• m_f@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Because there were not enough justices for a quorum—the court needs at least six and only Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson remained—the court affirmed the judgment of a lower court to dismiss the lawsuit.

    Clever. Appearing to do the right thing at face value coincides nicely with getting the case against you dropped. It’s likely impossible to sue a majority of the Supreme Court if they don’t care to be sued.

    • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      The lower court’s decision was upheld. A lower court that didn’t have the issue of defendants being asked to preside over their own case.

      • m_f@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Sure, but do you think if the lower court decided that the case could move forward, the justices would’ve sat out? I doubt it.

        • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Do you have an example of them doing that? Or are you simply lampooning them despite them making the best decision available.

    • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      It’s likely impossible to sue a majority of the Supreme Court if they don’t care to be sued.

      Only as long as you have the majority. If this had been a case against the liberal minority, they would not have been able to do the same.

    • VintageTech@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      This is a tactic Oregon representatives use quite often. So we voted on a bill stating that if you miss 10 or more sessions you’re in eligible to run for office again.

      • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        They’re already trying to weasel out of it by claiming that the language of the law means they still get to serve one more term.

    • Supermariofan67@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      It’s a frivolous troll lawsuit and this is a clickbait article

      https://casetext.com/case/mactruong-v-abbott

      In his Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that he is an inventor of “Tele-Sex or Tele-Mining on Jupiter and other planets of the Solar System,” and appears to assert a claim for copyright infringement and constitutional violations.

      In his brief, Plaintiff makes fantastical allegations, stating, for example, that “Defendants are dangerous liars, criminals, traitors and co-conspirators.” Dkt. 18 at 31. He further states that Supreme Court Justices Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett “deserve the death penalty or at least to be disbenched from the U.S. Supreme Court.” Dkt. 18 at 40.