Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Fiscally Conservative who wrote (1545678)	6/29/2025 1:55:14 PM
From: the traveler	3 Recommendations Recommended By Fiscally Conservative longz Maple MAGA Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1575919

hogwash--good ol trumpie is the greatest thang to come along since perforated toilet paper.

To: Fiscally Conservative who wrote (1545678)	6/30/2025 2:17:54 AM
From: Broken_Clock	1 Recommendation Recommended By longz Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575919

"Back in 2022, when President Biden was in the White House and conservatives were the ones seeking relief from his executive orders, Kagan was openly skeptical of nationwide injunctions. “This can’t be right that one district judge can stop a nationwide policy in its tracks and leave it stuck for the years that it takes to go through a normal process,” she said. That’s not some out-of-context paraphrase—it’s her own words, on the record. Fast forward to 2025, and suddenly Kagan’s skepticism has evaporated. Now that Donald Trump is back in the Oval Office, she’s all-in for the same judicial overreach she once panned. It just goes to show you who the real partisans on the court are. They aren’t adhering to any particular judicial philosophy or the Constitution, they care only about whether a particular ruling hurts or benefits the Democratic Party. This isn’t just about one justice’s hypocrisy. It’s a window into the left’s broader approach to power. When they control the levers of government, they demand deference and restraint from the courts. When they’re out of power, they want unelected judges to act as a permanent veto against any policy they dislike. It’s not about the Constitution or the separation of powers—it’s about maintaining their grip on the bureaucracy by any means necessary. The Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. CASA, Inc. is a must-needed correction, that frankly, should have been bipartisan. It restores a measure of balance and puts an end to the judicial free-for-all that has plagued our system for far too long. And if Justice Kagan and her allies are upset, maybe they should reread their own words from just a few years ago. Consistency, after all, used to be a virtue. But in today’s Democratic Party, it’s just another casualty of the endless war for power. The Supreme Court just restored the rule of law—and the left can’t handle it."