That's what I don't understand about SCOTUS and people trying to pick liberal or conservative judges. At the end of the day, in theory they should all rule with the constitution unless the issue is vague in the constitution. Yet this case is a cut and dry.
I just don't get it! I wonder if we get hear why each judge voted that way.
Edit: cool so each judge does explain their reason on their ruling. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a87_4g15.pdf
So pretty much the reason some said NO is because those two religious institutions we're not in Governor Cuomo's red zone. Essentially they didn't have the restriction of how many people anymore. That's the main reason they said it's useless to rule with the injunction. Altho Cuomo can always change this.
The other judges highlighted how it's ok to go to a bike shop, weed shop, and other essential places with a big capacity yet restrictions when it comes to religion, this violates the First amendment. And that things can change as their ruling is only for a temp injunction. Roberts seemed to agree with them but only ruled NO because NY moved these two religious institutions out of the restricted red zone. So I'm guessing if governor cu-homo still had the restrictions it would probably be 8-1 or 7-2. But these losers and traitors won't rule on this unconstitutional act because the governor decided to change the restriction in the middle of the review. They should know better that the governor anytime can change it back again, hence it needs a ruling now. Fake judges.
That's what I don't understand about SCOTUS and people trying to pick liberal or conservative judges. At the end of the day, in theory they should all rule with the constitution unless the issue is vague in the constitution. Yet this case is a cut and dry.
I just don't get it! I wonder if we get hear why each judge voted that way.
Edit: cool so each judge does explain their reason on their ruling. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a87_4g15.pdf
So pretty much the reason some said NO is because those two religious institutions we're not in Governor Cuomo's red zone. Essentially they didn't have the restriction of how many people anymore. That's the main reason they said it's useless to rule with the injunction. Altho Cuomo can always change this.
The other judges highlighted how it's ok to go to a bike shop, weed shop, and other essential places with a big capacity yet restrictions when it comes to religion, this violates the First amendment. And that things can change as their ruling is only for a temp injunction. Roberts seemed to agree with them but only ruled NO because NY moved these two religious institutions out of the restricted red zone. So I'm guessing if governor cu-homo still had the restrictions it would probably be 8-1 or 7-2
That's what I don't understand about SCOTUS and people trying to pick liberal or conservative judges. At the end of the day, in theory they should all rule with the constitution unless the issue is vague in the constitution. Yet this case is a cut and dry.
I just don't get it! I wonder if we get hear why each judge voted that way.
Edit: cool so each judge does explain their reason on their ruling. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a87_4g15.pdf
So pretty much the reason some said NO is because those two religious institutions we're not in Governor Cuomo's red zone. Essentially they didn't have the restriction of how many people anymore. That's the main reason they said it's useless to rule with the injunction. Altho Cuomo can always change this.
The other judges highlighted how it's ok to go to a bike shop, weed shop, and other essential places with a big capacity yet restrictions when it comes to religion, this violates the First amendment. And that things can change as their ruling is only for a temp injunction. Roberts seemed to agree with them but only ruled NO because NY moved these two religious institutions out of the restricted red zone. So I'm guessing if governor cu-homo still had the restrictions it would probably be 9-0 or 8-1
That's what I don't understand about SCOTUS and people trying to pick liberal or conservative judges. At the end of the day, in theory they should all rule with the constitution unless the issue is vague in the constitution. Yet this case is a cut and dry.
I just don't get it! I wonder if we get hear why each judge voted that way.
Edit: cool so each judge does explain their reason on their ruling. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a87_4g15.pdf
So pretty much the reason some said NO is because those two religious institutions we're not in Governor Cuomo's red zone. Essentially they didn't have the restriction of how many people anymore. That's the main reason they said it's useless to rule with the injunction. Altho Cuomo can always change this.
The other judges highlighted how it's ok to go to a bike shop, weed shop, and other essential places with a big capacity yet restrictions when it comes to religion, this violence the First amendment. And that things can change as their ruling is only for a temp injunction. Roberts seemed to agree with them but only ruled NO because NY moved these two religious institutions out of the restricted red zone. So I'm guessing if governor cu-homo still had the restrictions it would probably be 9-0 or 8-1
That's what I don't understand about SCOTUS and people trying to pick liberal or conservative judges. At the end of the day, in theory they should all rule with the constitution unless the issue is vague in the constitution. Yet this case is a cut and dry.
I just don't get it! I wonder if we get hear why each judge voted that way.
Edit: cool so each judge does explain their reason on their ruling. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a87_4g15.pdf
So pretty much the reason some said NO is because those two religious institutions we're not in Governor Cuomo's red zone. Essentially they didn't have the restriction of how many people anymore. That's the main reason they said it's useless to rule with the injunction. Altho Cuomo can always change this.
The other judges highlighted how it's ok to go to a bike shop, weed shop, and other essential places with a big capacity yet restrictions when it comes to religion, this violence the First amendment. Roberts seemed to agree with them but only ruled NO because NY moved these two religious institutions out of the restricted red zone. So I'm guessing if governor cu-homo still had the restrictions it would probably be 9-0 or 8-1
That's what I don't understand about SCOTUS and people trying to pick liberal or conservative judges. At the end of the day, in theory they should all rule with the constitution unless the issue is vague in the constitution. Yet this case is a cut and dry.
I just don't get it! I wonder if we get hear why each judge voted that way.
Edit: cool so each judge does explain their reason on their ruling. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a87_4g15.pdf
That's what I don't understand about SCOTUS and people trying to pick liberal or conservative judges. At the end of the day, in theory they should all rule with the constitution unless the issue is vague in the constitution. Yet this case is a cut and dry.
I just don't get it! I wonder if we get hear why each judge voted that way.