lawfag here

RE this notable question

>>4414501 Anon finds the process for SCOTUS review. How did RBG achieve this?

answer = she didnt - this was just a onle line document filed by the clerk - no justices even signed it - they give NO reasons when they accpert or deny a petition like this

the only info is of some judges would have accepted review

this was either decided before her surgery and/or finalized by her staff clerks - whatcha gonna do bout it homey?

thats right - NOTHING

remember these judges are never accountable for their actions in the present rigged system - NEVER

that will change - nothing can stop it

>>4415256

how dumb are anons today?

first the FAKE Q post we freak out is real

now we cant even recognizer the tip of the FUCKING WASHINGTON MONUMENT????????????

>>4415367

SOON

SOON

SOON

>>4415524

>>4415541

I fear we are all a little like that air TC poster yet not quite so bad…

battle fatigue is real and for me the biggest drain are the shitposters we tolerate here

you know the ones i mean

filter - scroll wtf - its like walking thru skid row = it stinks in here

>>4415552

SLIDE ALERT

COME ON ANONS WE CAN DO BETTER

>>4415552

HEY ANONS

ARENT YOU TIRED OF THESE FUCKS USING YOUR GOOD CONSCIENCE AGAINST YOU?

LEARN!!!!

>>4415560

>>4415599

>>4415654

ANONS

lawfag here

please read the bread more carefully

this question is answered in this bread by me

this is not a "vote" just a docket entry decision of NO REVIEW

handled by staff per verbal direction of the justices

OK?

please try harder!

>>4415756

ill hold my snark and answer

its a vote by name

its just a yes or not on the review and the doc lists if any voted against the majority

OK?

please anons this is exhausating

im on your side for FS!

>>4415744

i agree with one proviso

he was forced on POTUS and

he may well have some shady friends

>>4415854

lawfag here

you got it

they are politically motivated but its not like a roberts stretch on o-care

the case could have been reviewed and the lower court ruling stayed on real legal grounds - but the law is pretty clear and doing that was really not what we want from SCOTUS

its up to CONGRESS

>>4415854

and btw

since they do not release the reasons for their decision we will never know

now THAT i do not like

if the 4 DID have a good reason why the fuck not state it?

as it is lawfags like me have to conclude they are getting political

>>4415881

you misunderstood anon

i agree he is NOT a pedo IMO

but i do know he was forced on POTUS

and i do believe he has shady friends

i do not believe he was the choice of the plan in other words - he was accepted by them