Category Archives: SCOTUS For The Average Joe

Average Joe SCOTUS: Hernandez v. Mesa

On the face of it, this one makes me fucking sick. So apologies in advance for my strong opinions. I can’t find anything humorous to say on this one.

Several Mexican kids were playing near the U.S./Mexico border, jumping back and forth across it.  Border agent, Jesus Mesa, rolls up on a bicycle to do his job, and catches one of the kids—detaining him in the U.S.

Before I go on, I want to be clear; I think border enforcement is an important job, and I have nothing against them doing it, as the job description says they should. But this is not that. It’s not even fucking close, IMO.

Another boy, 15-year-old Sergio Adrián Hernández Güereca managed to escape back to Mexico with his friends, and thus was not detained. He stood there, watching as his buddy was detained by Mesa.

Mesa alleged the boys, including Hernandez, started throwing rocks (allegedly not confirmed in video of the incident). Now I don’t know how fucking hard 15 year olds can throw a fucking rock, but I’m pretty sure, it’s not deadly. Yet somehow, this cop Mesa shot young Hernandez across the border in the face, killing him.

I’ve tried my best to find any reason whatsoever to defend Mesa’s actions, but I just can’t. If he was getting pummeled with rocks, and since he was on a bike, didn’t have something to protect himself, I can see where he might have panicked and fired to get the kids to stop doing it. He had one of the boys in custody after all, so he was probably trying to not let this kid go, and at the same time, avoiding injury from the rocks.

Anyway, the U.S. for reasons I cannot comprehend, opted not to charge Mesa at all. Not even for a lesser crime than murder. This incident occurred in 2010, so before anyone wishes to argue Trump is to blame for the inaction, this was the Obama DOJ.

Mexico charged Mesa with Murder, but the U.S. refused to extradite Mesa. So this man gets to walk free, when he clearly erred in shooting Hernandez.

Anyway, the parents of the boy, who aren’t Americans, are suing for wrongful death, since they can’t seem to get any other justice for their sun, and SCOTUS needs to decide whether they have cause to do so.

The majority opinion split along left/right lines ultimately decided that congressional authorization must be given to sue the agent who shot Hernandez, because of the international issue which potentially has national security issues at stake if this becomes precedent. But ultimately, that the constitution does not protect non-Americans in a situation which occurs outside America, just because the incident was perpetrated by an American.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksibilla/2019/09/27/sleeper-supreme-court-case-could-make-suing-rogue-federal-agents-almost-impossible/#588a54ff2965

 

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/17-1678

 

Average Joe SCOTUS: Retirement Plans Committee of IBM v. Jander

IBM has a retirement plan, part of which is based on company stock. The person managing that stock, failed to act on information that IBM’s microelectronics unit was having issues, which would have presumably lowered the stock’s value, and thus harmed the holders of the stock. So they sued, because that’s what you do when you think someone fucked you in the ass without so much as a reach around.

Back in 2014, SCOTUS ruled in  Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer, 573 U.S. that the person running such funds is not given a “presumption of prudence.” This is a fancy way of saying, the courts do not assume this person has done the right thing unless there’s strong evidence to prove otherwise. Making the burden of proof for beneficiaries to prove wrongdoing, not that high. They pretty much just have to show that they could,  “plausibly allege that a prudent fiduciary in the defendant’s position could not have concluded that [an alternative action] would do more harm than good to the fund.”

As such, the IBM peeps were like, “this dude fucked up, and we want our god damn losses covered. These assholes knew there was a problem, but instead of buying other stuck which was a safer bet, they kept investing in IBM stock.”

So now here we are at SCOTUS trying to decide if a fiduciary who knows the company stock may have an issue, but keeps investing anyway, be assumed to have done more harm than good under the previous 5/3 Bank ruling?

SCOTUS however, decided that they’ve heard all the arguments and they were bored AF with them. So much so, that they couldn’t even be bothered to give an opinion. So they sent it back to the second court to deal with that shit.

Average Joe SCOTUS: Ritzen Group Inc. v. Jackson Masonry LLC.

Ritzen Group was trying to buy a piece of property from these deadbeats at Jackson Masonry. But then at the last moment, Jackson sent over some bullshit paperwork that caused Ritzen to have to pull out of the deal. Jackson was shit at their finances, and ended up filing for bankruptcy. So clearly, they were trying to pull something over on Ritzen in selling the property.

So Ritzen sued Jackson for breech of contract, but then Jackson was like, “Oh you’re gonna sue us asshole? We’ll sue you!” And so they did—claiming Ritzen entered into the deal when they didn’t have the money to actually buy the property, and thus were themselves in breech of contract.

So then the deadbeats at Jackson, having filed for bankruptcy, sought protection from Ritzen’s lawsuit, which is what bankruptcy does, among other things. But Ritzen filed a motion to lift the protection against Jackson, and were denied. So Ritzen sued the bankruptcy estate, and they ruled in favor of Jackson, saying that Ritzen’s failure to secure financing for the property was the breech of contract, not Jackson’s bullshit paperwork.

So Ritzen, having been fucked every step of the way, appealed yet again in district court, both appeals were denied. One denied because the courts said Ritzen didn’t appeal in time. The other, they just didn’t think Ritzen proved it’s argument worth a shit.

So now we’re at SCOTUS trying to figure out if the denial of relief for Ritzen are considered a final order, which affects how long Ritzen had to file its appeal. Because there’s steps in the process, and in order to file appeal, you first have to have a final order, otherwise you’re appealing before it’s been decided.

Unanimous decision for Jackson. Once a bankruptcy court has denied relief to the creditor, it is a final decision and therefore open for appeals, which means Jackson waited too damn long.

Average Joe SCOTUS: Rotkiske v. Klemm

General deadbeat Kevin Rotkiske, who suffers from eye problems, because he can’t see paying his bills, racked up some debt in 2003-2005 that he failed to pay.

Respondent Klemm, was a debt collector hired by the people Rotkiske owed money to, and Klemm went after Rotkiske for the deadbeat that he is in 2008.

Part of suing someone is obviously serving them papers that they are supposed to appear in court.

Rotkiske being the wile deadbeat he is, moved around a lot, and was no longer at the address Klemm had on file. But some dumb fuck that lived at the address now, signed for the summons, apparently not realizing their name wasn’t Rotkiske. Real fucking genius, there.

Anyway, Rotkiske, blissfully ignorant of all this shit, didn’t appear, and thus a judgement was given to Klemm.

Fast forward to 2014, and this deadbeat scumbag Rotkiske tried to finance a house. And surprise! You can’t finance shit, motherfucker, you’ve got a judgement against you. So Rotkiske was like, WTF? How do I have a judgement against me when I’ve never been summoned to court?

So after figuring out what happen, Rotkiske sued Klemm, because apparently this is the kind of country we are, that we’ll let a fucking deadbeat who didn’t pay his bills sue the people who just want him to pay his fucking bill.

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) has laws to protect deadbeats from mafioso type debt collectors, which I suppose I’ll grant may have some good facets to it. So this is the law in question here. I’m not sure how the fuck Klemm has done anything wrong here, since it was the dumb fuck who wrongly signed the fucking summons who caused the issue. Blame the fucking person who served the papers, right?

Anyway, Klemm felt like the courts should drop this shit, because the state of limitations on such violations is one year, and that shit happened back in 2008, or six years prior to 2014 when they were sued by Rotkiske.

But Rotkiske was like, “Fuck you, assholes. I didn’t know about this shit until 2014, and I took action immediately. How the fuck am I supposed to act when I don’t even fucking know it’s a problem.

So one court sided with Klemm, another with Rotkiske, as is usually the case, and now he we are at SCOTUS determining if a statute of limitation started in 2008 when Klemm got a bogus signature, or if it started in 2014 when Rotkiske first found out.

8:1 Judgement for Klemm, Ginsburg being the lone holdout. But the majority argued that the clock starts from the violation, in the text of § 1692k(d) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. So fuck you, Rotkiske. Pay your fucking bills.

Ginsburg’s dissent was some half-hearted bullshit where she agreed with them on one point, and disagreed on the other. Who cares, though, right?

Read about the case, or hear oral arguments here.

Average Joe SCOTUS: Knick v. Township of Scott Pennsylvania

Seven years ago, Scott Pennsylvania passed a law to protect cemeteries, and make them accessible to the public during all daylight hours.

The idea being, the poor or whatever, should always be able to visit their loved ones in their final resting place, without having to pay to do it.

Rose Mary Knick owns property in this township, and a township officer entered her property without a warrant, found some stones he deemed to be gravestones, and basically ordered her property be protected as a cemetery.

Rose was like, “WTF? First of all, where’s you’re fucking warrant for coming on my property?” Then Rose was like, “If you’re going to commandeer my fucking property, you have to pay me for it. There’s this thing called the constitution. Have you ever heard of it assholes?”

The Township merely protects these properties for people to visit their loved ones, so somehow, they’re trying to argue that Rose was unable to even show damages here. In other words, they’re not building something on the property and taking it away from her, they’re just protecting it.

I know, that’s the bullshittiest argument that ever bullshitted, right?

They also wanted to argue that they were going to reimburse her, but she didn’t give them time. They have a process for doing that, AFTER they’ve taken her property (the after being the part the Knick has a problem with), and she didn’t follow it. This bitch went straight to “sue those motherfuckers.”

While the lower courts seemed to think it was perfectly OK for the state to take Knick’s property over this bullshit, without first paying her, SCOTUS was unimpressed to the tune of 5:4, and told Scott Pennsylvania to either pay her up front, or give her her property back. You don’t get to set some long ass drawn out process for her to get paid, and meanwhile she’s without her property, and her compensation. That’s fucking ridiculous.

The dissent from the left-leaning justices Breyer, Sotomayor, Ginsberg, and Kagan , was largely over when Knick can make her claim. They didn’t seem to dispute she should be compensated. They just think she had to jump through the hoops the state set forth. And then, if she doesn’t feel she was made whole, she can sue.

Breyer, Sotomayor, Ginsberg, and Kagan trust the state to handle it properly with due process. But the rest of SCOTUS realizes this is dumb as fuck, and you can’t trust government to do a fucking thing right.

There was a state Supreme Court decisions, Williamson County Regional Planning Comm’n v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, that sided with Scott Pennsylvania, and SCOTUS told Pennsylvania they could shove that squarely up their ass, too. Overturned, bitches!

Average Joe SCOTUS: Lamone v. Benisek

So gerrymandering—it’s a thing. Weirdly, every politician says they hate it, and it should be stopped. Yet, every politician quietly does it in their party’s favor. But nonetheless, some people dislike it so much, that they decide to go to court to prevent it, so here we go.

Maryland drew up a map in a district that was traditionally Republican. But because of their redistricting map, a Democrat won the seat. So Republicans were like, “this is some bullshit.”

So they sought injunction against those scumbags who rigged the election legally, and a district court granted it. So now this thing meanders its way to SCOTUS, where the Maryland peeps hoped SCOTUS would tell the lower court they needed to know their fucking role.

SCOTUS on the other hand, decided the lower court was fine. But also, they were looking at another case, and they wanted to wait on the outcome of that shit, which they did.

So after hearing this shit the second time, they were like, “You know what? Fuck it. This is none of our fucking business. Good luck assholes. We care about the Constitution, not your childish fucking political games.”

5:4 Judgement for Lamone, and the courts to stay the fuck out of it. Separation of powers and shit. Good luck. The opinion was given under Rucho v. Common Cause in North Carolina, because there was gerrymandering fucking everywhere, and challenges were coming in like they were half-off on Black Friday.

Hear oral arguments or read about the case here.

Average Joe SCOTUS: Taggart v. Lorenzen

Holy fuck! This case has more twists and turns than a Hillary Clinton campaign position.

So this dude Taggart, (The petitioner here) owned 25% of a real estate company. But Taggart sucked with money and investing, was feeling kinda broke, and decided to sell his share to his attorney to get himself some scratch.

However, Terry Emmert and Keith Jehnke also owned 25% each, and they were represented by a Stuart Brown, who was then represented by Shelley Lorenzen (The respondent in the case). My head already fucking hurts from this shit.

Anyway, Emmert and Jehnke thought Taggart selling to his attorney instead of them, was a total dick move, and sued his ass. They won, and Taggart was booted from his own fucking company, with the shares being sold to Emmert and Jehnke. The courts also ruled that Emmert and Jehnke’s attorney could sue for attorney’s fees, so of course he totally did.

Taggart was all like, “Fuck you, I’m filing for bankruptcy.” Which means, his creditors are supposed to go to the bankruptcy proceedings if they want money from him. After that, it’s Hands-Fucking-Off. That’s why it’s called bankruptcy “protection.”

Anyway, this deadbeat Taggart was awarded his bankruptcy, but Brown, the attorney for the two assholes who were trying to squeeze blood from a turnip, decided to sue Taggart anyway, for legal fees, as mentioned earlier, after he got his bankruptcy. Their argument was that Taggart had “returned to the fray” and therefore didn’t deserve protection.

So now Taggart is suing Brown (Lorenzen) for contempt saying, “Hey, those motherfuckers knew I was in bankruptcy, and came after me for money anyway. But Brown (Lorenzen) were like, we thought it was Saul Goodman (Slang for “It’s all good, man”). We didn’t know we couldn’t come after him. We thought he “returned to the fray.”

So 97 different fucking courts weighed in on this shit before it finally got to SCOTUS who were asked to decide if someone in bankruptcy protection can sue someone who comes after them after the bankruptcy, if they thought in good faith, it was OK to sue for that.

SCOTUS unanimously thought Lorenzen, Brown, Emmert, and Jehnke were the bigger assholes in all of this. They fucking knew better, and did it anyway. Judgement for Taggart.