Vote on your favorite Supreme Court decision!

vote.serendipityThumbThe United States Supreme Court made giant far-reaching decisions this month.  Please vote on the decision that you feel was the most important.

PLEASE VOTE on RIGHT HAND MARGIN of this website then comment below in this article.

Here are the 7 most talked about cases…

– Obamacare abortion mandate violates religious freedom
– Unions can’t force dues (in-home health workers)
– Police can’t search cell-phones (w/o warrant)
– Obama abused recesses appointments
– EPA over-stepped authority
– Abortion clinic buffer zone unlawful
– Ohio can’t criminalize “false” political speech

(* listing of cases does not imply endorsement)

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 04:55 | Posted in Uncategorized | 33 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • Bob Clark

    I am with number 4, Obama’s abuse of recess appointments, as it nullifies over a year’s worth of National Labor Relation Board pro Union abuse. Also, currently Obummer is out complaining about GOP not giving into his socialism platform; and what better counter for the GOP than to hoist for public display a unanimous Supreme Court ruling the President is over stepping his executive authority if left to his own devices.

    • Eric Blair

      LOL.. again.. I wish Obama were a socialist, but he’s not. He’s a Democratic centrist at best.

      • .

        You should be listening to Lars and not licking your schtick dick!

        • Master

          Why is it all your posts reference bodily functions or a homosexual overtone? Gaydar is off the chart with you. Step out of the closet Sally. Being a lesbian is nothing to be ashamed of.

          • .

            Urine idiot, masterbateur!

          • master

            ok so u just made my point. lol. your nothing if not consistent

          • .

            Please, dog, you are incontinent and a demwitted mastiff bull spitter, Ucur!

          • MASTER

            Please dog (are you 12)? That should read “Please, Master” Just from this post “Urine”, “licking your schtick DICK”, “incontinent”, “masterbateur”. YOU NEED SOME SERIOUS HELP!!! WHAT THE HECK IS WRONG WITH YOU?

          • .

            Urine the one that suchs!

          • .

            Nuts2U, cockhold!

          • Katchoo,.

            Dotsa comment bin plagiarized by left bling communalized mental midgets, albeit ‘covertly’ hoping to get d’fleaed from whence their oversteers take a bed bath for over invok’n in Hoboken, Gnu Joisey

          • .

            Your pride charade schlep is sloughing you down, mastah!

      • T. Partee


  • How wack is that

    Mine is the Hobby Lobby decision. Now I can stop paying the portion of my taxes that support our defense budget as my religious convictions prohibit the killing of other humans even in a time of war. And….as a Morman I can now legally take another wife and then another wife. Glad to know that my Viagra is still covered though. Got to love a mostly male SC. Oh wait, actually I’m Muslim and what to thank the US SC for justifing the stoning of unpure women.

    • S Robeal

      The sky is falling. The sky is falling.

      You know, sarcasm comes off a lot better if you have your facts right, which said facts are totally lost on you. And why is polygamy wrong, in your mind? As a muslam you can take more than one wife, so what? Viagra, as well as 16 kinds of birth control, just not the four abortion inducing birth control methods. Learn some facts before posting demon talking points, you come off as a fool, not smart.

      • hwit

        Ok no more sarcasm. If you read carefully I challenge you to find one FACT that is wrong. Lets review-5 conservative CHRISTIAN judges voted to allow other CHRISTIANS to opt out a law (or part of a law) that they didn’t like. That is one dangerous precedent those 5 MEN just set.

        • .

          TwatLaw KemoSlapHarpy!

          • .

            Nuts2U, cockhold!!!!!!!

        • S Robeal

          Stoning women? What the heck does that have to do with birth control? If you were actually Mormon, you would know how to spell it. If you were Muslim, you wouldn’t care about birth control. As far as taking many wives, why not? It’s a woman’s choice if she wants to live that lifestyle. As far as a defense budget, sure, get rid of it, who needs protection in this country? As a woman, I am NOT okay paying for someone else’s birth control or abortion inducing drugs. But feel free to write the gubment a check if you feel you want to.

          • Eric Blair

            Fair enough…

            However, I don’t feel like paying for men to have an erection.

            I don’t feel like paying for smokers to have medical care for their bad decisions.

            Most of all, I don’t feel like giving churches tax exempt status and paying for the all the services they receive through my property taxes. They should pay their fair share.

            As for birth control pills, what about those women to take them for medical reasons such as Polycystic Ovary Syndrome?

            The fact is, we pay for a great many things we don’t agree with; it’s part of the social contract. We pay for those things we don’t like or want under the unspoken understanding that we also get some of the things we want.

          • S Robeal

            The decision did not include all birth control, just abortion inducing. Geez, read the decision.

            Do me a favor, do some research before posting, if they have a woman has a medical problem, the insurance still covers that, as it always has.

            I don’t want to pay for alcoholics or drug abusers either, but I do, even though it was their choice.

            What unspoken understanding? What is it you want that I should pay for?

            As far as churches or anyone receiving tax exempt status, I’m fine with no one receiving it.

          • HWIT

            ok, one last attempt. You say your not willing to pay for someone’s birth control. There are a number of thing I am not willing to pay for because of my religious beliefs. So is it ok for me to pick and choose which laws I will follow and which I will ignore? If you do not like a law then vote in representatives who will pass laws that you like. That’s how a Democracy works. 5 conservative men just placed the religious convictions of one family over the religious convictions of thousands of workers, if that doesn’t scare the snot out of you then you are the fool. You agree with it this time because it goes along with your beliefs. What happens next time when it doesn’t?

          • S Robeal

            Feel free to pick and choose which laws you’re going to follow. The president does it every day. Just use your pen and phone to change them when you don’t agree. That is what scares the snot out of me.

            If the workers don’t like it, they can find a job elsewhere. In today’s market, I’m pretty sure it won’t take but a day to fill their position. And if they quit their job because abortion inducing pills are not covered, then I’m not too sure they should be there in the first place.

            Since I’m agnostic, the religious aspect matters not. I’m speaking as a woman who did not demand birth control as a right and insist on someone else pay for it. And as a woman, I do not believe in abortion because I believe there’s a life growing from inception, not because of any religious belief.

          • .

            Ms. D’Pointe’ a pillar of salt on the banks of what’s left of US, having rapturously kipped off the counter of common sense apothecary.

            Redemption without fear of reprisal: Simply clench St Joseph aspirin between your needs, or consider no Asohol as construed, less spend y.

          • .

            Nuts2U, cockhold!

          • Period Mason

            slime to you. pointy moniker plagiarizer

    • Jack Lord God

      >Now I can stop paying the portion of my taxes t

      Yeah, and if you had read, or even gotten basic info about the decision from an actual news source instead of a Facebook meme you would know why this is so stupid.

      The court clearly lined out, and it was widely publicized in actual news sources, that in no way was this sort of thing applicable to taxes.

      Facebook is not a news source – and now ya know!

      • hwit

        OK, for the absolutely dense, I’ll give you one more (non tax) example to see if you can get my point about sup court precedents. A soldier comes in to my bake shop and asks for a cake for his upcoming marriage. I refuse based on my religious convictions about war and killing. Or I refuse to serve anyone who doesn’t have the same beliefs as me. Or, I refuse to provide health care to the spouse of an employee because they work for an organization that helps provide abortion services and that violates my beliefs. Get it yet.

  • Jack Lord God

    My absolute favorite has to be Hobby Lobby. As anyone on Facebook can attest, the liberal outrage machine is in full gear on that one. Breaking the news to them that the decision based upon a law passed by a unanimous (except three sens) democrat congress, and signed by a democrat president is good enough. But then pointing out that Hobby Lobby provides contraception coverage, and was only contesting four of the methods is just the cherry on the cake.

    Real quick you find out who the Kos drones are, and damn does it embarrass the crap out of them. Try it, it’s fun!

    • Eric Blair

      “Breaking the news to them that the decision based upon a law passed by a unanimous (except three sens)..

      Astonishingly bad writing! Lets correct your writing: if there were three dissenting votes, then it can’t be unanimous can it? Unanimous would mean that 100 senators voted for it, wouldn’t it? You would think that someone so conscious of good writing as yourself wouldn’t make such a fundamental and horrible gaffe.

      In the past I’ve overlooked your writing mistakes because, well, we all make them. But since you’ve decided that writing mistakes are fair game, you won’t mind if I point out yours, will you?

      Or would you prefer a live-and-let-live detente when it comes to grammar, spelling, and other writing errors?

  • g

    Foremost con-decision: Adjudicating the ACA as constitutional. What a load of Jeff Merkley permeating CJSCOTUS Roberts’ appellate barrel of gaffes.

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)