Democrats say Trump is an existential threat. They’re not acting like it.

jeffw@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world – 707 points –
Democrats say Trump is an existential threat. They’re not acting like it.
vox.com
132

You are viewing a single comment

Who do you believe could just tell them no and have them comply?

It would be Congress, but Republicans control the House at the moment.

They could be subpoenaed into a house select committee to undergo questioning explaining their actions . It would at least be a bold move and have them try and explain their reasoning to an equal institution under the republic?

There is no magic bullet, but you need to return some heat or else go under without a fight. It would also completely unhinge the conservative forces hell bent on a dictatorship.

You don't need them to comply. All they can do is write words. If you tell them they're making a power grab and you're not going to just cede power to them, they don't have anything they can do but write more words.

Defying the Supreme Court would set an extraordinarily terrible precedent. This only works if the masses are doing the defying. And it's incredibly risky, as the Republicans would very quickly follow suit

What exactly is the risk when considering the very real danger the court is doing to the country? Tolerating intolerance will only take the country in one direction.

Congress could impeach Justices or increase the headcount to properly balance the Court. Those are the legitimate ways to challenge these rulings based on the checks and balances in our governmental design.

That would require Democrats to vote with high turnout for Senate and House elections.

That would require Democrats to vote with high turnout for Senate and House elections.

Instead we'll give them a razor thin majority and complain when they don't pass sweeping legislation that requires the GOP to sign on to.

Right. Lieberman screwed single-payer healthcare, therefore all of the Democrats in Congress were useless.

Oh no! A bad precedent. Wouldn't want to have one of those. Surely precedent will protect us from having reproductive rights stolen, or declaring the president a king, or declaring the regulatory state invalid. The fascists are already on the march and have demonstrated they're willing to trash precedent without the Democrats making the first move.

But none of that matters. Is this an existential issue or not? If it is, a constitutional crisis is warranted to solve it. You can't say something is existential and then worry about not doing anything too extreme.

Its long overdue for the Democrats to take some extreme measures. Without the opposing forces we'll certainly not be a republic by November. I'm ready to protest en masse. Shit I'll help plan.

Starting collective action has always been the big stumbling block for the left-of-center in America. Europeans would riot for far less. We need more unions and unions willing to be political to help act as a nucleus for mass protests to say they can't just do whatever they want. People should believe they have power other than just voting or signing a petition.

The Supreme Court made bribery semi-legal, elevated allied presidents to kings, and dismantled the regulations that do most of the heavy lifting to keep our air and water clean. While I concur with many Democrats correct statements about how bad these rulings are, they should be leading people to the streets. Hell, the three dissenting judges should be going before the senate to explain how antithetical to American democracy the most recent ruling is. Stop pretending the system is working when it's in freefall with no correction in sight.

Making the Judicial branch unelected lifetime appointments has proven to be a massive failure.