Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has set his sights on eliminating the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday announced which cases it would consider next and which it wouldn’t. Among those the court rejected was a case that challenged the authority of OSHA, which sets and enforces standards for health and safety in the workplace.

And Thomas, widely considered to be the most conservative justice on the already mostly conservative court, wasn’t happy.

In a dissent, he explained why he believed the high court should’ve taken the case: OSHA’s power, he argues, is unconstitutional.

  • DogPeePoo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    290
    ·
    4 months ago

    Clarence Thomas is unconstitutional. By his own originalist logic, he is only 3/5 of a human and should not be married to a white woman.

    Fuck Clarence Thomas.

  • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    173
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Is Clarence Thomas okay, like upstairs? Does he just go around pointing at random things and screaming “Unconstitutional!” ? Is “unconstitutional” in the room with us right now?

    Artist’s Rendition:

  • asteriskeverything@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    112
    ·
    4 months ago

    “The agency claims authority to regulate everything from a power lawnmower’s design,” he wrote, “to the level of ‘contact between trainers and whales at SeaWorld.’”

    I fail to see anything wrong with either thing like… is he just mad it is not the people who sell lawn mowers should decide what’s safe?? Please please please don’t tell me Americans are going to dip to this new level of cognitive dissonance

  • Queue
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    90
    ·
    4 months ago

    I hope he finds a missing guard rail and falls to his death.

  • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    85
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    The program for rolling back hard fought union victories is going full steam ahead.

    I suppose the American worker could wake up to the reality that the protection against utter abuse for no pay didn’t just appear out of thin air and that only their fellow worker can be relied upon to stick for them.

    • el_bhm@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      4 months ago

      That is the plan. Clarence Thomas is owned by billioners parasites that want a feudalism system in their corporations.

    • ours@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      4 months ago

      Ah, but the police force got much better and stronger since back in those days so good look going back to protesting to get those rights back,

      Plus splitting people over insane conspiracies keeps them weak and easier to control so Americans are less likely to stick together and fight the real enemy: the billionaires.

      • jaybone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        4 months ago

        They will lay off middle class American workers, then bring in H1B visa workers to replace them at half the cost, then blame immigrants for taking their jobs. Then blame border security and terrorism.

    • rayyy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      I suppose the American worker could wake up to the reality that the protection against utter abuse for no pay didn’t just appear out of thin air

      Are you kidding? The Budweiser and Marlboro crowd will be told it is the fault of some brown people so they will double down on their hate and donations to elect a dictator who will “solve” their problems

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    79
    ·
    4 months ago

    I assume soon we will be getting rid of the weekend and the 40-hour work week.

    We’re already letting children work jobs that maim and kill them again.

  • Th4tGuyII@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    4 months ago

    Of course Clarence, the most openly corrupt, would be the one to dissent against the OSHA case. Clarence can go fuck himself

  • Asafum@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Just remember guys, the supreme court isn’t corrupted by billionaires they just happen to only want to do things that benefit the ultra wealthy. The gifts from mega rich people to Thomas mean nothing.

    ItS jUsT a cOiNcIdEnCe…

    • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      4 months ago

      Yes. But I am puzzled why the Ultras asked the supremes to end abortion. If I was an Ultra, I would have legalized public sex and drugs and tent cities. How does preventing abortion help the Ultras? Anyway, that’s a piece of the puzzle that I can’t understand well yet.

      Eliminating the EPA, OSHA, animal protections, all these things fall under the Ultra “I’m loving it” package.

      • wizzor@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        4 months ago

        Sex and drugs are already very easy to get if you are rich.

        Population growth on the other hand is an almost mandatory cornerstone of capitalism. And abortions too, will remain legal for the rich.

      • Asafum@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        4 months ago

        I think it’s that more people that shouldn’t have been born are born into positions that force them to accept absolutely horrible working conditions and depress wages by their accepting anything.

        That an some of the ultra wealthy are extremely religious.

        • Krauerking@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Well they have to believe they got their money for some reason and it’s easier to think it was a sky daddy than their actual daddy for some reason.

      • nyctre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Most likely argument for ending abortion is that it raises natality which means more workers/consumers. And I’m guessing tying it to religious beliefs reinforces the religion as well, which most agree that it’s used to control the masses.

        • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Just your daily reminder that literally no one but die hard catholics gave a single fuck about abortions until, what would today be called the right wing, made it an issue after losing the fight on desegregation and the civil rights act.

          It was just the next evolution of the southern strategy. Inflaming hatred against “non-traditional” women instead of blacks (though trust me, there was still plenty of inflaming hatred against blacks, to this day), which extended into hatred against non-traditional things in general, Which was great cause it oh so conveniently covered pretty much everything liberal.

          • nyctre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            Oh, yeah, infighting is probably another good reason I had totally forgotten about. Give us something to fight over. You’re right.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        The Pope wanted it gone. This is the most Catholic Supreme Court in US history and they got rid of abortion. It really doesn’t get any deeper than that.

        Roberts in particular is really showing his age and is devout. It’s highly likely they threatened to withhold communion from him just like they did with Biden unless he gave in. If you really thought hell was real and you could end up going there you would be willing to do anything to avoid that fate. Including murder.

        Put yourself in his perspective for a moment. He kills say a million women because they are denied lifesaving treatments. Well all those women are probably going to go to heaven anyhow, and heaven is forever. If he saves those women from death he goes to hell, the women he saved still end up going where they are going but he personally gets a time period in hell that laughs at a billion eons.

        Wouldn’t you do the same? Would you really allow yourself to be tortured for fucking forever just to save people who are already saved? It makes no sense too. You might be the kinda person who would run into traffic to push a kid out of a way of a bus possibly killing yourself, but even if you were you wouldn’t just run into random traffic.

      • samus12345@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Besides serving the ultra wealthy, the corrupt Supremes also have a Fundamentalist Christian agenda that arose from when the GOP reached out to the religious right for votes. Ending abortion is of no benefit to the ultra wealthy.

  • Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    ·
    4 months ago

    Just trying to bring it back to the good old days when children yearned for the mines, and men got blended up in industrial machinery.

    • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      4 months ago

      I did Asbestos removal for awhile years ago. I cannot imagine not having OSHA. The amount of crap companies get away with with OSHA around is already absurd.

    • t_chalco@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      4 months ago

      I had no idea of this entity, but I work with enough similarly, highly nuanced public professionals that I recognize that the rapid and blind “immediately destroy all gubberment” approach will have widespread oh-holy-fuck consequenes if not just for the extensive brain vacuum potentially left in the wake of this type of growing mentality. Thanks for sharing your knowledge and perspective.

      • Jojo, Lady of the West
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        I mean, do we not remember when companies were literally locking employees into buildings as they come down in a raging inferno?

        More than once?

    • Natanael@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      If they believe congress shouldn’t have the authority to delegate authority so broad then the way fix isn’t to eliminate the delegation but to require that congress reviews the regulatory agencies to see if they’re acting as according to their intent (yes there’s risk of abuse for this too, like endless micromanaging, etc, this is just to defuse the constitutionality argument)

      Just read a bunch of audit results and discuss relevant court cases involving the varies agencies in front of congress and let them rubberstamp it

    • Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      I wanted to post this channel for a long list of reason, broken down in a forensic manner, as to why this is a bad idea, glad others were here, and thinking the same.

  • Krauerking@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    4 months ago

    Oh great. An old man who simply is getting rid of protections for average people because all he hears is how it hurts the profit margins of his good friends the uber wealthy.

    We really are just heading to a split society of no class mobility and no real consideration of the poor from the rich.

    And yet they wonder why the country is collapsing and people don’t really want to have kids anymore.

  • BigMacHole@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    4 months ago

    It’s a good thing NOBODY WHO WOULD POSSIBLY BENEFIT FROM THIS has given Thomas Gifts Bribes or ANYTHING to sway his Judgement!

  • nifty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    4 months ago

    Can we make people who vote for lack of safety regulations work affected jobs for about a year or so? How’d you think they’d vote then?

    • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      4 months ago

      I used to argue that whoever was ultimately responsible for safety at a chemical plant should be required to have them and their family live close enough that if shot goes wrong, they’ll definitely be among the worst effected.

      But then I live within the greater Charleston, WV area, and there’s a plant in a town called Institute here that makes and handles MIC, most notoriously known for being made less poisonous for use as pesticide and being the stuff that leaked and caused the Bhopal incident back when.

      • nifty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        People should sue for damages if they have a case. Same for the Supreme Court ruling, I guess? It would make sense if someone sues the SC for something they suffer

        • Natanael@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          They have immunity for the effect of their rulings (unless it’s criminal corruption involved, but they get to decide for themselves that it’s just “gratuities”, unless congress impeach them)

    • DudeImMacGyver@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      No, they make the rules and would never agree to that, just like they always vote to give themselves raises and amazing healthcare while fighting to prevent the rest of us from getting adequate pay or healthcare.

  • gedaliyah@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    4 months ago

    Wow I love reading about these wacky sovcits. They always say the most silly things.

    Wait, what? WHO said that? Justice of which court?