340
Anyone else get a minor heart attack reading those first four words for a post at the very top of your feed?
Felt the deep pit in my stomach seeing “Elena Kagan.” Then read the rest and went back to being sleepy eyed.
At least, if it were to happen, Dems still have the Senate and Presidency this time around.
If there was a Supreme Court vacancy right now and the Republicans were pulling some kind of shenanigan to prevent a new one being seated until after the election, that'd be the greatest gift they could possibly give to the Democrats. That would mean that the election was very obviously going to decide the fate of the Supreme Court, which would bring out tons of voters that might have stayed home.
Whereas if Biden was to seat a new Supreme Court judge right now, and then Trump won, it's not like the Supreme Court would matter anyway.
Oh my little child. We're so far past that.
That scenario has already been played out and the Republicans won.
Yes, which is why it should light a fire under the voters. The Democrats can literally point to the previous example and say "look, this is exactly what will happen if the Republicans win."
Manchen is a traitor
Felt the deep pit in my stomach
It's depressing how I went from not understanding this expression, to feeling it nearly every time I checked the headlines starting in November of 2016.
Exactly! Scared the bejesus out of me.
"Supreme Court of the"?
Scotus is one word. I believe it's a disease of some sort
I feel like any such reform will be challenged and go to them, SCOTUS, for approval. Anyone wanna wager how that’ll turn out!?
I'll take the layup: 6-3 against
I’m not sure it can. It would be Congress and the president. The Supreme Court wouldn’t be able to overrule, that’s the whole point of the separate branches split the way they are
How did they overturn the other laws then?
Fun fact, the Constitution doesn't actually say that the US Supreme Court has the ability to interpret the Constitution. That power was granted to the Supreme Court by the Supreme Court in their decision on Marbury v. Madison (1803).
A classic example of how there's actually no such thing as laws or rules in any objective sense, it's just a bunch of people collectively agreeing to go along with stuff.
They ruled on the interpretation of the law. Congress can pass laws to avoid different interpretations as long as they aren't unconstitutional (which causes a problem if you have a very conservative understanding of the constitution).
the supreme court airbud rule: there's no rule against it, yet. The only thing the constitution says is that there's a supreme court and they can't be defunded or fired easily. It doesn't say what they do or how they do it. Congress could easily pass a law stripping the supreme court of powers or even throwing endless wrenches in the process.
This is coming from one of the conservative justices, right? Right?
Lol of course it isn't. Surprise, surprise.
this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2024
340 points (99.4% liked)
News
39162 readers
1524 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS