to the election Democrats in CA were terrified at the Trump supporter turnout in the state. No wonder they had the literal gaylords of Biden votes at the ready. They’re scared.

If this does not end with Trump as President, you can never trust the results of an election again, and honestly a civil war will be the only thing that solves it. I’m not trying to LARP, and I’d like to point out I REALLY would not like a civil war in my lifetime because just the thought of it seems unfathomable; But this is such a huge event in this country’s history that if the courts fail to uphold the Constitution, what other choice do the people have?

12
meden94 12 points ago +12 / -0

There is nothing left to do!!! Personally, I believe it is time to stand for the Flag, bear arms and show the leftist's this is America! Go back to the country you came from and make it better if you are unhappy here. America is a country of Freedom.

6
bck- 6 points ago +6 / -0

And since the Supreme Court doesn’t want to uphold the Constitution, then the laws can be thrown out the door.

My girlfriend’s father, who is a 2A enthusiast (in other words real American) has always told me that he could go out at anytime in the night and come back with a gun if need be. It’s easier to get one that way than to go through the bullshit hoops these cucked states put in place to sway you from getting one.

3
Anon1970 3 points ago +3 / -0

The commies can travel back in 🚁 rides.

9
deleted 9 points ago +10 / -1
3
Tulkas71 3 points ago +3 / -0

they have representation *without *taxation,

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
4
SteelDriver 4 points ago +4 / -0

It's time to write another letter to King George. :D

29
teen_burger_combo 29 points ago +29 / -0

Oh just wait. Biden already promised them citizenship. Expect California to gain 25 electoral votes in the coming years.

2
chinesevirus 2 points ago +2 / -0

If this goes through, expect secession talks to get serious. 25 more EC votes and 25 more representatives further drowns out the voices of multiple States and their citizens.

-3
deleted -3 points ago +7 / -10
10
Trumpeteer 10 points ago +12 / -2

OR, actually scoop their asses up, send them back, and build a better wall with stronger defenses instead of making it where the can simply stroll across. No executions needed, don’t blame them for taking advantage of the shit laws and system the Democraps have implemented.

-6
deleted -6 points ago +3 / -9
4
20KAG20 4 points ago +8 / -4

No. We are not trying to kill millions of people.

1
trollkin0331 1 point ago +1 / -0

It's not about the number. If there are millions of pedos, they need to be executed. The correct position is to ensure the objective morality of the laws and then faithfully enforce them.

-2
deleted -2 points ago +5 / -7
2
trollkin0331 2 points ago +2 / -0

I think we need to implement a policy were illegals who turn themselves in will be deported peacefully, and those that are caught by law enforcement face the death penalty as foreign invaders.

-1
Amaroq64 -1 points ago +1 / -2

The vermin are the leftists soliciting votes from entitled foreigners.

-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
1
jeffwingersballs 1 point ago +1 / -0

we can count on them to follow the path of least resistance.

320
deleted 320 points ago +324 / -4
101
The_Jelqer 101 points ago +104 / -3

Like saying people who break into your house are "undocumented guests"

27
Hatsarehats 27 points ago +28 / -1

I wish I could remember the exact phrasing but an article was written about a burglary and did exactly that. Used some absurd euphemism which made it sound like there wasn't a crime committed.

27
JudicialDredd 27 points ago +28 / -1

In Britain it's actually a thing that if you hurt or attack the people breaking into your house, you will be put in jail for it.

11
Monky 11 points ago +12 / -1

Br*tain 🤮🤮🤮

8
deleted 8 points ago +8 / -0
4
Hedonism_Bot 4 points ago +4 / -0

And just hope and pray that they don't become corrupted by Globalist bux.

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
1
AtlanticPede 1 point ago +1 / -0

I fear that's not possible over here.

7
Modus_Pwninz 7 points ago +7 / -0

"uninvited but otherwise welcome patrons"

5
Beat_to_Quarters 5 points ago +5 / -0

It's pure wordplay. There's no legal undocumented immigrant. Drug dealers are not undocumented pharmacists. Shoplifting is not an undocumented sale. It's theft.

4
Ebbie8708 4 points ago +4 / -0

Wish someone would be an “undocumented guests” in my apartment.

3
MrCaveman 3 points ago +3 / -0

And saying people who steal are "undocumented borrowers"

12
sociopathix 12 points ago +13 / -1

Illegal trespassing alien

2
BlueArmband 2 points ago +2 / -0

Trade War invading troops?

7
ippwndu 7 points ago +8 / -1

At least it's better than "undocumented migrants". Migrants are migratory. I keep wondering where they are going to migrate next.

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
1
Zskills 1 point ago +1 / -0

OUT

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
3
JudicialDredd 3 points ago +3 / -0

Illegal invading dirty rapists.

2
VoteCyborgTrump2040 2 points ago +2 / -0

Truer words have never been spoken. This is the prime example of manipulative language.

Shoplifters and thieves are not undocumented shoppers. Someone who sneaks in to a concert without paying is not an undocumented attendee. Someone who sneaks in to your house is not an undocumented guest.

171
no_public_id 171 points ago +174 / -3

"Three liberals dissent" should be the footer on all SCOTUS emails. Would save time for the reporters.

74
BeefChucker 74 points ago +78 / -4

That Four liberals agreed is the real headline.

25
no_public_id 25 points ago +26 / -1

Ouch. Accurate but ouch.

3
fdagasfd 3 points ago +4 / -1

So only 3/7 liberals want to abolish citizenship? Better than I thought.

2
Vir4030 2 points ago +2 / -0

Which two of the five constitutional justices are you calling liberal now?

0
fdagasfd 0 points ago +1 / -1

Maybe I misread, I thought "3 libs dissented, 4 agreed". So 3/7 or 3 out of 7 libs are just flagrantly anti-constitution.

2
Vir4030 2 points ago +2 / -0

How many liberals are there on the Supreme Court?

2
Dalewyn 2 points ago +2 / -0

The joke is that Kavanaugh, ACB, Gorsuch, and Roberts sided with the Constitution while being closet leftists.

Only Thomas and Alito have any integrity left on that rotten bench, and even that seems more and more like a stretch as the days go on.

0
Amaroq64 0 points ago +1 / -1

Yeah, wtf. Is this OP really telling me that the left-wingers on the supreme court wanted to hear it and the conservatives rejected it?

EDIT: Wait a minute, I read the OP wrong.

126
solomonwiebe 126 points ago +129 / -3

Almost caught a whiff of the constitution there...smelled good.

29
PelosisPussy 29 points ago +30 / -1

Better than what I gotta live with.

12
Nameless_Mofo 12 points ago +13 / -1

Username definitely checks out

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
2
Trumpeteer 2 points ago +2 / -0

u/PelosisPussy on suicide watch

113
BeefChucker 113 points ago +115 / -2

Theater. Under Biden, there will be no immigration laws and no one will be illegal. But elections will be rigged, so Citizenship will not have any value anyways.

34
deleted 34 points ago +36 / -2
26
ChilledCovfefe 26 points ago +27 / -1

Being a citizen would suck because you have to pay all taxes. Illegals can bypass anything.

9
Trumpeteer 9 points ago +10 / -1

So a win-win for Dems. They get more votes and more money. Won’t arrest for illegally invading the country but will if they’re made legal and evade their taxes lmao

2
sociopathix 2 points ago +3 / -1

Illegal aliens are the Democrat's slavery 3.0. Welfare was slavery 2.0.

0
deleted 0 points ago +3 / -3
2
kung-flu-fighting 2 points ago +2 / -0

NO, Citizens will have to follow laws and pay taxes, Thats your privilege.

2
jtt888 2 points ago +3 / -1

Being illegal only matters if the law does something about it. Dems have proven time and again as president that they just won't enforce the law if it serves their ends.

1
Thingthing22 1 point ago +3 / -2

Right. He simply won't enforce them. We have to be prepared to sue out the ass. Raise right-wing lawyers, pedes. We need a new kind of ARMY.

3
BlueArmband 3 points ago +4 / -1

Biden would pack the supreme court with illegals.

2
Thingthing22 2 points ago +3 / -1

Holy shit. What a fucking thought.

56
Ninjavideo 56 points ago +59 / -3

This is good news from a traitorous bunch

2
psybrnaut 2 points ago +2 / -0

So when would the number of state reps change?

0
Julius_Severus 0 points ago +1 / -1

Theoretically this should disadvantage states with a huge illegal population

52
FRENS 52 points ago +54 / -2

It is fucking incredible there's still 3 justices that vote in favor of shit like this.

26
ORD_to_SFO 26 points ago +28 / -2

Ya, that's what blows my mind.

This should be a no-brainer decision, but CLEARLY we have liberal activist justices that will unabashedly subvert our constitution. These people are mentally unfit to perform their duties. TDS is a disease that should immediately preclude someone from having a job that requires any form of judgement.

3
wolfpack28 3 points ago +3 / -0

The courts are more about politics than anything.

Priorities of the Judiciary:

  1. Political party
  2. Money
  3. Hangin' with friends and Epstein Island ...
  4. Justice
12
fthecoup 12 points ago +13 / -1

...Instead, the justices by a 6-3 vote said it was “premature” to rule the issue because it was unclear how or whether the Census Bureau would furnish data on residents who were not in “lawful status.” The decision most likely punts the issue to the Biden administration, which is expected to oppose a plan that many critics call unconstitutional. ..."

4
cowpen 4 points ago +5 / -1

Yes, the ripeness issue. I have no idea why anyone here is celebrating this decision. It does nothing.

5
fthecoup 5 points ago +5 / -0

6 SCOTUS want a President Biden to overturn Trump with another EO. If Trump somehow takes office and excludes illegals from the census, they would then overrule Trump.

3 SCOTUS would have overruled Trump right now.

It is that simple.

This sucks.

4
cptgusmccrae 4 points ago +5 / -1

Seriously how do they just blatantly ignore the law and rule based on their opinion? Unreal, these liberal judges are a complete joke.

3
fdagasfd 3 points ago +3 / -0

Because 8-40% of the population literally believes our constitution is simply mistaken and want corporations and international interests to "save" them from it.

2
sociopathix 2 points ago +3 / -1

Might have to force myself to read the dissent on this one to see mental gymnastics and clownery that has never been seen before.

1
Vir4030 1 point ago +1 / -0

In their dissent, they say that the government's effort to remove aliens without lawful status from the census violates decades of historical practice is true. Aliens have been included, but marked as such and not used for apportionment.

The dissent, however, then incorrectly equates the two, saying that it is unlawful to remove them from the apportionment base. The truth is that they were always removed from the base until Obama changed the rules. i.e. the Democrats cheated.

45
deleted 45 points ago +49 / -4
28
ciaramella_is_gay 28 points ago +31 / -3

YOU HAVE TO GO BACK!

GO HOME TO MOMMY!

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
22
NealKenneth 22 points ago +24 / -2

If they're allowing illegal ballots to be counted...then who gives a shit if non-citizens can vote?

This is a meaningless "victory."

7
Imransgarage 7 points ago +8 / -1

They count for 0/5ths for apportioning representation.

3
NealKenneth 3 points ago +4 / -1

It's not "representation" if your vote doesn't count.

I don't care if California has 55 seats or 51 seats if every one of those seats is stolen anyway.

2
Imransgarage 2 points ago +3 / -1

I sort of agree but also would rather have 51 instead of 55 stolen seats.

20
ShortCircuits 20 points ago +22 / -2

"The challengers have argued that Trump’s plan could leave several million people uncounted and cause California, Texas and New Jersey to lose House seats."

15
The_Mad_Draklor 15 points ago +16 / -1

American patriots: "I fail to see where this is our problem."

7
OptimusPrime 7 points ago +8 / -1

“Oh darn, what a shame.”

2
lurker247 2 points ago +2 / -0

New Jersey....That wouldn't have been my 3rd state choice for losing house seats because of illegals. That bad there?

I would have thought Florida or New Mexico before NJ.

2
fdagasfd 2 points ago +2 / -0

LOL! The goal of the census is not to count the total number of people in the world, it's the US Census. And I love how "we could lose house seats!" is even brought up.

Clown world, they'll do whatever they want and call it "rules".

18
FuckCommies2 18 points ago +20 / -2

UnDoCuMeNEd. I call them illegal pieces of smelly shit.

1
earthtrekker7 1 point ago +1 / -0

TBH, I dont blame them. I'd risk my life to get into this country too. Who i really blame are the dirtbag politicians who advocate for no borders and the government who destabilized their home in the first place

16
deleted 16 points ago +18 / -2
15
ovrwtchx32 15 points ago +16 / -1

The SCOTUS has essentially admitted they no longer rule based on law or the Constitution, so...

15
SpiceMustFlow 15 points ago +19 / -4

This ruling is exactly why we needed ACB. Regardless of the other bullshit which courts are afraid to touch universally.

No way Roberts votes with the other 5 if he wasn’t outnumbered here.

9
deleted 9 points ago +10 / -1
13
-f-b-i- 13 points ago +15 / -2

hmmmmm you seem alt like

9
deleted 9 points ago +10 / -1
5
Dang 5 points ago +6 / -1

Why delete your post history? For security?

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
12
ArcticDark 12 points ago +13 / -1

Now ensure they can't vote. If you are not a citizen with real "skin in the game" you have 0 justification to vote here.

10
ShakeYourTrumpThang 10 points ago +11 / -1

Dissenting in this case should mean being stripped of your citizenship and flown to Mexico.

9
Loc12 9 points ago +10 / -1

Can any leftist explain how people who are not citizens, who are in the country illegally, can be counted towards representation?

It's such a bizarre stance that I literally can't understand it

By that logic, you might as well say the population of the US is 8 billion and sort out Congress seats appropriately, because obviously borders and nations states don't matter

I know this is their ultimate goal but right now we do apparently still have borders

2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
1
Vir4030 1 point ago +1 / -0

Because it helps them win.

1
TheCandorist 1 point ago +1 / -0

Democrats are evil. That's your explanation.

0
Marshall2 0 points ago +1 / -1

Not for long.

0
sociopathix 0 points ago +1 / -1

Commiela Harris: "The distinguished gentlexhe is recognized for 4 years."

9
deleted 9 points ago +11 / -2
9
deleted 9 points ago +11 / -2
9
empiretc 9 points ago +10 / -1

Illegals should not count... Why is that so difficult to comprehend? Counting them is like trying to use counterfeit money.

8
deleted 8 points ago +9 / -1
1
HiddenDekuScrub 1 point ago +1 / -0

This "no standing" crap is showing up a lot lately...

Even if this is a "win", it wreaks.

1
Nv1ncible 1 point ago +3 / -2

Nobody read. Tired of half-truth posts here just because people are too lazy to look into the details.

8
ovrwtchx32 8 points ago +9 / -1

Why didn't shitbag Roberts vote with his liberal friends?

12
shade1k 12 points ago +13 / -1

If you look at the pattern of Roberts' votes, he likes to "keep things in balance" by handing out wins like treats.

"Sure, I'm blocking Trump's re-election lawsuits, but lookie! Here's a symbolic judgement that I think will be utterly meaningless since I expect the census to be slow-walked to keep Trump from actually making use of it."

It goes beyond merely ignoring the law when the law is inconvenient, and verges on total contempt for the idea that laws even are a thing.

3
CastlesMadeofSand01 3 points ago +4 / -1

Exactly. The guy is like Harvey Dent up there with his decisions. He's totally turned the Supreme Court into a political institution when it's plainly intended to uphold the law. There's no logic and critical thinking going on up there.

It's just another institution in our country that's had its cloak of credibility removed recently.

4
zooty 4 points ago +4 / -0

No need to since that would be a losing position anyway. He can vote with the majority and pretend that we still have a mostly majority republican supreme court.

3
FullMetalMello 3 points ago +3 / -0

Because as Chief Justice he can write the opinion of the majority. It’s a power play.

1
flashersenpai 1 point ago +1 / -0

YUP

2
TheCandorist 2 points ago +2 / -0

Because he is starting to wonder if he will get the rope.

6
mytummyhurts 6 points ago +8 / -2

Fuck yeah. About a dozen seats in CA are about to go byebye!

5
PepeQ 5 points ago +6 / -1

Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Read the opinion and you'll note that SCROTUS doesn't give a fuck about GEOTUS:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-366_7647.pdf

1
gummibarenaked 1 point ago +2 / -1

Friend, it's YOU that needs to read the opinion.


I've taken the liberty of clipping the pertinent sections for you.

The District Court also ruled that the exclusion of aliens on the basis of legal status would contravene the requirement in §2a(a) that the President state the “whole number of persons in each State” for purposes of apportionment. Id., at ___, 2020 WL 5422959, *32. The District Court declared the memorandum unlawful and enjoined the Secretary from including the information needed to implement the memorandum in his §141(b) report to the President. Id., at ___, 2020 WL 5422959, *35. The Government appealed, and we postponed consideration of our jurisdiction. 592 U. S. ___ (2020).

...

The judgment of the District Court is vacated, and the case is remanded with instructions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.


The law is not a common sense type of thing that you can understand by watching 2-3 YT videos. If you aren't well versed in the language of the law, I am happy to assist you. You only need ask politely.

To "Vacate" means to undo something that a court has done previously. In this matter the scotus erased the findings and the decision reached by the federal district court.

"Remand" means to send back to the court from which the case came. That would mean that this case would be transferred back to the federal district court.

"to dismiss" means just that. No further actions can be taken by either side. Any new filings would have to be new cases containing new information for the district court to consider.

"Lack of jurisdiction" is a legal term of art. It's interesting to me that the justices chose this particular language. It seems that they are going out of their way to highlight their belief in their own impartiality. Usually this would be worded using the term "ripeness", which means that the scotus doesn't consider that the issues underlying the case to have been developed well developed enough in the lower courts for the scotus to render some sort of decision without making new law.

I hope that this explanation is helpful to you.

1
Pepekun 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well, what do you say about Sundance's take? He seemed to lay out pretty clearly that this supreme court decision is exactly what PepeQ says.

1
gummibarenaked 1 point ago +1 / -0

i haven't read sundance's take. if you provide a link i'll check it out.

1
1
gummibarenaked 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm not sure if you got my reply. It probably was too long. I started going through the opinion and the dissent. If that's what you wanted me to do, I can break it up into smaller bits and send it to you. You asked me if I'd read the article. Well now I have. The article doesn't offer any analysis. It states that the same case will be back before scotus next year. Procedurally that's absolutely impossible since scotus ordered both a remand and also an order to dismiss.

1
Pepekun 1 point ago +1 / -0

Oh no I didn't I'm sorry it didn't come through. I really appreciate the additional understanding and coming back to me but I don't want you to do too much work. I guess the main thing I'd be curious about is your take on what is true about this specfic part:

That the justices indicated they think illegal aliens ought to be counted in the census, and that should this topic come back before the supreme court in a different manner they would most likely rule against us?

Is that your take on it also, or did you think it was more unclear or even the opposite of that?

1
gummibarenaked 1 point ago +1 / -0

Have you ever studied the law before? It doesn't have to be formal study. I'm just trying to understand at what level I should write. I was explaining how I approach analyzing a court decision. The reason I think it's important to do that here is because the justices have seeded (I believe) some clues in the per curium decision as to how the Trump administration might structure it's plans regarding how illegal aliens should be counted.

1
gummibarenaked 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sometimes my longer comments seem to hang when I'm trying to send them. I don't get a completion screen although they will sometimes still go through. I will have to just start splitting them up after about 30-50 lines. The limit seems to be somewhere in that range.

First off, I'd like us to agree to some ground rules/understandings. My statements about what I believe is the current state of the law should not be conflated with my own personal viewpoints. I don't agree at all that counting those unlawfully present in the US was ever a Great Idea. This and several other governmental actions/policies have created and fostered distinct perverse incentives that have consistently favored the political and societal goals of those who are against political conservatism.

With that line clearly drawn, let's move on.

5
deleted 5 points ago +6 / -1
5
RusherOfDin 5 points ago +5 / -0

This is another reason why Biden is going to pack the court when he starts his illegitimate administration.

Unless we do something about that now.

5
MinneMAGA 5 points ago +5 / -0

I see this cuck spelled "Illegal aliens" wrong

4
cornpop30303 4 points ago +4 / -0

If CCP runs our country, the SC will become obsolete.

4
sc00b3 4 points ago +4 / -0

I’m happy with the results, but Trump needs to hammer this home!

3 Justices agreed that representation should include non-citizens. This is yet another example about how the rule of law and respect for the constitution and the USA is dying (not dead yet... look at us here)!

Being a constitutionalist is not an optional “position”. By definition, SCOTUS justices are supposed to be constitutionalists! The madness needs to stop!

4
DRKMSTR 4 points ago +5 / -1

This could be a test to see how much rioting will happen.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
4
BoatingAccident 4 points ago +4 / -0

There is only one ruling I care about.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
4
deleted 4 points ago +6 / -2
4
NotDangerousGame 4 points ago +4 / -0

"We'll just count 'em anyway." -The Uniparty

4
SoldierofKek 4 points ago +4 / -0

Great of course this won't get implemented if Trump doesn't stay as POTUS. Good job

4
PeruvianNeckTie 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yea, this is good and all, but do not think a little red meat will distract us. We see you SC, we remember Texas 👀

4
MamaStew 4 points ago +5 / -1

Well, whatever else happens, at least California won't falsely inflate their house/electoral college numbers. Makes for more states that the dems will have to rig in future elections.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
4
flashersenpai 4 points ago +4 / -0

Not a win like you think it is.

4
Thorzam 4 points ago +4 / -0

Lets send them all a copy of the Constitution so they can re-read...those cowards on the SCOTUS swore an oath, I believe they should be stripped of their position and have to go back through a remedial Constitution Law class...

4
TruckyTrailer 4 points ago +4 / -0

the fact that this isn't a 9-0 decision tells you the state of our nation and our court system.

4
SwampSlayer 4 points ago +4 / -0

Red meat to appease conservatives angry over Texas decision. They vote conservative when it’s not existential, and then they get in line when it is. People need to reprogram and recognize this racket for what it is.

3
TheCandorist 3 points ago +3 / -0

So California has like 2 seats now?

1
cucumbersandwich 1 point ago +1 / -0

lol!

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
1
Bender4Prez 1 point ago +1 / -0

It means they won’t even look at a the question. Standing and ripeness. It can be brought again by different people or a different time.

There is no unjustly yet I assume. When they use the census to set the new congressional districts someone could claim injury.

We will see this challenge again, and soon.

3
AlphaOmaga 3 points ago +3 / -0

Thank god.