The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent term ended with a flurry of conservative-leaning decisions that have been met with shock and disapproval, particularly from the left. This conservative trend is seen as a reflection of the 6-3 conservative majority established during Trump’s presidency. Noteworthy rulings include siding with a web designer who refused services to same-sex couples, ending affirmative action in colleges, and dismissing President Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan.

  • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think I’m alright. I’m not going to waste my time on you any further.

    I know, hard to make an argument when you just make wild claims.

    Why say anything if you’re just gonna misrepresent what I’ve said?

    That’s what you said, like 2nd comment of our conversation.

    • S_Roman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I know, hard to make an argument when you just make wild claims.

      No, it’s just hard to talk with people who do not do so in good faith.

      • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I asked you to support your claim that the reason why supreme court cases are being rule dhow they are is because they are in rich folks pockets.

        You really couldn’t, so I don’t see why there would be a point to continue this convo.

          • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It takes a lot of logical leaps to go from ‘someone paid for his vacation’ to say 'they’re just ruling with whatever rich person is sending them money! I can’t point to any specific people…or cases they ruled on, BUT THEY ARE!!"

              • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                You can’t explain anything because you can’t prove what you need to about your statement. You made a statement, but you failed to prove any part of it. I’ve read every single word you’ve wrote and gone to each of your sources.

                Show me how money has altered any of the sitting current justices opinions.

                • S_Roman@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’ve read every single word you’ve wrote and gone to each of your sources.

                  Reading something doesn’t mean anything if you don’t understand it.

                  Show me how money has altered any of the sitting current justices opinions.

                  See above and actually read in good faith.

                  • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Reading something doesn’t mean anything if you don’t understand it.

                    Hahaha, come back with an actual argument, instead of some loose ‘see he went on a paid vacation, therefore he just gets paid to rule court cases for rich people.’

                    You made the claim, I asked which case you thought that they ruled on based on corruption, and what their flawed legal reasoning was.

                    You can’t back anything up that you’ve said. If you want to be convincing, you gotta back up your claims.