So, basically, and after reading your comment, the Supreme Court will give back to the government at least those five months just on “principle.”

Heads up. Virtue signaling at 12 o’clock.

So who are the other two voters going to be? Kennedy and Roberts? Roberts is probably in the bag. Good to know that the First Amendment rests on Justice Kennedy’s shoulders. What could go wrong?

And . . . . Clarence Thomas comes through for the uber-right, effectively voting for the entire travel ban to be enacted while this case is pending.

Never get caught in bed with a dead woman, a live boy or a partially live, tan suit.

They won’t. My understanding with injunction / restraining order law is that, as long as parties keep asking for continuances (which the government will likely do), the status quo would stay in place until the matter is finally resolved. I.e., the portion of the ban which the court put back in place would be live…

So much for that self imposed 120 day time limit. How bout’ them apples? 🤔

I mean I can’t see a connection between the current government and Fox News for miles.

Right. As if the three branches of the current administration-a-la-Fox News aren’t connected. Hmmm . .. hmmm . . . Mkay.

So this upcoming weekend, starting about Thursday evening, will become bananas again at our nation’s international airports. Are Border Patrol officers allowed to evaluate on the the fly a bona fide relationship? If not, why not?

Right. So I wonder who the other two will be when it is heard fully on the merits? Breyer? Roberts?

I laughed my fucking ass off at this. Wow! But no kidding. I was like, “Well, what’s the upside not to have weapons?” Jeesus.

Straight white guy here. Thanks for your discussion about love and boundaries, etc. Really made me think.

. . . thus allowing them to get closer to Breyer’s retirement date (although admittedly nobody knows when that really is) and then really start packing the Court in a way which hasn’t been seen since the 30's.

Well, by its very terms, Trump’s travel ban expired on about June 15, yet the Supreme Court kinda dodged that issue altogether (meaning it’ll be decided in October.) Since that’s the case, the government, just for perhaps no reason at all besides spite, will keep asking for continuances of the fall oral argument…

The real upshot is that the Court kind of sort of gave the White House carte blanche to ask for more time to keep it in effect, and I’d suspect that the conservative justices on the Court just want it to sort of fade away with time. Honest point.

As you say, all roads lead to dick. You’re a savage.

This is kind of a good point. I’ve been thinking how to say it, but you did it better than I did.

As to your last question — not necessarily, principal because both parties in effect waived it so that the matter could be heard as quickly as possible. In other words, they both put the matter at issue and teed it right up for the court decide.

I’ll take a hard pass on that, but your analysis is on fleek. Yo.