Obama can influence the Supreme Court?

[ProSense]

Here's how the bad deal went down. After hearing passionate arguments from the Obama Administration, the Supreme Court acquiesced to the president's fervent request and, in a one-line ruling, let stand a lower court decision that declared torture an ordinary, expected consequence of military detention, while introducing a shocking new precedent for all future courts to follow: anyone who is arbitrarily declared a "suspected enemy combatant" by the president or his designated minions is no longer a "person." They will simply cease to exist as a legal entity. They will have no inherent rights, no human rights, no legal standing whatsoever -- save whatever modicum of process the government arbitrarily deigns to grant them from time to time, with its ever-shifting tribunals and show trials.

What's to stop Obama from influencing the decision on mandates?

[treestar]

1. that is someone's opinion of the case

The case leaves standing the D.C. Circuit ruling that the petitioners have no case for civil damages, due to sovereign immunity (one can't sue the government without its consent) and not having a case under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

Like those who claim the POTUS can control Congress, they are now blaming the POTUS for the judiciary branch.

Some people don't get this three branch checks and balances thing.

[ProSense]

3. Yeah, just ignore the bogus premise and run with

the made up narrative.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. *That* Supreme Court? Scalia, Roberts, Alito, Thomas?

Bloody doubtful.