#SCOTUS

[liberalsarecool]

Roberts' SCOTUS said it was executive overreach for Biden to forgive student loans but not to wholesale gut the education department with zero contingency plan. Or any plan at all.

This is how you downgrade every public school in every town and dismantle the IEP system to help address students with disabilities.

Charters won't take students with special needs.

SCOTUS is taking the power of Congress and giving it to the Epstein List Rape King.

[golwenlothlindel]

so yes, and no.

See, it is true that the Roe vs. Wade decision decided that the 4th Amendment should be interpreted as guaranteeing a right to privacy. But, quite a few decisions were based on this interpretation: including Loving v. Virginia. It's also what HIPPA, a suite of federal laws, is based on. Those other decisions stand as of the time of writing.

Also, the more conservative understanding of the 4th Amendment as meaning your devices cannot be searched, as well as immunity from tapping or hacking by the government, still stands. This is of course, a type of privacy. You can have an alias on social media and keep it separate from your real identity, and say whatever the fuck you want with no one being able to link it to you. This kind of privacy is NOT under threat: Congress is not going to pass a Constitutional Amendment and that's the only way to repeal a Constitutional Amendment.

But, there is a constant threat that Loving vs. Virginia could be overturned on the basis of the Dobbs decision. Also the HIPPA laws could be declared unconstitutional, again, on the basis of the Dobbs decision: because yes, it absolutely does hinge on a reanalysis of the 4th Amendment to mean it does not cover data privacy.

i know most leftists agree that everybody should have a right to food, water, shelter, and healthcare but i think a vitally important fifth pillar is privacy. people should not be compelled to be tracked, monitored, or to share personal space with others to access their other essential rights

[never-quite-buried]

Nope now it’s at the point that i’m shocked that people off tt don’t know what’s going down. I have no reach but i’ll sum it up anyway.

SCOTUS is hearing on the constitutionality of the ban as tiktok and creators are arguing that it is a violation of our first amendment rights to free speech, freedom of the press and freedom to assemble.

SCOTUS: tiktok bad, big security concern because china bad!

Tiktok lawyers: if china is such a concern why are you singling us out? Why not SHEIN or temu which collect far more information and are less transparent with their users?

SCOTUS (out loud): well you see we don’t like how users are communicating with each other, it’s making them more anti-american and china could disseminate pro china propaganda (get it? They literally said they do not like how we Speak or how we Assemble. Independent journalists reach their audience on tt meaning they have Press they want to suppress)

Tiktok users: this is fucking bullshit i don’t want to lose this community what should we do? We don’t want to go to meta or x because they both lobbied congress to ban tiktok (free market capitalism amirite? Paying off your local congressmen to suppress the competition is totally what the free market is about) but nothing else is like TikTok

A few users: what about xiaohongshu? It’s the Chinese version of tiktok (not quite, douyin is the chinese tiktok but it’s primarily for younger users so xiaohongshu was chosen)

16 hours later:

Tiktok as a community has chosen to collectively migrate TO a chinese owned app that is purely in Chinese out of utter spite and contempt for meta/x and the gov that is backing them.

My fyp is a mix of “i would rather mail memes to my friends than ever return to instagram reels” and “i will xerox my data to xi jinping myself i do not care i share my ss# with 5 other people anyway” and “im just getting ready for my day with my chinese made coffee maker and my Chinese made blowdryer and my chinese made clothing and listening to a podcast on my chinese made phone and get in my car running on chinese manufactured microchips but logging into a chinese social media? Too much for our gov!” etc.

So the government was scared that tiktok was creating a sense of class consciousness and tried to kill it but by doing so they sent us all to xiaohongshu. And now? Oh it’s adorable seeing this gov-manufactured divide be crossed in such a way.

This is adorable and so not what they were expecting. Im sure they were expecting a reluctant return to reels and shorts to fill the void but tiktokers said fuck that, we will forge connections across the world. Who you tell me is my enemy i will make my friend. That’s pretty damn cool.

[marvelsmostwanted]

When you see the news about all of the heinous Supreme Court decisions that were just made please remember that every single one is a direct result of the fact that Donald Trump was the president from 2016-2020 and Hillary Clinton was not. And there are two conservative justices who will likely retire as soon as a second Trump term begins so he can appoint younger people and enshrine conservatism on the court for another 50+ years. So. Please vote. It will at least give us a fighting chance to get our rights back sooner

[ngdrb]

[reasonsforhope]

"The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday [June 27, 2025] upheld a key provision of the Affordable Care Act, ruling in Kennedy v. Braidwood that health insurance companies must continue covering preventive services recommended by a federal task force — including HIV prevention medication, cancer screenings, and vaccines.

The Court ruled 6-3, in an opinion written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, concluding that the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force operates constitutionally and that the Secretary of Health and Human Services has the authority to appoint its members as inferior officers. That means the ACA’s mandate, requiring insurers to cover preventive services, remains intact. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neal Gorsuch dissented.

The majority rejected arguments that the Task Force’s structure violated the Appointments Clause of the Constitution, emphasizing that Congress had provided for the Secretary’s oversight and removal authority, making the Task Force’s members “inferior officers.”

At issue was whether insurers could be compelled to cover services such as pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, which prevents HIV transmission. Public health experts say PrEP access is especially vital for Black and Latine gay and bisexual men and transgender women, who are disproportionately impacted by HIV.

Other services potentially on the chopping block included screenings for cancer, depression, hepatitis B and C, and sexually transmitted infections, as well as a range of vaccines and counseling interventions.

The plaintiffs, a group of Christian business owners, argued that being required to cover PrEP violated their religious beliefs, claiming the medication “encourages homosexual behavior.” A lower court had previously sided with them, sparking concern that the ruling could jeopardize nationwide access to dozens of preventive health services.

Medical experts and LGBTQ+ advocates emphasized that PrEP is used by people of all backgrounds and sexual orientations, and that HIV “does not discriminate.”

Friday’s decision, on the last day of the Supreme Court's term, marks a significant win for LGBTQ+ health equity and for public health more broadly, following years of legal attempts to undermine the ACA’s nondiscrimination and preventive care mandates.

A joint statement by Lambda Legal, PrEP4All, the Center for Health Law and Policy Innovation, the Center for HIV Law and Policy, and Equality Federation called the ruling “the right decision to reject this assault,” saying it “uphold[s] essential protections for preventive services and affirm[s] that prevention and early detection of diseases save lives, improve health outcomes, and reduce long-term health outcomes.”

They said the Braidwood case “has been not just an attack on HIV prevention or LGBTQ people — it has been a coordinated effort to dismantle access to no-cost preventive healthcare for more than 150 million Americans.”

“This was never about religious liberty,” the statement continued. “It has been about using LGBTQ people as a scapegoat to push a broader agenda that punishes the vulnerable. And the truth is, most of the people harmed by this decision wouldn’t have been queer. They would be working-class families, Black and Brown communities, rural Americans, and anyone who relies on preventive care to stay healthy and alive.”

The groups warned that while the ruling preserves existing protections, vigilance is needed to prevent political interference. “History reminds us that silence is deadly,” they said, invoking the memory of the AIDS crisis and those who “weaponized faith to justify inaction.” ...

“This Pride Month, we celebrate this victory as we honor the legacy of those who fought back at Stonewall, who took to the streets with ACT UP, and who demanded dignity at the height of crisis,” the statement said. “We carry that legacy forward now. Join us. Raise your voice. Defend preventive care. Fight back.”"

-via The Advocate, June 27, 2025

[politijohn]

Source

Waking up everyday to learn that, yes, things did get worse

[mysharona1987]

So SCOTUS has just given Joe Biden the funniest way to end this election, ever.

[thetourguidebarbie]

Supreme court came down with two earth-shattering decisions this morning:

Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo allows courts to make decisions that used to be the job of federal agencies.

If the FDA says hormone treatments are safe, the court can now say "mmm, nah" and ban those treatments.

The court can ban mifepristone or miscarriage care contrary to medical experts.

The court can lower requirements by the EPA that regulates climate change.

The court can overrule trade rules by the FTC.

The court could require less safety regulation on airplanes.

And much much more!!

This is very very bad, and the way to solve this problem is by voting for Joe Biden so that he can replace Thomas and Alito when they die. If you care about marginalized communities, PLEASE vote.

City of Grant Pass v. Johnson says that criminalizing/fining people for sleeping outside (aka being homeless) isn't cruel and unusual punishment. It will punish people of color and disabled people disproportionately.

On my knees begging you to vote for Joe Biden. You cannot sit this one out. Activism is not tweeting or blogging. You are not helping by not exercising your right to vote, a right that can and will be taken from you if Joe Biden is not reelected.

Edit: they also dismissed some charges against January 6 defendants but quite frankly that is not as important, even though that's what everyone is freaking out about.

[artielu]

Listen up.

The current Supreme Court is a 6-3 conservative majority.

Justice Thomas, that corrupt fascist fucker, is 75.

Justice Alito, that biased fascist fucker, is 74.

Each is married to a fascist ultra right wing woman. Ginny Thomas was actively involved in Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Martha Ann Alito is the alleged source of the ultra right wing flags on the Alito homes.

If Trump is elected in 2024, Thomas and Alito will retire, just like Kennedy did in 2018. Trump will get to appoint two more justices in their 50s.

Like sexual assaulter and liar Kavanaugh. Or handmaid's tale Coney Barrett. And the conservative majority will be on lock for thirty years. Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Coney Barrett are in their 50s.

Add two more ultraconservative justices in their 50s and you have a five seat conservative majority for 30 years if they live natural lifetimes.

If Trump is elected in 2024, we've not only lost the Court for at least a decade (now) but another thirty years.

What other civil rights would you like to lose? Because YOU WILL. We ALL will.

Can we fucking not? CAN WE FUCKING NOT?

Vote for Biden.

Vote for Democrats for the Senate.

[liberalsarecool]

The independent court is dead. Impartial rulings are dead. Republican judges have succumbed to corruption, bribes, and white supremacy.

SCOTUS can't even be bothered to write how their pro-Trump rulings make legal sense. Unsigned orders?!

They even diminish their own co-equal power to give more influence to Trump.

It's appalling. Centuries of legal precedents and legitimate legal arguments, all tossed aside to give Cheeto Mussolini a fascist sledgehammer.

[my-midlife-crisis]

[corporationsarepeople]

If any person in this country does not have due process, then no one has due process.

You’re a citizen? Oh yeah? Prove it. Sorry but you’ll need due process for that. Welcome to CECOT.

[dicapiito]

Friendly reminder about this election

[ngdrb]