204
You mean the one where he ruled that the United States has a government of men, and not of laws?
Maybe this columnist thinks he's "shaken", but I doubt it. The reason he acted in a more moderate way before was that the Christian Nationalist justices didn't have a strong majority and the ability to impose their agenda with impunity. The minute they had a 6-3 majority, he knew they could do whatever they wanted, and they have.
The only thing we can do about it now is elect as many Dems as possible to the House and Senate and pressure them to impose term limits and expand the Court, things that should have been done a long time ago.
And please, regardless of whether you think your vote for POTUS will count, vote anyway and fill out your full ballot because you have much more influence on your State legislature and local offices, which is where so many things that affect your life are decided.
What this says to me is that he and other members of his majority live in a kind of bubble.
What this says to me is a veteran reporter covering the SCROTUS is just now realizing this.
Shaken?! SHAKEN?
Like like the women of America were shaken when their rights to bodily autonomy were taken from them?
Or like when the American people were shaken when they discovered that our nation's checks and balanced were completely corrupted? That they will do nothing to stop a dictatorship and the end of democracy?
Or shaken by the knowledge that the highest court in the country is colluding with the lower courts to bring specific cases through the appeals systems so they can make predetermined rulings, effectively writing their own laws and subverting the basic foundation of law in our country?
Shaken. Yeah, go fuck yourself Roberts.
Won't somebody think of the oligarchy!
I don’t want him feeling “shaken”. I want him to know, deep down, undeniably to the very core of his soul, that he is a blight on humanity. He is devoid of honor and value by any moral measure. His existence on earth and in this society has done vastly more harm than good and humanity would have been better off if he had never been born. I want him to wake up every day and feel that more deeply and truly than he can feel his own breathing.
Then the rest of the list, too: Trump, Mitch McConnell, Steve Bannon, Roger Stone, Rupert Murdoch, Roger Ailes, Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity. Alito, Kavanaugh, Thomas, Barrett. Gym Jordan, Mike Johnson. Steve Miller, the list goes on and on. Selfish monsters that I only wish knew how little they deserve the lives they live.
Lithwick pointed to legal reporter Linda Greenhouse, who asked on Slate's podcast how Roberts could "have been so clueless about where this opinion was going to leave a court that has already been really battered in public opinion ever since the run-up to Dobbs?… What this says to me is that he and other members of his majority live in a kind of bubble.”
He may have been able to persuade himself that he was doing something positive. Alito and Thomas don't live in a bubble. They are very consciously forcing their dogma on the rest of us with no sense of guilt or shame.
He doesn’t fear enough.
Assuming I believe anything he says in the first place. We are so divided that he won’t see consequences.
Tbh I’m low-key waiting for someone to try taking a shot at one or more members of the Tribunal of Six. They’re so obviously standing in the way of progress in so many ways. They’re only appointed for life, after all. Someone’s going to take advantage of the darker side of that statement at some point. Roberts and his ilk should be scared.
It's honestly wild that two people have tried to take a shot at Trump first. Trump's just a useful idiot to these fuckers, the real assholes that are destroying our country are the ones on the Supreme Court.
Ya, idk why people are surprised about the consequences of one party trying its damnedest to make the last box of liberty the only protected box. Like, what did they expect?
Actions have consequences.
I really want someone to press one of these people on camera.
"Donald Trump has promised at multiple rallies to end the democratic process by eliminating the need to vote, and this is extremely dangerous to our democracy, therefore it is an official act of the office e of the president to order a hit on DJT, Seal teams 3 and 5 are en-route now. Such an act is official, and necessary for the country to survive therefore Joe Biden is completely immune from any prosecution."
I just want to know for sure what the reaction would be. I'm sure pearl clutching indignation (because someone thought of their idea but flipped the victims around)
It's really a situation that ought to resolve itself. If the justices vote anything as an official act is perfectly legal, then threaten those justices that voted that way with violence, assassination, nothing is off the table apparently as long as it's an official act, and reverse that decision with the remaining justices, done and dusted.
I really don't see the problem here. It's all been declared perfectly legal, nothing is off the table, it sends a strong message that this democracy will be maintained by whatever means necessary, and that as long as the president is Democrat at least, then any attempt at an all powerful king or Führer will automatically undo itself. An abrogation of power done through wielding that very power itself would be a beautiful thing to behold.
In fact, the Supreme Court justices would make a better target than Trump himself even. Trump is a political rival and it could be argued that it's Biden supporting the election of a candidate from his own party. Meanwhile targetting the Supreme Court justices would be defending basic democracy, fighting for the freedom from a despotic tyrant - the very supposed foundation of the country we're talking about, changing the composition of the Supreme Court and weakening the powers of the presidency itself, which definitely sounds like official acts rather than those of a candidate or private individual.
About the only silver lining to Trump's inevitable re-attempt to steal the election is that he won't be President during the election. If he wins he won't make the same mistake of appointing people with even a shred of ethics. He'll rig it to give himself a 3rd term or be kingmaker for the next gen of American dictators.
He should be. There is no way that the constitution had immunity in mind for the president. George Washington would be flipping some tables in the supreme court if he was alive.
The fact that the Supreme Court gave themselves the ability to effectively unilaterally write federal laws with Marbury v Madison was already massively overstepping bounds and the concept of checks and balances.
We need to overturn Marbury v Madison.
They would all be challenged to gentlemen's duels so quickly, for abdicating their honor.
They would literally be shooting the tyrants.
Good. He deserves all of it for making such an obviously partisan and foolish ruling.
He’s not serious. Roberts is an arch conservative and has been for a long time. This is posturing to try and paint himself as a moderate, like he has been doing since before he was appointed to the bench. Fuck him.
I second that. FUCK this guy.
How could he possibly have been surprised by the response? They are with 9 judges. Three vehemently disagreed with the ruling and even Barret partially disagreed. It’s not like he was looking for some compromise ruling that all judges signed onto. Pathetic reporting.
He wasn’t. He’s trying to maintain the image that he’s above the fray while being deep in it
"You mean my radical and insane interpretations of the law are insane and radical?".
Yeah, he fucking knows and is a piece of shit like the rest of these disingenuous monsters
The Extreme Court has made itself irrelevant, useless and obsolete.
None of that is true in any way. They are a relevant, useful, very much still in use, tool for conservatives to undermine democracy. I don't understand why you chose a single one of those descriptors.
Shaken?
And?
He will forget about it quickly. Until it comes back to haunt him. Then he will engage in mental gymnastics to justify it.
I prefer my justices stirred
Unexpected? How the fuck is backlash about a ruling saying the President is above the law unexpected?
For real. He’s either being completely disingenuous or he’s really that much of an oblivious asshole.
Unbelievably, he managed to underestimate the political awareness of the US public to his office. The bar was already on the floor.
More like digging required.
He has gotten away with it for along time.
Exactly. How can he claim to be shocked when the dissent told him why he's a monster? Dude is a liar.
Good. Now fucking resign.
I'm kind of okay with it. Nobody is doing more to advocate for and bring awareness to the need to expand the Supreme Court right now than this fucking guy.
Boo hoo, fucking cry baby. Corrupt SCOTUS is too insulated from their terrible decisions.
this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2024
204 points (95.9% liked)
politics
19022 readers
2891 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS