Supreme Court Ruling time again

[Karl Masks]

They are turkeys voting for Christmas.

People might think the stuff about the court empowering Trump to use the military to murder his opponents or stage a military coup are hyperbole. They’re not. The court did not deny that’s what they did, Trump’s lawyers did not deny that’s what they were arguing for that.. And law professors agree that is an effect of the ruling:

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/07/02/trump-immunity-murder-navy-sotomayor-00166385

The ruling is as terrifying as it sounds.

As a Brit observing this I’m baffled. Not so much by the ruling itself given how fanatical the court is (though in all honesty I’m still shocked by how extreme this decision is) but more the non-response of politicians to it. Biden’s was basically like: “the Supreme Court just made the president king, so vote for me to be the good king instead of trump the bad king”.

How is that an adequate response to such a maniacal deterioration of democratic norms?

And the founder of the Heitage Foundation, in a tv interview, said that it was up to the left to make sure the upcoming revolution, as they see it, is bloodless. They are telling us what they are doing and Biden needs to wake the fuck up

 

[Nylock]

I find it so infuriating that the fanatical edicts issued by this court are treated with such reverence. Sure, Biden and others criticise these rulings, but act as if there’s nothing to do to challenge them because they’re law. Whilst a constitutional democracy should be premised on a strong presumption of judicial independence, there comes a point where judges are acting so blatantly in a partisan manner and threatening the very foundations of democracy that intervention becomes necessary. The separation of powers is a safeguard against the concentration of power in one branch of government, it isn’t a suicide pact.

After SCOTUS upheld slavery in Dred Scott, Lincoln went to war with the South. When SCOTUS attempted to hobble FDR’s new deal in a series of extreme laissez faire rulings, FDR threatened to pack the court and they backed down quick.

Now SCOTUS has laid the constitutional blueprint for American fascism. It’s time to act against them fast before it’s too late.

...I fear it's already too late...

 

[Ming]

They are turkeys voting for Christmas.

People might think the stuff about the court empowering Trump to use the military to murder his opponents or stage a military coup are hyperbole. They’re not. The court did not deny that’s what they did, Trump’s lawyers did not deny that’s what they were arguing for that.. And law professors agree that is an effect of the ruling:

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/07/02/trump-immunity-murder-navy-sotomayor-00166385

The ruling is as terrifying as it sounds.

As a Brit observing this I’m baffled. Not so much by the ruling itself given how fanatical the court is (though in all honesty I’m still shocked by how extreme this decision is) but more the non-response of politicians to it. Biden’s was basically like: “the Supreme Court just made the president king, so vote for me to be the good king instead of trump the bad king”.

How is that an adequate response to such a maniacal deterioration of democratic norms?

I don't think Joe Public realises the import of the decision. Which Project 2025 is counting on of course. Trump did say 'I love the poorly educated'.

 

[Karl Masks]

If trump wins and the SCOTUS ruling stands, can he amend the constitution as official business ending the two term limit? or just stack the electoral colleges? I mean, it'd be 'official' right?

Assuming Trump's mental state (or ours) can last a third term.

 

[two sheds]

I'm thinking Trump will go gaga if he gets in and control will be passed to someone with much less fluffy and friendly policies.

 

[krtek a houby]

I'm thinking Trump will go gaga if he gets in and control will be passed to someone with much less fluffy and friendly policies.

Whether he gets in or not, the nation will be in crisis.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

AOC absolutely nails these corrupt terrorist supporters here:



Of course, she knows the fascists in congress will never allow the fascists on the Supreme Court to be held accountable, but at least she’s helping to politicise the issue and raise awareness. These should be the first steps all democrats are taking now.

 

[petee]

I'm thinking Trump will go gaga if he gets in and control will be passed to someone with much less fluffy and friendly policies.

policies less fluffy and friendly than trump's, the guy behind Project 2025, which fact he is of course lying about already?

 

[Jeff Robinson]

Finally, Biden expected to announce court reform proposals and making it a political issue in the presidential election:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/07/16/biden-supreme-court-reforms/

 

[phildwyer]

Finally, Biden expected to announce court reform proposals and making it a political issue in the presidential election:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/07/16/biden-supreme-court-reforms/

Oh great. The man who can't utter a coherent sentence, or walk up a flight of stairs, or park a bicycle, or hold a meeting without pooing his pants (literally) is going to make it an issue in his presidential election. Fabulous.

 

[krtek a houby]

Oh great. The man who can't utter a coherent sentence, or walk up a flight of stairs, or park a bicycle, or hold a meeting without pooing his pants (literally) is going to make it an issue in his presidential election. Fabulous.

Who is literally pooing his pants?

 

[phildwyer]

Who is literally pooing his pants?

 

[krtek a houby]

I don't click far right loon videos.

Have you any proof to back up your claims?

 

[phildwyer]

I don't click far right loon videos.

Have you any proof to back up your claims?

 

[krtek a houby]

I refer you to my previous reply

 

[phildwyer]

I refer you to my previous reply

I truly don't mean to be patronizing, but in the USA everyone knows that Biden has toilet issues, and that several untoward eruptions have recently occurred on unsuitable occasions. It's really not a matter of dispute. Nor is it really much of a problem, there are certainly worse things a President can be than incontinent. Like an enabler of genocide ferrinstance.

 

[krtek a houby]

I truly don't mean to be patronizing, but in the USA everyone knows that Biden has toilet issues, and that several untoward eruptions have recently occurred on unsuitable occasions. It's really not a matter of dispute. Nor is it really much of a problem, there are certainly worse things a President can be than incontinent. Like an enabler of genocide ferrinstance.

You don't speak for the entire US, though.

But well done for fucking another thread.

 

[teqniq]

Ah, the 'everyone in the USA' gambit. How many times has this been wheeled out now?

 

[FridgeMagnet]

I'll prefix this by being quite straight in saying that as a moderator I am sick of your shit and will very happily just flat ban you.

Could you just not post MAGA meme videos? Is that an option?

 

[krtek a houby]

Ah, the 'everyone in the USA' gambit. How many times has this been wheeled out now?

Aye. Think he was threatened with a banning if he continued with that line.

But little changes, the whole "watch the video" shtick he's been doing for years.

Back on topic and Biden's reform proposals for the SC are much needed but aren't going to fly. It's far too late in the day and the Republicans aren't going to give up such power easily.

 

[two sheds]

Couple of interesting quotes in here

https://archive.ph/zGc37

The Supreme Court has been hit by a new damaging leak over its abortion decisions in a fresh blow to its embattled reputation—and a hint of even more leaks to come.

Intimate details of months of disagreement among the nine justices were reported at length by CNN Monday, just hours after President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris both backed major reforms to the court, with the president accusing justices of being “above the law.” CNN also said its report was the first of a series, suggesting more leaks ahead.

The justices are likely to be extremely concerned at the level of detail CNN has obtained about their internal divisions over the case Moyle v. United States. It was prompted by Idaho introducing an extreme abortion ban in the wake of the Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade, which would have criminalized doctors performing abortions under any circumstances. That move prompted the federal government to introduce formal guidance that hospitals receiving federal Medicare funding had to offer emergency abortions—which Idaho’s Republican attorney general tried to challenge.

Interesting that the federal government can issue formal guidance on compelling hospitals to offer emergency abortions - I wonder whether this could be done more widely.

CNN revealed Monday that the stay was issued 6-3, splitting along ideological lines, a split which had never been known before and should be a secret....

There's a fair amount of procedural detail that I don't really understand, leading to:

CNN reveals that the other conservatives—Samuel Alito, the author of the Dobbs decision, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch—argued from April until June that Idaho should have its abortion ban upheld. Alito was described as “adamant” that the Biden administration was in the wrong, CNN said.

The report reveals that Roberts, Barrett and Kavanaugh were then offered a compromise in “negotiations” with liberals Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, which was eventually what prevailed: a ruling not that the court had made a mistake in taking the case, but that Idaho had not shown “irreparable harm” by the Supreme Court setting aside its emergency stay of the federal guidelines. The liberals accepted, leading to the June ruling.