|
cr0y posted:I got drunk on the news and can't recall, what does scotus expansion require? It's set by law, not the constitution. Pass new law saying SCOTUS is now X size, and it is that size. That's also the only chance of fixing this. McConnell is walking around with a rock hard turtle-dick right now and they will absolutely fill that seat. Fascism wants power for the leaders in exchange for punishing the out groups for the followers.
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2020 01:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
Anybody thinking there's going to be eleventh dimensional chess game theory about why and when this should happen to benefit this person or that person is forgetting who, exactly, is president. There is absolutely no way one Donald John Trump will pass up the chance to smear poo poo on the wall like a toddler and stand back to tell everyone "LOOK WHAT I DID, LOOK AT IT. THAT WAS ME. I DID THAT THING." RGB will be replaced at lightning speed and the Anger Mango will campaign on it to benefit himself. There is approximately zero-point-gently caress-off chance he will give anyone else the opportunity to not do it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2020 03:35
|
|
|
myron cope posted:Do they even need to repeal Roe v Wade? They'll just use the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to keep taking stuff away. The John Roberts Experience Yes, they do, or the ravenous CHUD hordes that they've been feeding bloody red meat for decades will focus on whoever they can find to be of insufficient ideological purity and they will be cast out then shunned by their own. This idea that things will be well-coordinated and planned out really needs to die a quick, public death because reality is gonna start changing pretty loving quick. Fascists don't care about poo poo like that they want to seize power so they can punish the out-groups. That's it. That's the goal. Fail at that goal and all the rage that's being targeted at the 'other' chooses a target from within to remove the impurity.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2020 03:55
|
|
|
Parrotine posted:Yeah but for four straight years? Only blockade I'm familiar with is Obama on his final year, maybe there's an example from the past where this has happened before? What's going to stop them? Fascists are immune to hypocrisy. They revel in it, in fact, because it lets them misdirect their opposition in to fighting pointless battles while they seize more and more power. So, again, what's going to stop them from doing exactly that?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2020 19:27
|
|
|
Enigma89 posted:Adding more SCOTUS seats may be great but what is to stop the Republicans from doing it again when they inevitably win the senate again? In the immediate short term the point is to staunch the bleeding and stop the next 40 years of un-elected legislation with unstoppable veto power from the judicial branch. Long term, that is exactly the point. Force Republicans to counter-pack the courts in exactly the same tit-for-tat manner until the point of absurdity and everyone accepts the reality of what the SCOTUS has been made in to by Republicans; a blatantly partisan extension of party politics being used as a power grab that has been de-legitimized as an institution and needs reformed. It's not a great plan, but it's the only long shot left to move back towards being a functional country.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2020 21:06
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:issuing such blatant "gently caress you we do what we want" rulings is only going to make calls for judicial reform much stronger and if Congress passes a judicial reform bill there's gently caress all the SCOTUS can do about it You've outlined the threat, and then immediately after that why the threat doesn't exist. The legislative branch has been thoroughly and completely broken. It will never in my lifetime pass judicial reform that removes the conservative majority. I'll  a regular ban on that. The court is going to do whatever the hell they want. If they want to pull a 2000's "We say in this one specific instance it doesn't count but this is never valid for anyone else ever and makes no precedent and no takes-backsies" they'll loving do it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2024 22:54
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:That's not exactly the riskiest toxx, given that even FDR at the height of his popularity with massive Dem supermajorities was still unable to force through blatantly partisan "reforms" to the Supreme Court to change its ideological makeup. We do have massive partisan intervention in the makeup of the Supreme Court though? Like, we do. Huge amounts of massive partisan intervention. McConnel ratfucked his way in to stealing multiple seats by inventing long-held traditions out of thin air that he then immediately discarded when he could intervene some more.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2024 12:52
|
|
|
Cimber posted:SO what i think is going to come down: I feel they're going to add in some special sauce about not being convicted specifically of the crime of only insurrection and that it has to be 1,000% turbo-guilty of that exact crime whose definition we've put on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the leopard" and it only applies to Democrats in the future, so even if he is found guilty in the DC case it won't count because gently caress you liberal cry more about it yes we're ignoring the long held tradition of how the 14th was implemented after the civil war according to traditionalists we don't give a gently caress get bent. This is of course as you say, all on the optimistic assumption that they don't just sandbag the thing entirely for the better part of a year and let it all play out somewhere else so they can duck the issue for the election then swoop in and set things right according to the particulars of the fascist leaning of society at that time.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2024 19:32
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:Imagine the conversation we would be having if someone anywhere to the left of Ronald Reagan attempted the J6 insurrection and coup. People were getting loving black bagged and committing "suicide" in burning cars for Black Lives Matter protests that broke windows. They'd still be washing the blood off the steps of the capitol building to this day.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2024 21:21
|
|
|
Bel Shazar posted:The constitution gave authority for determining how electors work to the legislatures of the states and this ruling is a massive abrogation of states rights. I'm sorry but I've been told that this court is an independent, non-partisan entity that calls balls and strikes only while adhering to the theory of originalism so you must be mistaken. You see if they did anything besides this ruling there would be so many other cases they would have to hear and that is, after all, what the original words say, "Don't make things inconvenient for us as a court that's just annoying". Not saying I disagree with it. I'm not opposed to a federal standard for federal elections, I'm just gonna shove their own words up their rear end every time they lie about the originalism bullshit. If something is inconvenient for other people by, say, taking away their right to control their own body or having access to the ballot well then go gently caress yourself you miserable creatures that's what we say the words say nobody cares get hosed and suffer. Inconvenience the courts by having many different standards that need to be reconciled? Well now that's just chaos and we'd have to do work. That's just not allowed so we're going to read between some lines over here and infer obvious conclusions there and consider hypotheticals going forward so we'll rule this way for ourselves get hosed you miserable creatures. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2024 16:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:There's no catch-22. It's entirely possible to write an enforcement law for the Insurrection Clause that isn't also a bill of attainder. The decision even cites a historical example (the Enforcement Act of 1870) and strongly implies that a law modeled after that would also be constitutional. Is this frictionless perfectly spherical cow on an infinite plane theorizing or something? We can't even write legislation to keep the loving lights on without some rear end in a top hat demanding we disband the DoE. Which one? Yes.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2024 01:40
|
|