Donald Trump isn’t exactly a beloved figure in politics, in fact, you have to have a very limited intellect to fall for his very blatant and baseless lies. That doesn’t stop nearly half of the nation from slipping further into the abyss, turning their backs on reality and morality for no other reason than to keep a Republican in power.
The distain with which these people treat their fellow Americans cannot be ignored. Neither can their complete lack of accountability in the face of the most dangerous president in American history.
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor is now calling out fellow members of the supreme court, accusing them of bias towards Trump.
According to NY Times:
The Supreme Court on Friday allowed the Trump administration to move forward with plans to deny green cards to immigrants who are thought to be likely to become “public charges” by making even occasional and minor use of public benefits like Medicaid, food stamps and housing vouchers.
As in a similar case last month, the vote was 5 to 4, with the court’s conservative justices in the majority. As before, the court’s brief order included no reasons for lifting a preliminary injunction that had blocked the new program.
The earlier case, from a judge in New York, concerned a nationwide injunction. Friday’s order lifted a much more limited injunction, one that applied only in Illinois.
Sotomayor said this about Republican heartlessness on the matter, even rebuking her fellow justices:
“Claiming one emergency after another, the government has recently sought stays in an unprecedented number of cases, demanding immediate attention and consuming limited court resources in each. And with each successive application, of course, its cries of urgency ring increasingly hollow.”
Sotomayor communicates that a shift has apparently happened when it comes to the meaning of “irreparable harm.” Sotomayor says that the previous ruling that provided some aid by blocking countrywide injunctions was far better.
“Having first sought a stay in the New York cases based, in large part, on the purported harm created by a nationwide injunction, it now disclaims that rationale and insists that the harm is its temporary inability to enforce its goals in one state.”
Justice Neil Gorsuch gives a perfect example of what Sotomayor is talking about when it comes to bias. This is what he had to say about the issue:
“It has become increasingly apparent that this court must, at some point, confront these important objections to this increasingly widespread practice. As the brief and furious history of the regulation before us illustrates, the routine issuance of universal injunctions is patently unworkable, sowing chaos for litigants, the government, courts, and all those affected by these conflicting decisions.”
“I concur in the court’s decision to issue a stay. But I hope, too, that we might at an appropriate juncture take up some of the underlying equitable and constitutional questions raised by the rise of nationwide injunctions.”
Sotomayor then goes on to blame the Supreme Court itself for its part in the scandal. She says:
“It is hard to say. what is more troubling: that the government would seek this extraordinary relief seemingly as a matter of course, or that the court would grant it.”
“I fear. that this disparity in treatment erodes the fair and balanced decision-making process that this court must strive to protect.”