Hacker News Reader

Comment by airstrike | Hacker News Reader

The Supreme Court doesn't.

The supreme court says a lot of things.

So does the EFF, but they have no say in legal matters, so their opinion here is irrelevant, whereas the Supreme Court's opinion is final.

Sure but even the supreme court disagrees with the supreme court. Treating their rulings as the best or canonical interpretation of a case doesn't make much sense.

It's not like any interpretation is valid but there are plenty of valid ones.

By definition, the Supreme Court's decision _is_ the canonical interpretation. Whether you disagree with the decision has no bearing on the matter.

And of course it makes sense, because the legal system was created by the very laws it upholds. If you think it should be different, then you'll have to convince a lot of people to change a lot of laws and probably parts of the US constitution

> Treating their rulings as the best or canonical interpretation of a case doesn't make much sense.

It does, because the Supreme Court's ruling is the legally binding interpretation.

The EFF are just some people with an non-legally binding opinions.

It boggles the mind that this comment is being downvoted for literally stating facts. People really have their fingers in their ears with this topic.

And what they say matters a whole lot more than what the eff says.

Just because Supreme court said it doesn't mean they aren't heavily biased.

What exactly do you mean here by using the term “biased”? In what way is the Supreme Court “biased”?

Yeah, and the EFF is in no way biased. at all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com