Biden worries ‘extreme’ supreme court can’t be relied on to uphold rule of law

MicroWave@lemmy.world to News@lemmy.world – 1067 points – Biden worries ‘extreme’ supreme court can’t be relied on to uphold rule of law
theguardian.com

Joe Biden worries that the “extreme” US supreme court, dominated by rightwing justices, cannot be relied upon to uphold the rule of law.

“I worry,” the president told ProPublica in interview published on Sunday. “Because I know that if the other team, the Maga Republicans, win, they don’t want to uphold the rule of law.”

“Maga” is shorthand for “Make America great again”, Donald Trump’s campaign slogan. Trump faces 91 criminal charges and assorted civil threats but nonetheless dominates Republican polling for the nomination to face Biden in a presidential rematch next year.

In four years in the White House, Trump nominated and saw installed three conservative justices, tilting the court 6-3 to the right. That court has delivered significant victories for conservatives, including the removal of the right to abortion and major rulings on gun control, affirmative action and other issues.

The new court term, which starts on Tuesday, could see further such rulings on matters including government environmental and financial regulation.

377

You are viewing a single comment
View all commentsShow the parent comment

Article V of the the Constitution.

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artV-1/ALDE_00000507/#

Amending the Constitution was intended to be much more usable, but over half the country doesn't vote.

I can see how 9 out of 13 colonies (or equivalent votes in congress) might be more plausible than 34/50 states or 357/535 congresspeople (house + senate) considering the state of politics today.

6 more...

on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention

Always wondered what the legal definition of "several" was, as it applies to that clause.

It's the adjective form. It just means separate or distinct.

I always took that phrase as expressed in the Constitution to be a quantitative factor? Several as in three to many.

https://thelawdictionary.org/several/

Nice, ty.

Definition & Citations: Separate; individual; Independent. In this sense the word is distinguished from “joint.” Also exclusive; iudi- vidual; appropriated. In this sense it is opposed to “common.”

Still confused though, quantity wise. Basically, the point being made here:

By definition, several means three or more (but often less than many, which we will cover next.) So, if several party-goers out of a group of nine were intoxicated, several could correctly be translated as three or four. If five party-goers were intoxicated, that would usually be stated as most. However, if several party-goers out of 100 people were intoxicated, that wouldn’t be three or four, but a slightly higher number. So again, this term is challenging to interpret under time pressure because its meaning can change, depending on the size of the group.

6 more...