Fucking hell, just reminds me again that if they lose the election anyway, the state can just come in and replace the entire elected board as they see fit--see Houston TX for example. Why the fuck did I put effort into researching and voting for not-insane, education-experienced school board members just to watch them get removed against the will of the people in the district?
Progressives need to stop pretending that packing the court would open the door for conservatives to do the same.
At this point, conservatives will simply do the same if they lose control of it. They do not care about law and order and they do not care about mores. They only care about oppressing the weak and solidifying their power. The SCOTUS is a political institution that needs immediate reform.
We're racing to doomsday and they're leaning on the accelerator while progressives argue about whether it's safe to turn off the ignition.
Progressives know damn well that Republicans have already stacked the court. It's the establishment Democrats that are whining about an imaginary retaliation. You know, the centrists who are basically Republican lite, the assholes who whine about how extreme the Left-most parts of the party are, while ignoring how extreme the entire right-wing has always been.
We've seen this shit play out dozens of times in the past, the centrists say we progressives need to moderate ourselves to appeal more broadly, that we need to compromise or lose support. The reality plays out that any compromise we make is what loses us our support, and the centrists then side with the extremists on the right to hurt us more.
we shouldve been packing the court already. but nope democrats dont wanna rock the boat. something about when they go low we get high. no sorry, when they go low kick em in the fucking mouth.
Yeah, with what majority? There are only 47 Democrats and 2 independents who are interested in any politics left of center. Manchin, techincally a Democrat, will only vote for his personal, center-right beliefs, and Sinema, the only remaining independent has shown she's in it solely for personal financial gain. There was no time in which there were enough Democrats, excepting the two aforementioned posers, to add seats to the court or confirm any justice without some money changing hands. If it weren't about power or money we could have had 52 states (DC and PR) and at least 3 more truly democratic senators (considering the outside chance of a 50/50 split in PR). But that was impossible because it would have reduced the power of Manchin and Sinema, and that's the only reason for them to exist.
Like how the Dems won't get rid of the filibuster, while the Reps got rid of it to push through the judicial nominees. Or how the Dems did absolutely nothing about the Rep Senate ignoring Obamas nominee and then rushing through their own at the last minute to stack SCOTUS.
Dems just can't admit that they need to play on the Reps level because the other team openly cheating while you take the high ground just tolerating the intolerant.
It didn't originally exist in the Senate either, but the worse Vice President we ever had, decided that the Senate had too many rules and got rid of most of them. One of those original rules allowed any senator to call for a vote, even when someone was on the floor speaking.
This rule, called the previous question for some reason, still exists in the House, along with the Hour Rule which limits the time a Representative can spend holding the floor.
So we already have the framework to end the filibuster, but conservatives on both sides of the aisle like it because it means that they can thwart progress.
Of course, when it gets in the way, Republicans quickly carve out an exception for themselves, like they did with Judicial appointments.
The Senate is a useless and bad institution anyway. It's the US House of Lords, where land is being given rights to vote over people.
If we're swinging magic wands anyway, just get rid of it and give its duties to the House. Or maybe return it to being a governor-appointed advisory board that only has proforma powers over legislation that the House can override.
At a minimum, make it so Senators can cast as many votes as they have constituents. Do the same thing for reps in the House.
Can anyone explain to me how guns will help if the national guard is at your door? Or the military? Do people really think that they could go to war against the United States because the US government becomes overrun by fascists?
At worst you'll be labeled a terrorist and immediately murdered. Even if you ignore the military, brandishing a gun Infront of a cop is a death sentence (if you aren't white).
As the Lever helped expose last year, Leo’s judicial activism was supercharged in 2021 when a conservative surge protector magnate secretly funneled $1.6bn to his new dark money fund – the largest known political advocacy donation in US history.
Even the design of the student debt case reeks of Leo’s involvement, since just like the Colorado suit, it appears to have been based on DC machinations. As the Lever reported, the student loan servicer at the heart of the case – whom Republican attorneys general argued would be harmed by Biden’s student loan plan – would in reality face no financial harm at all.
The US has a serious problem about the impartiality of the SCOTUS. Dems not going hard to fix the problem is not helping the situation. Future of US Legal System is not looking good for the average Joe.
What is going on in Indiana with that they had to make ninja stars illegal in the first place? Either way it's good to see that injustice righted while still thinking of the children.
A lot of laws about weapons aren't really about anything actually happening or dangers. Often it's about perceptions people have or actually about trying to target a group politicians don't like.
That's how bailsongs and switch blades got restricted in a lot of states. Also why suppressors or short barreled firearms are regulated like hand grenades.
The left doesn't say that one man doesn't have the power to pull strings, the left says that there's no evidence of Soros doing it.
A subtle distinction, but an important one.
Leonard Leo literally hand-picked every judge that Donald Trump appointed, all 234 of them, including 3 supreme court justices.
Leo then paid for nonsense cases to be filed in jurisdictions with friendly (read his own hand-picked) judges. These cases were all based on lies. Because it never mattered if there was any truth to them. They then get kicked up the chain to Leo's hand-picked supreme court, where the justices rule how Leo wanted from the beginning. Well, 3 hand-picked, and 1 bribed, all that's needed from there is to get Alito to fall in line, and that man has Fox News brain so bad that it's scary.
And that's how one man can shape the law in any way he wants, even if congress and the presidency are controlled by Democrats
We shouldn’t be shocked when the education levels of these states (literacy, math, writing, etc) starts to decrease in the near future. It’s not like these politicians, companies, people care sadly, but with the less time teenagers are going to have for studies, extracurricular, and usual teenage things, we can definitely expect to see even further decrease in grades and proficiency levels.
Grades are one thing, but the mental toll and stress a lot teenagers face due to not being have to have an effective school/work/life balance is insane. I have seen a further decrease on these students mental health since the pandemic started (especially now with inflation impact lower SES families) since alot of them have to work to provide for the family as well.
The Christian web designer who says she was harmed by a gay couple asking her to do a webpage for their wedding was LYING. This Christian took a case to the Supreme Court claiming she was harmed by the gays but she was LYING. And the Christians on the court ruled to cause harm to the LGBTQ community by allowing their bigotry to be legal.
thats what i dont get about this whole thing. i thought in order to bring a case you had to have standing and courts would examine if your case was legit. how did it even get this far? wtf? i hate this country sometimes.
The liberal justices' first criticism of the decision was that the court shouldn't have heard the case at all because the plaintiff didn't have standing.
Does anybody care what The Supreme Court justices think? They are all narcissistic crooks.
Kavanaugh yelled at his interviewers and rambled on about his love for drinking beer through his butt-hole (how do you qualify for any job after that?)
Clarence is a soulless, political hack
RGB was too full of herself to step down in a timely manner
Barrett claims to be Christian, but took her position predicated on a lie and in bad faith
None of the justices want oversight, even though there is rampant bribing taking place among their ranks.
All of recent major decisions have upended legal precedent which is the entire foundation of our law. With judges who will not respect legal precedent, what's really the point in giving a shit. The rules are made up now, and the scores don't matter.
Politics
Active