If you thought the Supreme Court would be Conservative, well think again.
The Supreme Court declined to review three cases relating to Republican efforts to defund Planned Parenthood at the state level Monday, over a vigorous dissent from Justice Clarence Thomas.
The dissent was significant because it indicates that Justice Brett Kavanaugh sided with the high court’s liberal wing to deny review of a lower court decision that favored the nation’s largest abortion provider.
“So what explains the Court’s refusal to do its job here?,” Thomas wrote. “I suspect it has something to do with the fact that some respondents in these cases are named ‘Planned Parenthood.’”
I guest Brett forgot what the damn liberals did to he and his family.
“Some tenuous connection to a politically fraught issue does not justify abdicating our judicial duty,” Thomas added. “If anything, neutrally applying the law is all the more important when political issues are in the background.”
Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch joined the Thomas dissent, meaning there were three votes in favor of taking the case. Since four votes are needed for the Supreme Court to take up a case, the opinion indicates that Chief Justice John Roberts and Kavanaugh joined with the four liberals to deny review.
This move could indicate that Roberts and Kavanaugh are loath to take take up an abortion-related question in the aftermath of Kavanaugh’s contentious confirmation. The Court’s new junior justice has generally kept a low profile since taking the bench in October.
Both of these phonies are liberals.
Justice Clarence Thomas participates in taking a new family photo with his fellow justices at the Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst
Monday’s cases arose when Republican state leaders in Louisiana and Kansas stripped Planned Parenthood of state Medicaid funds after a pro-life advocacy group presented evidence that the abortion-provider was harvesting and selling fetal materials. Planned Parenthood contests the accuracy of these claims.
Planned Parenthood and several unnamed female patients challenged the states’ move in federal court. The legal question in Monday’s cases was whether Medicaid recipients can challenge the disqualification of a provider under the Medicaid law. As such, it did not touch on abortion directly.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Planned Parenthood on that question in June 2017, prompting an appeal to the Supreme Court. That ruling is left in place now that the justices have refused to take the case.
Pro-life groups swiftly expressed their displeasure following Monday’s announcement.
“We are disappointed the Supreme Court declined to hear this case,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List. “The pro-life citizens of states like Kansas and Louisiana, through their elected representatives, have clearly expressed their will: they do not want Medicaid tax dollars used to prop up abortion businesses like Planned Parenthood.”
The Trump administration is currently formulating a new federal regulation called the Protect Life Rule which would forbid public funding of Planned Parenthood under Title X.
President Donald Trump finally reacted on Tuesday to French President Emmanuel Macron’s speech condemning nationalism, noting his low approval ratings.
“The problem is that Emmanuel suffers from a very low Approval Rating in France, 26 percent, and an unemployment rate of almost 10 percent,” Trump wrote on Twitter.
Despite Trump’s embrace of the word “nationalist” to describe his political thought, Macron warned the world that “patriotism is the exact opposite of nationalism” during his speech marking the 100th year anniversary of the end of World War I.
Trump suggested that Macron was trying to distract from his unpopularity.
“He was just trying to get onto another subject,” Trump wrote. “By the way, there is no country more Nationalist than France, very proud people-and rightfully so! MAKE FRANCE GREAT AGAIN!”
The president also criticized a number of issues facing France and the United States, including wine tariffs and military spending.
The president noted that both countries made excellent wine, but said that France had higher tariffs than the United States.
“The problem is that France makes it very hard for the U.S. to sell its wines into France, and charges big Tariffs, whereas the U.S. makes it easy for French wines, and charges very small Tariffs,” Trump wrote on Twitter. “Not fair, must change!”
He also ridiculed Macron for suggesting that Europe would have to build an army to protect itself from China, Russia, and the United States.
“How did that work out for France?” Trump wrote referring to World War I and World War II. “They were starting to learn German in Paris before the U.S. came along. Pay for NATO or not!”
Donald J. Trump
✔@realDonaldTrump
The problem is that Emmanuel suffers from a very low Approval Rating in France, 26%, and an unemployment rate of almost 10%. He was just trying to get onto another subject. By the way, there is no country more Nationalist than France, very proud people-and rightfully so!……..
On Trade, France makes excellent wine, but so does the U.S. The problem is that France makes it very hard for the U.S. to sell its wines into France, and charges big Tariffs, whereas the U.S. makes it easy for French wines, and charges very small Tariffs. Not fair, must change!
Emmanuel Macron suggests building its own army to protect Europe against the U.S., China and Russia. But it was Germany in World Wars One & Two – How did that work out for France? They were starting to learn German in Paris before the U.S. came along. Pay for NATO or not!
A biological male who identifies as a transgender woman won a women’s world championship cycling event on Sunday.
Rachel McKinnon, a professor at the College of Charleston, won the women’s sprint 35-39 age bracket at the 2018 UCI Masters Track Cycling World Championships in Los Angeles.
McKinnon, representing Canada, bested Carolien Van Herrikhuyzen of the Netherlands and American cyclist Jennifer Wagner to take home the gold.
McKinnon celebrated the victory on Twitter, writing: “First transgender woman world champion…ever.”
“We cannot have a woman legally recognized as a trans woman in society, and not be recognized that way in sports,” McKinnon told USA Today.
“Focusing on performance advantage is largely irrelevant because this is a rights issue. We shouldn’t be worried about trans people taking over the Olympics. We should be worried about their fairness and human rights instead.”
McKinnon also compared restrictions on biological males competing in women’s events to racial segregation.
“This is bigger than sports, and it’s about human rights,” McKinnon said to USA Today.
“By catering to cisgender people’s views, that furthers transgender people’s oppression. When it comes to extending rights to a minority population, why would we ask the majority? I bet a lot of white people were pissed off when we desegregated sports racially and allowed black people. But they had to deal with it.”
Al Gore Should Be Arrested For Making Millions Off The Fake Man Mad Global Warming.
A $240 PER GALLON GAS TAX TO FIGHT GLOBAL WARMING? NEW UN REPORT SUGGESTS CARBON PRICING
A new U.N. report suggests a $240 per gallon gas tax equivalent is needed to fight global warming.
The U.N. says a carbon tax would need to be as high as $27,000 per ton in the year 2100.
If you think that’s unlikely to ever happen, you’re probably right.
A United Nations special climate report suggests a tax on carbon dioxide emissions would need to be as high as $27,000 per ton at the end of the century to effectively limit global warming.
Tree Hugging Idiot.
For Americans, that’s the same as a $240 per gallon tax on gasoline in the year 2100, should such a recommendation be adopted. In 2030, the report says a carbon tax would need to be as high as $5,500 — that’s equivalent to a $49 per gallon gas tax.
Political Correctness Gone Amuck.
If you think that’s an unlikely scenario, you’re probably not wrong. However, it’s what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s report, released Sunday night, sees as a policy option for reducing emissions enough to keep projected warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius.
Nuff Said!
The IPCC’s report is meant to galvanize political support for doubling down on the Paris climate accord ahead of a U.N. climate summit scheduled for December. The report calls for societal changes that are “unprecedented in terms of scale” in order to limit future global warming to below 1.5 degrees Celsius, the stretch goal of the Paris accord.
In order to effectively keep future warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius, the IPCC says carbon taxes would need to range from $135 to $5,500 per ton in 2030, $245 to $13,000 per ton in 2050, $420 to $17,000 per ton in 2070 and $690 to $27,000 per ton in 2100.
To meet the goals of the Paris accord, which seeks to limit future warming to below 2 degrees Celsius, the IPCC says carbon taxes would have range between $10 and $200 in 2030 and $160 and $2,125 in 2100.
That’s equivalent to a gas tax as high as $1.70 per gallon in 2030 to nearly $19 per gallon at the end of the century. That’s less onerous than limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, but still no walk in the park.
California and many European countries have policies to price carbon dioxide emissions and mandate green energy, including cap-and-trade systems and carbon taxes. But carbon prices under those systems are nowhere near where the IPCC says they need to be.
The IPCC said the “price of carbon would need to increase significantly when a higher level of stringency is pursued.” However, the group’s report tacitly acknowledges the unlikelihood that governments will enact astronomical taxes on energy.
“While the price of carbon is central to prompt mitigation pathways compatible with 1.5 [degree Celsius]-consistent pathways, a complementary mix of stringent policies is required,” reads the IPCC’s report.
In the U.S., Republican lawmakers overwhelmingly passed a resolution opposed to carbon taxes in July. Democrats called for a price on carbon dioxide in their 2016 party platform, but they haven’t made much effort on that front since the failure of cap-and-trade legislation in 2010.
Republican Rep. Carlos Curbelo of Florida introduced carbon tax legislation shortly after all but five of his GOP colleagues in the House voted to oppose such a bill. Curbelo’s bill would tax carbon dioxide at $23 a ton — nowhere near what the IPCC calls for.
However, the IPCC suggested a lower carbon tax could be used in conjunction with command and control policies, like regulations and bans on coal plants, could achieve “generate a 1.5˚C pathway for the U.S. electric sector.”
But that point only serves to undermine Curbelo’s bill, which would put a moratorium on some environmental regulations and possibly eliminate some if emissions goals are reached.
The IPCC noted the “literature indicates that the pricing of emissions is relevant but needs to be complemented with other policies to drive the required changes in line with 1.5°C-consistent cost-effective pathways.”
Hollywood celebrities from Judd Apatow to Kathy Griffin melted down on Twitter Thursday following the FBI concluding its seventh background check into Brett Kavanaugh that did not provide information about him being a sexual abuser.
The FBI report could not corroborate any claims of sexual misconduct made against Brett Kavanaugh. This means that Kavanaugh could soon be confirmed to the Supreme Court — and many celebrities found this just too much to handle.
1. Call your senators to demand they oppose Kavanaugh 2. Call your senators to demand they oppose Kavanaugh 3. Ask a friend to call their senators, too 4. Call your senators to demand they oppose Kavanaugh
“So many women I love are in DC today. They represent hundreds, thousands, & millions of other women. At this point, opposing Kavanaugh is not about a political party…it’s about ensuring that women-people-of every political party are safe. (1/2)” Lena Dunham tweeted, adding, “Trauma is a silent killer. I pray- truly, yes, have been praying- that our senators on both sides of the aisle recognize their own moral imperative to believe and protect survivors. #stopkavanaugh (2/2).”
So many women I love are in DC today. They represent hundreds, thousands, & millions of other women. At this point, opposing Kavanaugh is not about a political party…it’s about ensuring that women-people-of every political party are safe. (1/2)
Trauma is a silent killer. I pray- truly, yes, have been praying- that our senators on both sides of the aisle recognize their own moral imperative to believe and protect survivors. #stopkavanaugh (2/2)
Meanwhile, Michael Moore claimed that it was time for the left to “wake up and start FIGHTING.”
“5 days ago Dems & ‘liberals’ did the same old thing, claiming some empty ‘victory’ when Flake feigned ‘shame, and then foolishly placing their hopes in the FBI – THE FBI! – doing an ‘investigation.’ When is our side going to wake up and start FIGHTING? Stop hoping & start acting!” he tweeted.
5 days ago Dems & “liberals” did the same old thing, claiming some empty “victory” when Flake feigned “shame, and then foolishly placing their hopes in the FBI – THE FBI! – doing an “investigation.” When is our side going to wake up and start FIGHTING? Stop hoping & start acting!
Both houses of Congress.The White House.Almost every corporate boardroom.Country clubs and business organizations. Most churches. Over half of white people, a majority of old white people. Virtually every square foot of rural America.
Dear @JeffFlake@lisamurkowski and @SenatorCollins. An investigation that fails to investigate will NOT provide you with political cover. If you vote for this man you are telling EVERY survivor who comes forward that your career is more important than justice. We won’t forget.
Donald Trump says it’s “a very scary time for young men in America.”Gee, I didn’t know so many of them were being assaulted and then mocked about it by their president.
It’s almost as if moderate GOP senators knew in advance that the FBI investigation would be stymied and useless, but the fact that one happened would give them the political cover to vote yes.
Tuesday on CNN’s “New Day,” network legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin reacted to a clip of Donald Trump Jr. discussing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh sexual assault allegations and his fear of such claims becoming weaponized.
Toobin mocked the idea of “white men” fearing they can be falsely accused.
Any More Questions?
“Every night, I cry myself to sleep over the fate of white men in America,” Toobin stated. “White men have no power, white men — I mean, it’s such garbage.”
One Of The Main Reasons America Is Being Destroyed.
He added, “You know what? If you sexually assault someone in high school, your life should be ruined, your life should be pursued. The idea that this is somehow unjust — remember, this all started with accusations of sexual assault. How about the lives of the women who were sexually assaulted in high school? How about 15-year-old Ms. Blasey, she wasn’t Ms. Blasey Ford in those days, how about her life? All this whining about the poor plight of white men is ridiculous.”
