• RaoulDook@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    8 months ago

    If you read the article, it says that the justices are following the code of ethics that they agreed to, which precludes a justice from judging a case against them.

    The decision of the lower court also was sound as the plaintiff did not have standing to sue, being a NJ resident suing over TX law.

    These are simple facts, easy to understand, and hatred of the justices won’t change that. It’s important to take an objective look at facts to be fair to your own mind.

    • Kyre@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      They deserve the scrutiny and criticism regardless of their legal status. Anything they do at this point is suspect. If it was reversed and it was a court of all democrats, you better believe that a bunch of redneck fucktard assholes would be using their second amendment rights in an attempt to “fix” the court. With lifetime appointments, it doesn’t leave much room for options.