Not to mention that USC beat Auburn in 2002 and 2003 in their home and home non-conference matchups. No one wanted to see USC-Auburn for a third year in a row, with the outcome likely to be another USC win. Auburn was always going to be on the outside looking in if there was another non-USC undefeated.

Hey, look, it's a Clay Travis sock puppet.

Accusing someone of a crime or of serious sexual misconduct constitutes defamation per se and obviously these statements were published to third parties, so, if the statements aren't true (and there's no proof that they are or aren't at this point) the posters have committed a tort. And in 18 states, Puerto Rico, and…

Man, you really don't like the presumption of innocence. Or the due process clause. Or the confrontation clause. Or the 4th Amendment. Or, you know, any protections against the overwhelming power of the state.

Sophie Turner, the actress who plays Sansa, agrees with you. Like using-the-exact-same-language agrees with you (or more accurately, you agree with her).

Nevermind, my browser is just acting up.

For those who want a primer on how this case got to where it is now and what to expect going forward:

Did you dismiss my reply? If so, why?

You were right all the way until your last sentence. Citizen's United is completely unrelated to the issue here.

I'll start from sort of the beginning, since it helps to have some of the background. Pre-1990, there was a certain test, under the 1st Amendment's Free Exercise Clause, that applied to challenges by persons (an important word, that will become even more important later) to generally applicable laws that the person…

This is wrong. Hobby Lobby objects to four of the twenty type of birth control covered by the ACA. Conestoga Wood objects to three of the twenty.

The middle of a venn diagram of UNC football players and students enrolled in classes in the African and Afro-American Studies department isn't going to have a lot of non-African American people in it. It's a pretty safe assumption.

Let's call a spade a spade: the entire African and Afro-American Studies department at Carolina was a sham created and maintained for the purposes of keeping almost-exclusively black athletes eligible for athletics. This goes well beyond just the "paper classes." As your counterparts at Deadspin put it: "this paper,…

You're wrong. RFRA (which is the statute really at issue) requires a balancing test: The "Government shall not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability" unless the burden is both necessary for the "furtherance of a compelling government…

Talk to Congress then.

1) Scalia wouldn't really be a hypocrite or contradicting himself, because congress enacted the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to explicitly over rule Employment Division vs. Smith, which is the peyote cactus case I think you're referring to. The law simply changed because congress wanted it to.

Really? No mention of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act or the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act or the Dictionary Act, which defines a person as including a corporation? Or the rejection of the Nadler Amendment, which would have "ma[de] clear that the right to raise a claim under RLPA applied…

1) As noted by nopunin10did, there's no federal question present in this case. It presents state law issues, and the Supreme Court doesn't take cases based on state law.