Chuckie Schumer Declares Supreme Count “MAGA” after 9-0 Decision

According to woke Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, labeled the Supreme Court “MAGA” after a unanimous decision. The case concerned an EPA ruling that declared that houses could not be built on an Iowa plot that the EPA declared to be “wet lands.”

According to Chuckie, Sotomayor, Jackson and Kagan are all “MAGA.” Who knew? Their ruling was the EPA had overreached, but Chuckie disagreed. Perhaps those three justices could give an interview on their “MAGA” backgrounds.

Has Chuckie over reached? Perhaps. Maybe “MAGA” ranges from Trump Republican to jurists with good sense.

 

Chuckles is a noted hack.

Puddles and marsh on private property are only controlled by the EPA if they have a continuous surface water connection or are directly adjoining jurisdictional (navigable) waters. It shouldn't have taken a SCOTUS decision to explain this obvious fact.

 

Limbaugh was on to something when he referred to him as "Chuck-U Schumer."

 

I GUESS CONTEXT DOESN'T MATTER? NAH


All 9 judges agreed that the EPA overstepped its authority and that the plaintiffs' property should not be subject to EPA regulation. However, 4 judges disagreed with the majority's opinion on the limits of EPA authority with respect to wetlands.

The Supreme Court on Thursday cut back the power of the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate the nation’s wetlands and waterways, another setback for the agency’s authority to combat pollution


NYT
Writing for five justices, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said that the Clean Water Act does not allow the agency to regulate discharges into wetlands near bodies of water unless they have “a continuous surface connection” to those waters.

The decision was a second major blow to the E.P.A.’s authority and to the power of administrative agencies generally. Last year, the court limited the E.P.A.’s power to address climate change under the Clean Air Act.

...The decision was nominally unanimous, with all the justices agreeing that the homeowners who brought the case should not have been subject to the agency’s oversight because the wetlands on their property were not subject to regulation in any event. But there was sharp disagreement about a new test the majority established to determine which wetlands are covered by the law.

Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, joined by the three liberal justices in a concurring opinion, said the decision would harm the federal government’s ability to address pollution and flooding.

https://archive.ph/mR0gO

 

He had talent on loan. . . from God.

 

If you mean he was a grifter, I agree.

 

He's getting a little big for his britches after getting away with threatening supreme Court justices in public on tape

 

So, grifters have talent on loan from God, yet you think he's in hell? Well, I guess you're just the most logical poster here.

 

Did I say from Gawd? Nope, but Diaper Donnie took over where Druggie Limpballs left off

 

His name is El Rushbo, also known as the Great Maha or Maha Rushie.

Get it? Got it? Good.

 

Kavanaugh being a staunch Liberal ally has to have Liberals feeling a way after the congress hearings.

 

Friggin Schumer. Illegals have taken over his state, city and borough, the Squad wants to boycott his homeland of Israel. But all he cares about is government controlling everything.

 

From a ''ditto head''

dittohead

English
Etymology

ditto +‎ -head, coined by callers to Rush Limbaugh's radio show who begin their remarks with "Ditto!" or "Dittoes!" to concur with a previous comment without restating it.

Noun
dittohead (plural dittoheads)

1. (US, slang) A devotee of Rush Limbaugh, his radio program, or his opinions. US, slang, derogatory) Someone who mindlessly agrees with an idea, especially one who agrees only as a supporter of the person who expressed it. follower, sheeple

 

So you agree, your premise was BS too. Glad we agreed

 

Huh? What premise? I was generally neutral during the Kavanaugh saga.

 

Hopefully you realize how weak that reply is.
No one is agreeing with you.

But I guess if it makes you feel like you've won the conversation to pretend that someone's agreeing with you then stay the course

 

Sorry I always forget popularity is the factor whether things are true with the right wingers

 

the EPA overreached sounds like, if the State wants to address it due to flood issues, that is up to the State

do not know much about this case though, is the homeowner planing to destroy his wet lands?

Found a link on it

"Chantell and Michael Sackett objected when federal officials identified a soggy portion of their property as “wetlands”, which required them to get a permit before filling it with rocks and soil. The high court said wetlands can only be regulated-- under the Clean Water Act-- if they have a “continuous surface connection” to larger, regulated bodies of water."

https://www.ktiv.com/2023/05/28/ernst-applauds-supreme-court-ruling-wotus/

 

''According to woke Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, labeled the Supreme Court “MAGA” after a unanimous decision. ''

However, 4 judges disagreed with the majority's opinion on the limits of EPA authority with respect to wetlands.


NYT
Writing for five justices, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said that the Clean Water Act does not allow the agency to regulate discharges into wetlands near bodies of water unless they have “a continuous surface connection” to those waters.


...The decision was nominally unanimous, with all the justices agreeing that the homeowners who brought the case should not have been subject to the agency’s oversight because the wetlands on their property were not subject to regulation in any event. But there was sharp disagreement about a new test the majority established to determine which wetlands are covered by the law.

Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, joined by the three liberal justices in a concurring opinion, said the decision would harm the federal government’s ability to address pollution and flooding.

https://archive.ph/mR0gO

 

That's pretty funny because I see it in the opposite direction the same exact way.

 

Yes, and I highlighted the fact that Kavanaugh joining the Liberal justices(as he has in several high profile cases) should have them feeling a kind of way even after the hearings and the fiasco they became.

If anything, Kavanaugh has taken the reins of a RGB to an extent.

 

So, basically, trying to make excuses. Imagine my surprise!

 

Rush started as a satirist but many began to follow him believing he was stating facts and truth. He went with it and expanded his manner. Whole news networks owe their entire existence to him.

 

Truth.....stuffing their pockets at the expense of the country.