r/scotus • u/thenewrepublic • 14h ago
r/scotus • u/orangejulius • Jan 30 '22
Things that will get you banned
Let's clear up some ambiguities about banning and this subreddit.
On Politics
Political discussion isn't prohibited here. In fact, a lot of the discussion about the composition of the Supreme Court is going to be about the political process of selecting a justice.
Your favorite flavor of politics won't get you banned here. Racism, bigotry, totally bad-faithed whataboutisms, being wildly off-topic, etc. will get you banned though. We have people from across the political spectrum writing screeds here and in modmail about how they're oppressed with some frequency. But for whatever reason, people with a conservative bend in particular, like to show up here from other parts of reddit, deliberately say horrendous shit to get banned, then go back to wherever they came from to tell their friends they're victims of the worst kinds of oppression. Y'all can build identities about being victims and the mods, at a very basic level, do not care—complaining in modmail isn't worth your time.
COVID-19
Coming in here from your favorite nonewnormal alternative sub or facebook group and shouting that vaccines are the work of bill gates and george soros to make you sterile will get you banned. Complaining or asking why you were banned in modmail won't help you get unbanned.
Racism
I kind of can't believe I have to write this, but racism isn't acceptable. Trying to dress it up in polite language doesn't make it "civil discussion" just because you didn't drop the N word explicitly in your comment.
This is not a space to be aggressively wrong on the Internet
We try and be pretty generous with this because a lot of people here are skimming and want to contribute and sometimes miss stuff. In fact, there are plenty of threads where someone gets called out for not knowing something and they go "oh, yeah, I guess that changes things." That kind of interaction is great because it demonstrates people are learning from each other.
There are users that get super entrenched though in an objectively wrong position. Or start talking about how they wish things operated as if that were actually how things operate currently. If you're not explaining yourself or you're not receptive to correction you're not the contributing content we want to propagate here and we'll just cut you loose.
- BUT I'M A LAWYER!
Having a license to practice law is not a license to be a jackass. Other users look to the attorneys that post here with greater weight than the average user. Trying to confuse them about the state of play or telling outright falsehoods isn't acceptable.
Thankfully it's kind of rare to ban an attorney that's way out of bounds but it does happen. And the mods don't care about your license to practice. It's not a get out of jail free card in this sub.
Signal to Noise
Complaining about the sub is off topic. If you want the sub to look a certain way then start voting and start posting the kind of content you think should go here.
- I liked it better before when the mods were different!
The current mod list has been here for years and have been the only active mods. We have become more hands on over the years as the users have grown and the sub has faced waves of problems like users straight up stalking a female journalist. The sub's history isn't some sort of Norman Rockwell painting.
Am I going to get banned? Who is this post even for, anyway?
Probably not. If you're here, reading about SCOTUS, reading opinions, reading the articles, and engaging in discussion with other users about what you're learning that's fantastic. This post isn't really for you.
This post is mostly so we can point to something in our modmail to the chucklefuck that asks "why am I banned?" and their comment is something inevitably insane like, "the holocaust didn't really kill that many people so mask wearing is about on par with what the jews experienced in nazi germany also covid isn't real. Justice Gorsuch is a real man because he no wears face diaper." And then we can send them on to the admins.
r/scotus • u/orangejulius • Jan 09 '26
Order Bans are going to go out to top level comments that are emotional reactions or off topic. This is a heads up to anyone who wants to change how they’re posting.
This is SCOTUS. Talk about scotus. Talk about the opinions issued. If you want to criticize them that’s fine but have something to back it up.
Complaining about “tRump”, trump, motorhomes, “scrotus”, or any other number of things where you react to something instead of respond to something isn’t going to fly. The bar is very low. Almost all of you are tripping over it.
r/scotus • u/RawStoryNews • 10h ago
news Real 'tragedy' of Supreme Court's new Trump ruling 'staring us in the face': legal expert
r/scotus • u/Apollo_Delphi • 20h ago
news “The Supreme Court has spoken: Children in the certified class are ‘Citizens at Birth,’” - US District Judge Deborah Boardman wrote.
news Republicans ask the Supreme Court to give them a huge discount on ad spending
r/scotus • u/theatlantic • 1d ago
news The Court’s Ballroom Decision Is a Sign of Deeper Problems
r/scotus • u/TheAbyssalOne • 1d ago
Opinion Can the Supreme Court and Congress regulate people or not?
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
In the video it says the Supreme Court ruled against Congress regulating people's behavior but then it says the dissenting judges said that there are cases that show this is possible. I'm having trouble understanding the distinction. Aren't these contradictions in the Supreme Court? Is this allowed or does this condition vary state by state?
r/scotus • u/DoremusJessup • 2d ago
news The Supreme Court Keeps Finding Reasons to Give Trump What He Wants
r/scotus • u/thenewrepublic • 2d ago
news The Supreme Court Brought This on Themselves
South Carolina Representative Jim Clyburn endorsed calls to expand the Supreme Court over the weekend, reflecting a growing resolve among Democratic officials to do what they considered unthinkable a decade ago and fairly unpalatable as recently as five years ago.
r/scotus • u/bloomberglaw • 1d ago
news New Jersey Wants the Supreme Court to Take On Kalshi’s Sports Markets
r/scotus • u/Person_756335846 • 1d ago
Amicus Brief Akhil Reed Amar Amicus Brief in Viramontes (AR15)
supremecourt.govnews The Supreme Court Is Letting Trump Get His White House Ballroom on a Technicality
r/scotus • u/bloomberglaw • 2d ago
news Supreme Court’s Ballroom Order Imperils Other Trump Building Cases
r/scotus • u/RawStoryNews • 3d ago
news 'Indefensible' revelation emerges in Samuel Alito's long-withheld disclosures
r/scotus • u/Achilles_TroySlayer • 2d ago
Opinion SCOTUS, Congress, and The Trump Ballroom Fiasco
r/scotus • u/Person_756335846 • 3d ago
news U.S. Supreme Court's Rejection of the “Presumption of Regularity"
r/scotus • u/Guyentertainment • 2d ago
news Trump Scores Supreme Court Win Over $400M White House Ballroom — As Prez Allowed to Continue Construction on 'Fortress'
r/scotus • u/DoremusJessup • 2d ago