• ryper@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    94
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    27 天前

    I’m pretty sure this supreme court would rule that people don’t have a right to electricity, or even water. They’ll probably be totally ok with people losing internet access as punishment for crossing media owners.

      • tomenzgg@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        26 天前

        Besides your point but this is the aspect about Gorsuch that I can’t seem to make internally consistent. He almost always rules in terms of native rights – even when, I think, it stretches his supposed originalist guiding principle – yet is more than happy to rule as a conservative on all other times and support “industry” and big business (even when it stretches his supposed originalist guiding principle).

        I know that nothing necessitates a person to act logically and most act from emotion, more than anything, but most people, I find, have a relative reason they think they’re being logically consistent but I can’t seem to suss even that out, with regards to him.

      • jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        27 天前

        to be fair the treaty never specified anything about water, and the Navajo nations should have had better lawyers or better guerilla warfare tactics if they wanted more negotiating power.