SCOTUS: Setting The Stage for the Apocalypse (sort of)
June 28, 2024
The Apocalypse Starts Now [2012 original with AI background]
Anyone who was awake and near an electronic device found themselves startled, either positively or negatively, as three critical decisions were handing down this morning by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). Personally, I grew increasingly livid with each one. I was in the middle of editing a set of pictures, though, and didn’t want to stop. My blood pressure increased with each subsequent announcement until I knew my only choice was to take some medicine and go to bed, give my brain a chance to sort everything out before making any kind of comment. I cannot promise that this will be my only comment on these matters, but this is the first.
SCOTUS is setting the stage for a GOP-dominated government
Welcome to the first ring of Hell, USA. Everything that the court handed down this morning was something that Republicans have wanted for a long time, in one case since 1984. These decisions make it easier for a GOP-dominated government to continue to dismantle departments, agencies, and programs it doesn’t like, which is most of them. The long-term effects will be a weaker federal government, diminished oversight and safety, and a stronger “might-makes-right” attitude toward the Constitution.
Potentially, today’s decisions have the ability to bite the entire country in the ass. Whether or not that happens remains to be scene, but the groundwork is definitely there. One has to wonder, given the recent news of corruption within the high court, as to whether today’s critical decisions were partial payback for the vacations and other gifts that some justices have received. We may not know the answer to that question within our lifetimes, but I’d bet the money I don’t have that history will reveal this to be one of the most corrupt and evily influenced moments in juris prudence.
That is, if history remembers us at all. We’re not that old, you know. There have been hundreds of “empires” that history has forgotten because of how thoroughly they destroyed themselves. We remember those who spanned millennia, not those who only lasted a couple of centuries. In fact, we’re not even close to “age” status, which is 2,000 years. We’re not likely to make it, either.
I want to briefly examine each of today’s rulings, in the order I received them, and consider not only what they may mean for the country, but ways in which we can fight back against the absolute nonsense the court has unleashed. Technically, yes, this is a long read (over 300 words), but realistically, it could be a lot longer. There are still a number of opinions to unpack. Please don’t consider this a finished treatise by any measure.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) reports that, “on a single night in 2023, roughly 653,100 people in the U.S. experienced homelessness, up about 12 percent from 2022.” The World Population Review currently estimates that Overall, 66.7% of the total homeless population of the United States is single individuals, with the remaining 33.3% being families. In recent years, homelessness increased nationally by almost one percent. This number comprises unaccompanied children and young adults, single adults experiencing chronic homelessness, and people experiencing unsheltered homelessness. Some populations have seen a decrease in homelessness. Dramatic reductions are among families and the veteran community.
The top ten areas for homelessness looks like this:
Cities, who have no feeling at all, have grapples with how to handle the unhoused issue. They have wrung their hands, citing health issues as sufficient justification for concern, when in reality all any mayor or city council is concerned about is that uncomfortable feeling people get when they see other people, possibly their co-workers, living in a tent in the park.
Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote what may be the lamest decision I’ve ever seen. “Homelessness is complex. Its causes are many. So may be the public policy responses required to address it. A handful of federal judges cannot begin to ‘match’ the collective wisdom the American people possess in deciding ‘how best to handle’ a pressing social question like homelessness.”
What a fucking crock of shit. The Eighth Amendement is the “cruel and unusual punishment” amendment and has been widely used to combat cities kicking out or fining unhoused people. The San Francisco appeals court had ruled that outdoor sleeping bans amount to cruel and unusual punishment. Yet, this privileged pile of refuse somehow thinks that treating unhoused people as something less than human doesn’t meet that definition.
Understand, almost every city has laws requiring that animals be brought in and cared for during extreme weather. Yet, there are zero laws posing the same requirements for humans. Read that carefully; the court considers you and I less worthy of protection than a dog.
We may have to get creative with our solutions now. Squatting is certainly an option. After all, there are plenty of empty spaces around and the UK is providing a precedent. The Reclaim Croydon collective, a squatters’ group, has taken over disused commercial premises to provide beds for the homeless, saying it is providing a community-based solution to a broken housing market. If you see someone making “alternative” use of an otherwise empty space, it would be immoral for you to say anything. Keep your fat mouth shut.
Otherwise, we could soon be looking at more situations such as this one in Indianapolis where a couple “wiped out” grocery store shelves out of desperation. When cities fail to provide sufficient options, people are going to create their own, but cities aren’t going to like them.
More reasonable options: pricing caps, rental limits, some goddamn efficiency with HUD vouchers, and generally greater attention to the factors responsible for so many people being unhoused. We still have this really bad habit of thinking of unhoused people as being drug addicts, derelicts, and the mental ill. Certainly, there are still some of those individuals needing help. But roughly a third of all unhoused situations are families with small children. Mom and Dad are working their asses off, but with insurance, the high cost of daycare, and rent prices that are four to five times higher than they were four years ago, they can’t make it!
I would like to think this would be a wake up call for people to pressure their city councils to find better solutions. I already know you won’t, though. This isn’t a new problem at all. We’ve had years to find a solution to homelessness and we just keep kicking the damn can down the road.
This decision has the ability to get really technical quickly, so let me summarize for you: Congress is too fucking lazy to actually pass legislation that controls corporations who are intent on deriving profit at any cost, no matter who it hurts. Since 1984, federal agencies such as the EPA, FAA, SEC, FDA, and all the others, have used the Chevron decision as the basis for their authority in enforcing rules designed to keep everyone safe.
This decision effectively takes away those protections, leaving all those agencies with questionable power to enforce a damn thing.
How does that affect you? Let me make you a short list:
Your air is no longer safe to breathe
Your water is no longer safe to drink, even if it comes in a bottle
Your ground is no longer safe for growing food
Your food is no longer safe to eat, even if it comes from a store
Flying is not safe and Boeing is totally off the hook
Crooked investors can steal your money, especially IRA funds, with impunity
No one’s measuring the safety of bridges you cross
No one’s making sure the building you are in has a working sprinkler system
No one gives a shit if you’re hurt at work
No one gives a shit if you are a victim of discrimination of any kind
Authority to prosecute attempted terrorism is questionable
Fair trade rules are in jeopardy
No one cares how little money you make or how your employer is cheating you
Regulations that keep hospitals from overcharging you may no longer apply
Veterans are more likely than ever to get screwed as VA authority wanes
The power to prosecute monopolies was just drained
Inspection of power plants may not happen
Limits on strip mining and other misuses of land are now back on the table
Chemical safety is now questionable
And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Every form of mandatory inspection, every safety rule, and every limit on corporate greed, transparency, and excess is something the GOP has been targeting for decades. Today’s decision opens the door for all manner of government regulation to be gutted.
I know there are plenty of people who think that lack of government involvement in business is a good thing, and that might be the case if we were talking about honest, caring, individuals who put people above profit. We’re not. We never have been Runaway Capitalism has created one disaster right after another. In fact, most federal agencies were created after an unregulated industry fucked something up so bad that people were screaming for intervention.
All of this could be prevented if Congress got off its partisan ass and actually did something like providing federal agencies with the authority that they need to regulate industry and make sure that we all stay safe. That’s not going to happen, though. That would require that voters actually pay attention to what’s going on around them and hold their congressional representatives responsible for making sure the government works for people rather than making our lives more miserable. We’re just as self-absorbed as those we elect, however.
Who gives a fuck if warehouse workers aren’t wearing steel-toed shoes around heavy equipment? They don’t need those toes anyway.
Of the three decisions, this is the one most likely to hurt our country as a whole to quickest. The 6-3 ruling dictates that the charge of obstructing an official proceeding must include proof that defendants tried to tamper with or destroy documents. Regarding the riot of January 6, only a fraction of those involved actually touched any documents and could see their prosecutions and penalties dropped.
The Orange Felon is already celebrating this as a victory.
What’s the danger? A clear line has been drawn. Threatening members of Congress in the act of doing their job isn’t obstruction. By extension, that would apply to any law enforcement or legislative body at any level of government. Therefore, anyone can riot against any government institution and get away with it as long as they leave all the paper alone.
Still questionable: does the charge apply if documents “inadvertently” catch fire after the rest of the building is set on fire?
We all know that both extremes, right and left, are more than capable of violent attempts against forms of government with which they disagree. Obstruction laws were one of law enforcement’s easiest and most effective ways of delivering some form of punishment. Attorneys General only had to prove was that the person in question somehow disrupted or delays the actions of a governmental body. Essentially, if rioters crossed a certain physical line, such as entering a room or a building where government work is taking place, they could be charged. Now, according to this absolutely ridiculous decision, rioters have to actually touch the papers.
That means they can invade your next school board meeting and yell, fling insults, physically threaten, and even tear shit up and as long as they leave the paperwork alone the ability to build a case against them is challenging.
Don’t think extremists groups on both sides haven’t already taken note of this very precise instruction. Occupying the office of the Speaker of the House? Yeah, no problem. Just don’t touch the paperwork.
This ruling sets the stage for absolute anarchy and there’s no reason to believe that extremists on both sides won’t use it in an attempt to get their way. This is the absolute destruction of the rule of law and without it in place even the justices themselves are potentially in danger.
Just don’t touch the paperwork.
I’m sure, if I look around hard enough, there has been a day where a court has done more damage to the country than this one. At the moment, though, I’m hard pressed to think of what it might be. These three rulings are an absolute disaster and play direction into the hand of a wildly right-wing government who, quite plainly, doesn’t give a shit if you and I die.
With the politics of this year already feeling volatile, I fear that we won’t have to wait too long before we see the negative results of today’s rulings. Of course, the justices don’t care. They’re all safe and secure. They all have homes, really good jobs with great retirement benefits, and they get to push other people around in the process. Why would they care? They can’t be fired.
I’m really beginning to think that Thomas Jefferson was right: The Constitution needs to be completely re-written. I’m just not sure I trust any group of people to get it right.
Anyone who was awake and near an electronic device found themselves startled, either positively or negatively, as three critical decisions were handing down this morning by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). Personally, I grew increasingly livid with each one. I was in the middle of editing a set of pictures, though, and didn’t want to stop. My blood pressure increased with each subsequent announcement until I knew my only choice was to take some medicine and go to bed, give my brain a chance to sort everything out before making any kind of comment. I cannot promise that this will be my only comment on these matters, but this is the first.
SCOTUS is setting the stage for a GOP-dominated government
Welcome to the first ring of Hell, USA. Everything that the court handed down this morning was something that Republicans have wanted for a long time, in one case since 1984. These decisions make it easier for a GOP-dominated government to continue to dismantle departments, agencies, and programs it doesn’t like, which is most of them. The long-term effects will be a weaker federal government, diminished oversight and safety, and a stronger “might-makes-right” attitude toward the Constitution.
Potentially, today’s decisions have the ability to bite the entire country in the ass. Whether or not that happens remains to be scene, but the groundwork is definitely there. One has to wonder, given the recent news of corruption within the high court, as to whether today’s critical decisions were partial payback for the vacations and other gifts that some justices have received. We may not know the answer to that question within our lifetimes, but I’d bet the money I don’t have that history will reveal this to be one of the most corrupt and evily influenced moments in juris prudence.
That is, if history remembers us at all. We’re not that old, you know. There have been hundreds of “empires” that history has forgotten because of how thoroughly they destroyed themselves. We remember those who spanned millennia, not those who only lasted a couple of centuries. In fact, we’re not even close to “age” status, which is 2,000 years. We’re not likely to make it, either.
I want to briefly examine each of today’s rulings, in the order I received them, and consider not only what they may mean for the country, but ways in which we can fight back against the absolute nonsense the court has unleashed. Technically, yes, this is a long read (over 300 words), but realistically, it could be a lot longer. There are still a number of opinions to unpack. Please don’t consider this a finished treatise by any measure.
Supreme Court allows cities to enforce bans on homeless people sleeping outside
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) reports that, “on a single night in 2023, roughly 653,100 people in the U.S. experienced homelessness, up about 12 percent from 2022.” The World Population Review currently estimates that Overall, 66.7% of the total homeless population of the United States is single individuals, with the remaining 33.3% being families. In recent years, homelessness increased nationally by almost one percent. This number comprises unaccompanied children and young adults, single adults experiencing chronic homelessness, and people experiencing unsheltered homelessness. Some populations have seen a decrease in homelessness. Dramatic reductions are among families and the veteran community.
The top ten areas for homelessness looks like this:
The number one reason this problem exists? Lack of affordable housing. This is especially true on the West Coast where housing costs have risen 11.4% just since April of 2023. Nationally, housing costs are up 29% since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Because of this, more and more people with fulltime jobs, what we formerly considered decent employment, don’t have a home. They live in their cars, with friends, or, if the weather’s not too bad, on the street.
Cities, who have no feeling at all, have grapples with how to handle the unhoused issue. They have wrung their hands, citing health issues as sufficient justification for concern, when in reality all any mayor or city council is concerned about is that uncomfortable feeling people get when they see other people, possibly their co-workers, living in a tent in the park.
Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote what may be the lamest decision I’ve ever seen. “Homelessness is complex. Its causes are many. So may be the public policy responses required to address it. A handful of federal judges cannot begin to ‘match’ the collective wisdom the American people possess in deciding ‘how best to handle’ a pressing social question like homelessness.”
What a fucking crock of shit. The Eighth Amendement is the “cruel and unusual punishment” amendment and has been widely used to combat cities kicking out or fining unhoused people. The San Francisco appeals court had ruled that outdoor sleeping bans amount to cruel and unusual punishment. Yet, this privileged pile of refuse somehow thinks that treating unhoused people as something less than human doesn’t meet that definition.
Understand, almost every city has laws requiring that animals be brought in and cared for during extreme weather. Yet, there are zero laws posing the same requirements for humans. Read that carefully; the court considers you and I less worthy of protection than a dog.
We may have to get creative with our solutions now. Squatting is certainly an option. After all, there are plenty of empty spaces around and the UK is providing a precedent. The Reclaim Croydon collective, a squatters’ group, has taken over disused commercial premises to provide beds for the homeless, saying it is providing a community-based solution to a broken housing market. If you see someone making “alternative” use of an otherwise empty space, it would be immoral for you to say anything. Keep your fat mouth shut.
Otherwise, we could soon be looking at more situations such as this one in Indianapolis where a couple “wiped out” grocery store shelves out of desperation. When cities fail to provide sufficient options, people are going to create their own, but cities aren’t going to like them.
More reasonable options: pricing caps, rental limits, some goddamn efficiency with HUD vouchers, and generally greater attention to the factors responsible for so many people being unhoused. We still have this really bad habit of thinking of unhoused people as being drug addicts, derelicts, and the mental ill. Certainly, there are still some of those individuals needing help. But roughly a third of all unhoused situations are families with small children. Mom and Dad are working their asses off, but with insurance, the high cost of daycare, and rent prices that are four to five times higher than they were four years ago, they can’t make it!
I would like to think this would be a wake up call for people to pressure their city councils to find better solutions. I already know you won’t, though. This isn’t a new problem at all. We’ve had years to find a solution to homelessness and we just keep kicking the damn can down the road.
Maybe you can let someone live in your garage.
The Supreme Court weakens federal regulators, overturning decades-old Chevron decision
This decision has the ability to get really technical quickly, so let me summarize for you: Congress is too fucking lazy to actually pass legislation that controls corporations who are intent on deriving profit at any cost, no matter who it hurts. Since 1984, federal agencies such as the EPA, FAA, SEC, FDA, and all the others, have used the Chevron decision as the basis for their authority in enforcing rules designed to keep everyone safe.
This decision effectively takes away those protections, leaving all those agencies with questionable power to enforce a damn thing.
How does that affect you? Let me make you a short list:
And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Every form of mandatory inspection, every safety rule, and every limit on corporate greed, transparency, and excess is something the GOP has been targeting for decades. Today’s decision opens the door for all manner of government regulation to be gutted.
I know there are plenty of people who think that lack of government involvement in business is a good thing, and that might be the case if we were talking about honest, caring, individuals who put people above profit. We’re not. We never have been Runaway Capitalism has created one disaster right after another. In fact, most federal agencies were created after an unregulated industry fucked something up so bad that people were screaming for intervention.
All of this could be prevented if Congress got off its partisan ass and actually did something like providing federal agencies with the authority that they need to regulate industry and make sure that we all stay safe. That’s not going to happen, though. That would require that voters actually pay attention to what’s going on around them and hold their congressional representatives responsible for making sure the government works for people rather than making our lives more miserable. We’re just as self-absorbed as those we elect, however.
Who gives a fuck if warehouse workers aren’t wearing steel-toed shoes around heavy equipment? They don’t need those toes anyway.
Supreme Court makes it harder to charge Capitol riot defendants with obstruction
Of the three decisions, this is the one most likely to hurt our country as a whole to quickest. The 6-3 ruling dictates that the charge of obstructing an official proceeding must include proof that defendants tried to tamper with or destroy documents. Regarding the riot of January 6, only a fraction of those involved actually touched any documents and could see their prosecutions and penalties dropped.
The Orange Felon is already celebrating this as a victory.
What’s the danger? A clear line has been drawn. Threatening members of Congress in the act of doing their job isn’t obstruction. By extension, that would apply to any law enforcement or legislative body at any level of government. Therefore, anyone can riot against any government institution and get away with it as long as they leave all the paper alone.
Still questionable: does the charge apply if documents “inadvertently” catch fire after the rest of the building is set on fire?
We all know that both extremes, right and left, are more than capable of violent attempts against forms of government with which they disagree. Obstruction laws were one of law enforcement’s easiest and most effective ways of delivering some form of punishment. Attorneys General only had to prove was that the person in question somehow disrupted or delays the actions of a governmental body. Essentially, if rioters crossed a certain physical line, such as entering a room or a building where government work is taking place, they could be charged. Now, according to this absolutely ridiculous decision, rioters have to actually touch the papers.
That means they can invade your next school board meeting and yell, fling insults, physically threaten, and even tear shit up and as long as they leave the paperwork alone the ability to build a case against them is challenging.
Don’t think extremists groups on both sides haven’t already taken note of this very precise instruction. Occupying the office of the Speaker of the House? Yeah, no problem. Just don’t touch the paperwork.
This ruling sets the stage for absolute anarchy and there’s no reason to believe that extremists on both sides won’t use it in an attempt to get their way. This is the absolute destruction of the rule of law and without it in place even the justices themselves are potentially in danger.
Just don’t touch the paperwork.
I’m sure, if I look around hard enough, there has been a day where a court has done more damage to the country than this one. At the moment, though, I’m hard pressed to think of what it might be. These three rulings are an absolute disaster and play direction into the hand of a wildly right-wing government who, quite plainly, doesn’t give a shit if you and I die.
With the politics of this year already feeling volatile, I fear that we won’t have to wait too long before we see the negative results of today’s rulings. Of course, the justices don’t care. They’re all safe and secure. They all have homes, really good jobs with great retirement benefits, and they get to push other people around in the process. Why would they care? They can’t be fired.
I’m really beginning to think that Thomas Jefferson was right: The Constitution needs to be completely re-written. I’m just not sure I trust any group of people to get it right.
Share this:
Like this:
You might also like