Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Dick Durbin has refused calls to bring Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts in for a formal hearing on the issue. Instead, he and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, another senior Democrat on the panel, merely asked Roberts to push Alito to recuse himself on cases related to the 2020 election and to come in for a meeting. According to White House aides, President Joe Biden is reluctant to engage on the controversy because he fears that criticizing the conservative justices will undermine the court’s legitimacy as well as the president’s claim to be a supporter of the country’s democratic institutions and norms
We need some politicians with spines in charge
Oh no.
Not undermine the legitimacy of the Court!
Those fucksticks did it themselves. Anything the Executive does to put it back on course is an improvement.
Best they can do is let fascism win.
So you would be ok with Republican politicians intervening in the juristic world? If Democrats can do it, so can Republicans.
We've heard this bullshit so many times. You know what happens? They do it anyway.
Then you'll have people complaining that politics is directly interfering with justice which isn't supposed to happen.
People so often forget about the actual politics of politics. Everyone seems to want their guy to be a tyrant but a cuddlier and friendlier tyrant than the other side's tyrant.
Yep, Democrats intervening would just prove Republicans right
Just for funsies, I asked ChatGPT to come up with a platform for Dark Brandon. Except for being militaristic, it was bog standard liberal and progressive stuff. Then I asked how he would put his own unique signature on implementation and enforcement, and it was straight up fascist authoritarianism.
Now I know it's just AI bullshit, but the AI's understanding of the meme from everything it has absorbed is left hard authoritarianism, which says something about the overall sentiment.
It started off as a fun little joke but it got darkly serious quick. I don't want an authoritarian government. Even one I agree with.
I think you should stop having funsies if you do political analysis using stuff generated by ChatGPT...
It doesn’t matter what he says. It would just be actionless criticism.
POTUS oversees the Executive Branch, not the Legislative Branch. He can’t remove a Justice. He can’t even seat one without a vacancy and congressional approval. Only Congress can try a Justice for impeachment. The last time that happened was 1805, and the Justice remained seated until his death.
This article is throwing tons of shade for not expanding SCOTUS, like it’s the wave of the President’s magic wand. That also requires approval from Congress. There’s been a stalled bill in the House for over a year.
I expect ignorant President finger-pointing from the average citizen, but I’m terribly disappointed in the ignorance of that article from Politico.
Damn right
Want to open the door for Republicans to do the same thing?
Hold judges to account when they are biased and refuse to recuse themselves? Yes, obviously.
Interfere in the juristic system when it's supposed to be separate from the political system?
Yeah, want to prove Trump right? That's exactly how you do it.
The jurist system that has been irreparably corrupted by bribery from the wealthy who heavily support far-right politicians? The ones making rulings that conflict with the wording and clear intent of the US Constitution, citing case law predating the country by a century, and mysteriously being in line with far-right political leaders' biases 9/10 times? That one?
We need some politicians with spines in charge
Oh no.
Not undermine the legitimacy of the Court!
Those fucksticks did it themselves. Anything the Executive does to put it back on course is an improvement.
Best they can do is let fascism win.
So you would be ok with Republican politicians intervening in the juristic world? If Democrats can do it, so can Republicans.
We've heard this bullshit so many times. You know what happens? They do it anyway.
Then you'll have people complaining that politics is directly interfering with justice which isn't supposed to happen.
People so often forget about the actual politics of politics. Everyone seems to want their guy to be a tyrant but a cuddlier and friendlier tyrant than the other side's tyrant.
Yep, Democrats intervening would just prove Republicans right
Just for funsies, I asked ChatGPT to come up with a platform for Dark Brandon. Except for being militaristic, it was bog standard liberal and progressive stuff. Then I asked how he would put his own unique signature on implementation and enforcement, and it was straight up fascist authoritarianism.
Now I know it's just AI bullshit, but the AI's understanding of the meme from everything it has absorbed is left hard authoritarianism, which says something about the overall sentiment.
It started off as a fun little joke but it got darkly serious quick. I don't want an authoritarian government. Even one I agree with.
I think you should stop having funsies if you do political analysis using stuff generated by ChatGPT...
It doesn’t matter what he says. It would just be actionless criticism.
POTUS oversees the Executive Branch, not the Legislative Branch. He can’t remove a Justice. He can’t even seat one without a vacancy and congressional approval. Only Congress can try a Justice for impeachment. The last time that happened was 1805, and the Justice remained seated until his death.
https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/impeachment/impeachment-chase.htm
This article is throwing tons of shade for not expanding SCOTUS, like it’s the wave of the President’s magic wand. That also requires approval from Congress. There’s been a stalled bill in the House for over a year.
https://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/democrats-introduce-bill-to-expand-u-s-supreme-court/
I expect ignorant President finger-pointing from the average citizen, but I’m terribly disappointed in the ignorance of that article from Politico.
Damn right
Want to open the door for Republicans to do the same thing?
Hold judges to account when they are biased and refuse to recuse themselves? Yes, obviously.
Interfere in the juristic system when it's supposed to be separate from the political system?
Yeah, want to prove Trump right? That's exactly how you do it.
The jurist system that has been irreparably corrupted by bribery from the wealthy who heavily support far-right politicians? The ones making rulings that conflict with the wording and clear intent of the US Constitution, citing case law predating the country by a century, and mysteriously being in line with far-right political leaders' biases 9/10 times? That one?