3 ms·

It’s a pro business anti consumer supreme court which knows it’d be dangerous to appear that way. Government and court will hamstring their ability to help cons

It’s a pro business anti consumer supreme court which knows it’d be dangerous to appear that way. Government and court will hamstring their ability to help consumers. My favorite comment on HN was some law student saying his prof said “Scalia is the most complicated supreme court member whose views are always unpredictable” and the commenter said “he’s just a corporate hack who always votes for corporations and backs it up” and sure enough he guessed every ruling correctly.

pinkmuffinere 1y ago
> they rightly commented that if this was allowed to stand, the FTC and every government agency would just always estimate low in these cases. I think you missed this — it isn’t some arbitrary reason to rule in an anti-consumer way. There is good reason to do so. Imo we should keep our checks and balances strong, and this is one small action that does that.
- antonvs 1y ago
  > Imo we should keep our checks and balances strong I think the tense of this sentence is not quite right. Something more like "Make checks and balances strong again" would work.
  - pinkmuffinere 1y ago
    Haha, ya I agree with that too
- bagels 1y ago
  There are always reasons on both sides of a case
- mring33621 1y ago
  so, small questionable wins for normal people would break the system while big, veeeeerrrrry questionable wins for some subset of the elite are OK?
- AlexCornila 1y ago
  sure bud .. wake the fck up
skeeter2020 1y ago
>> It’s a pro business anti consumer supreme court Maybe? But this wasn't the supreme court: "...was vacated by the US Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit."
- js2 1y ago
  The 8th Circuit has an even more conservative composition than SCOTUS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Eighth_Circuit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Court_of_Appeals... Case was decided by Loken (GHW Bush), Erickson (Trump), and Kobes (Trump).
  - Yeul 1y ago
    In my country politicians do not appoint judges. The separation of the branches of power and all that... But I will say that having independent justices who constantly fuck up your government plans can be exhausting.

pinkmuffinere 1y ago

> they rightly commented that if this was allowed to stand, the FTC and every government agency would just always estimate low in these cases. I think you missed this — it isn’t some arbitrary reason to rule in an anti-consumer way. There is good reason to do so. Imo we should keep our checks and balances strong, and this is one small action that does that.

antonvs 1y ago
> Imo we should keep our checks and balances strong I think the tense of this sentence is not quite right. Something more like "Make checks and balances strong again" would work.
- pinkmuffinere 1y ago
  Haha, ya I agree with that too
bagels 1y ago
There are always reasons on both sides of a case
mring33621 1y ago
so, small questionable wins for normal people would break the system while big, veeeeerrrrry questionable wins for some subset of the elite are OK?
AlexCornila 1y ago
sure bud .. wake the fck up

skeeter2020 1y ago

>> It’s a pro business anti consumer supreme court Maybe? But this wasn't the supreme court: "...was vacated by the US Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit."

js2 1y ago
The 8th Circuit has an even more conservative composition than SCOTUS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Eighth_Circuit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Court_of_Appeals... Case was decided by Loken (GHW Bush), Erickson (Trump), and Kobes (Trump).
- Yeul 1y ago
  In my country politicians do not appoint judges. The separation of the branches of power and all that... But I will say that having independent justices who constantly fuck up your government plans can be exhausting.