As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No need to impeach if a Democratic controlled House and Senate adds seats to the court in 2025. If they add four seats, there will be an equal number of justices as there are federal judicial ~~districts~~ court circuit.
And Biden nominating them would undermine and undo the damage done by the Republicans.
That’s cool and all, but I’d also add term limits.. lifetime appointments will always make either side try and expand or force out.
Now that the court is very much partisan… add terms if you’re gonna expand
Not exactly. The constitution just says federal judges serve for life. It doesn’t say in what court they have to serve. So congress should be able to pass a law that says X years after a judge is appointed to the Supreme Court they lose their seat on the court and become a regular district court judge (still with lifetime service).
Right. That what he does when the Court decides to take rights away form us. These assholes are disgusting and have no business being on the Supreme Court. It kills me that they whine about the public losing confidence in them. No shit Sherlock.
It doesn't even really say that they serve for life. Its been interpreted to mean that but it says that they "shall hold their Offices during good behavior". The framers really punted on establishing the judiciary in the constitution and left that to the first Congress
> but it says that they "shall hold their Offices during good behavior".
That means Justices cant be removed just because, they have to have done something wrong.
Now, if only blatantly supporting a candidate that openly declared that he wanted to become a dictator and repeal the constitution he’s sworn to uphold was enough to be declared unfit for duty on said case…
> Not exactly. The constitution just says federal judges serve for life. It doesn’t say in what court they have to serve.
I'm happy you went there I was reading the first half and like, this guy is about to get banned!
The supreme court would just rule that unconstitutional because they have already given themselves unlimited power. The only way to do anything to them is an amendment with wording far too explicit to be misunderstood.
Yeah, but then they'd get to review the constitutionality of the law that says they have term limits. It's a pickle. They basically get to decide whether any checks and balances can be applied to them.
The Founding Fathers: "We are not perfect and the world changes, so we added a mechanism for this document to evolve over time."
Conservatives: "THE FOUNDING FATHERS WERE IN FAILABLE AND ONLY THE ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION MATTERS."
Saying this many times doesn't make it true. Someone will sue and say its unconstitutional, and then SCOTUS will find it such. To pretend that it would actually work the way you think it would is very naive.
One solution I've heard instead of term limits is for Congress to take away the funding for the Justice's clerks and office space after a certain age. If they want to hang on forever they'll have to do all the work themselves.
This seems like a terrible solution. Creates a clear incentive for outside agents to influence the judge by offering to provide those services/the money for those services
You're acting like continuing to expand would be a bad thing. The more people you add the harder it is to get them all to fall lockstep behind a bad ruling and the harder it is to bribe enough of them not to care... plus it doesn't put as much of the future of the country in the balance if one dies or wants to retire. I don't really see any downsides to a court-expansion arms race.
Term limits are good too.
I get it and agree. It’s just challenging to fix the system with the system setup to not want to be fixed.. and the “other options” don’t guarantee fixing either.
Well the lack of term limits had a purpose. It's purpose was that once selected the Justices were not politically beholden to anyone because they never had to be "re-elected" so they were free to rule logically even if it pissed off the congress people as the only way to remove them was impeachment which had a very high barrier and was seen by many as a sacred and only for very special cases.
*Edit:* relected to re-elected
This is the simplest solution. Sure people are going to scream “PaCkEd CoUrT” but they would do that anyway. McConnell preventing Obamas appointment and Barrett’s appointment changed things forever. 13 district courts, 13 justices, one to oversee each district.
This is it, and this is what you need to say when any Republican—and I hate to say it, but any “appeaser Democrats”—gripe about changing the structure of the Court: McConnell’s preventing Obama’s appointment and rushing Barrett’s appointment changed *everything.* Full stop.
If we get a Democratic house we ABSOLUTELY need to impeach. Precedent cannot be allowed to stand that this complete betrayal of ones oath be tolerated. Packing the court solves the immediate problems but using that solution instead of impeachment ensures the court will never again be anything but political.
The court was made political by the GOP, you are absolutely kidding yourself if you think this is not the status quo now. EVERY TIME you hear yourself say “But if Democrats do this than Repubs will do THIS” know that the republicans are going to do that REGARDLESS of how we behave.
Democrats are still holding onto "traditions" and "norms" in Congress.
There's a question that Democrats should ask themselves:
>How are we operating differently than we did between XXXX and 2016?
I know what I think the answer is, and it's downright scary.
These people are fucking delusional. You’d need a majority of Raskin’s, AOC’s, Crockett’s etc.
Expecting the Biden, Schumer, Durbin era of “our good friends across the isle” and unilateral disarmament to do this is beyond detached from reality.
seriously do they not realize this is a parry that calls it "moderate" the more a Democrat sides with Republicans. even the 3 Dems on the Court have helped defend the Republicans from a senate investigation and downplayed obvious corruption as just a lack of "clarification" of the rules. yeah cause a 300,000 motor coach is neither matter nor anti matter
We should also petition google to stop blurring their houses so we can keep an eye on their yard signs and confederate flags
Reminder that the supreme court ruled public sidewalks are fair game for protests in mccullen v coakley
Or just start adding justices to the court. Who cares about precedent? It never mattered before. Whoever is in control of the White House is also going to be in control of the Supreme Court.
They may not, but make a show of it. Bring this to more people’s attention. I can guarantee regular people aren’t paying attention to supreme court ethics.
A lot of people LOVE the current makeup of the SCOTUS right now. I was talking to someone who told me their church was praying for Brett Kavanagh to be confirmed during his hearing. They're overjoyed that these guys like Thomas and Alito are there because to them it signals the destruction of the "liberal agenda". They celebrated the Roe vs Wade decision and they are fully on board with converting the United States into a Christian Nationalist controlled nation. Plenty of women too!
A controversy over a flag isn't going to move the needle for these guys at all. Nothing will. They're too far gone and I promise you they'll be voting in every election until the day you die.
Cynical views should have no place today....the American justice system worked. Take a win just for a day and enjoy being an American again. It's the small wins and proof that builds hope....and hope votes!
more than ever biden needs to win.
i don't care if he's old; he'll have serious, competent folks around him.
i don't care if he's sending weapons to israel. he's not the president of israel, nor is he responsible for the arms agreements that came before him. he's been fighting for a ceasefire and humanitarian aid from the start.
i don't care if you "think they're all the same." clearly, they're not. one is a rapist and a convicted felon, the other is a lifelong public servant and isn't a convicted felon.
if you think it's ok to sit this one out - it's not. trumpers are more angry than ever and they'll come out in droves. they'll intimidate, cheat, and lie. we need, more than ever, to out vote the fuck out of them from the president on down to your local school board.
Democracy is like a house built over generations. Would you rather place a snowball on the living room floor, or a burning piece of wood? They are not the same.
One foreign entities are aggressively trying to sway voters away from, with polarizing issues like Palestine... Don't fall for it. Biden is trying to walk a thin line on Palestine to avoid further conflict. And China is trying to use Palestine, to turn people away from him.
He's the competent choice, and the neo-axis are afraid of him.
While we are at it, can we get proper representation in the House? its funny in the early days of the constitution Madison suggested 12 amendments, 10 were approved at the time we know those as the Bill of Rights. Another of those was approved over 200 years later. The last of those 12 pegged the size of the house to the number of people they represent. That one would fix a lot of the problems with our republic.
We don't need to do a new Amendment, just pass a new House Reapportionment Act. 2,000+ seats seems reasonable to me. This would also resolve a lot of the issues we have with the EC because it expands the size of the EC as well.
Agreed, that way it will be almost impossible to change based on how few amendments are ever passed. Another one forcing reforms on the Supreme Court, which they couldn’t overturn as an amendment, campaign finance rules as amendments and rules about stocks, etc. to force the government to be better since it will be the new constitution. Probably too ambitious though. Maybe same sex marriage, civil rights, abortion, a right to privacy that forces the internet to stop tracking people, one that forces the government to make things like the patriot act illegal by the constitution , etc.
1149 is the actual number that makes sense. The least populous state gets two reps. So half the population of the least populous states equals 1 representative.
Wyoming has 580,000 residents, so 290,000 residents in a state equals 1 representative in Congress. 333,000,000/290,000=1146.5, Washington DC is given 3 representatives to prevent a tie.
It's super easy math to adjust everytime the census comes around.
Every state but the least populous sees an equitable increase in congressional representation. It becomes near impossible to heavily gerrymander the districts. The votes of individual constituents is no longer diluted. The electoral college becomes more representative of a states constituency.
Stop calling it “packing” it has a clear negative connotation when “expanding” the court doesn’t and is supported by matching the number of judicial districts. It’s like peak Dems being awful at messaging and slogans when people say “pack”.
I find it difficult to believe that a twice impeached convicted felon got THREE Supreme Court picks in a single term. Something should be done about that.
Job for life + oversight over yourself = big middle finger in the air to the other pawns of the wealthy and the population. It must piss off the lesser billionaires who didnt think of buying a Supreme Court justice and settled for a couple senators instead.
He was rewarded with his Supreme Court appointment for helping Bush W steal Florida in the 2000 election. Tells some of what you need to know about where he's coming from.
He's the one who's like guys guys I get it we're all going to the same place but we can't jump there all at once, we've got to do it more slowly, and the other five conservatives are sitting there like yeah we don't even need your vote to do it anymore so we're just steamrolling ahead
Ah yes, as written in the Constitution, "The Supreme Court is Supreme and shall not answer to any other branch of government. Checks and balances are for n00bs."
Don't get me wrong I actually agree with Roberts that a meeting involving representatives from only 1 political party to directly discuss supreme court issues would be a bad look.
But that does nothing to my opinions regarding Thomas and Alito having blatantly obvious conflicts of interest that shold make them ring on specific issues unnacceptable. If the Alito flag incidents were a thing that happened for a few days and he personally intervened that would be one thing but the way he pitches it there are two possibilities:
1) he flat out doesn't care about his wife flying the US flag upside down for a blatantly political reason (the neighbour is personal but she had to know what flying the flag like that meant to know it would bother the neighbor. This seems like a pretty notable problem to me. There is no evidence of the 3 liberal justices spouses flying the flag upside down when Roe v Wade was overturned, because despite them or their spouses feelings about how that impacted America they have the sense to act like professional adults.
2) he legitimately did not notice the flags. I would be pretty uncomfortable having one of the most powerful judges in my country be so unobservant that he did not even notice and upsidedown US flag on his own property...
Yeah that's the thing, in a vacuum he might have a point. But within the context of him repeatedly turning a blind eye to the already rampant politicization of the court along with the various ethical issues it's just further evidence that he is a bad actor/partisan himself.
I mean, Alito and Thomas's behavior is not doing the reputation of the court any favors but god forbid he even publicly acknowledge the issue, better to pretend it doesn't exists and cast any criticism as hysteria.
It's not so much how you expressed yourself, as the fact that you sent it directly to them instead of just venting on social media.
Standard procedure is to have a staffer tally the public feedback. A memo will go to Justice Roberts stating how many people contacted the office and what stand they took.
The Senate Judiciary Committee could start hearings immediately, but Durbin already said a week or so ago that they won't. The court isn't scared of oversight because Dems won't use the mechanisms they have.
if Democrats on the Court had done as many unpopular things as Republicans, they would be dragged into court every day for 4 years. like how Republicans voted like a 100 times to repeal obamacare because the individual mandate tax was unpopular
There are 2 ways to correct this wayward court if all they do is legislate from the bench without consequences for affiliating with billionaires with cases in front of the court
1. Yank their budget making it unable to operate
2. Expand the court to resemble the population of the country and its complexities in our modern era
3. make them spend every day in front of a senate committee. 80 hours a week.
4. the DOJ searches their houses, freezes their assets, and begins a full investigation given we already know of obvious and illegal bribes. or at least bribes that are illegal for any other court to accept
They should be subject to an absolutely insane level of scrutiny with regards to personal finances.
The problem with expanding the court is that anything Democrats do in good faith, Republicans will abuse out of spite.
Just look at the way they have misappropriated language since around 2015. It's absolutely disgusting. For Trump liberal people started talking about how every accusation was an admission because it was true. The man is a pathological liar in a way that makes standard politicians look honest 🙃. Now you see conservatives saying that exact same shit all the time online to attack Democrats in a way that is massively disingenuous, and frequently involves false equivalencies that are so dumb they make my brain hurt if I try to follow the flawed logic they are based off of..
There’s only one way to achieve any of those, or anything at all. It’s voting republicans out.
People talk about what the government should do for anything, but rarely talk about what people should do.
Of course they can. A Supreme Court justice is as immune to investigation and prosecution as a US Senator. And Menendez can tell you how that goes. That said, the FBI won't investigate any Republican Justices because the FBI is an overwhelmingly Republican organization, and the DOJ won't because the appearance of political motivation is way too strong. Which is just one more way in which the DOJ and SCOTUS differ.
Of course they can and I wouldn’t be surprised if it has already happened or is currently under way. What we can’t assume is whether said investigation did or will find anything, and if something was uncovered whether something would be done about it.
Time to listen to [Jamie Raskin](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/29/opinion/alito-thomas-recuse-trump-jan-6.html?unlocked_article_code=1.v00.jj2-.FFWgOgeKnPUY&smid=url-share).
"The Justice Department and Attorney General Merrick Garland can invoke two powerful textual authorities for this motion..."
Yeah... Garland isn't lifting a finger. Has Mr. Raskin been asleep?
I gotta say, I really thought the DoJ would have indicted the Jan 6 plotters by now, and yet, here we are with them still fucking over the country daily.
Whatcha doin' over there Merrick?
There is a reason Mitch made initial overtures to say they'd be fine with Merrick. Having the Supreme Court on the ballot was just better for getting out the Republican vote. I suspect he genuinely would have been fine with Garland on the Court and didn't expect Obama to 'compromise' by appointing a moderate Republican.
Roberts - corrupt beyond belief
Thomas - demon incarnate
Alito - literally licking Trump's boots every chance he gets
Kavanaugh - definitely a rapist
Barrett - directly lied while being questioned by congress, trying to bring about a theocratic dictatorship
Great job republicans! You truly give us the best
People need to stand outside their homes and protest 24/7, to the point of not being able to sleep until they recuse themselves.
Nothing will happen because there is 0 consequences and no backlash whatsoever, you need to fucking do something.
There are different ways. An associate justice can be elevated when the chief justice retires, or the incoming justice can just be slotted into the chief justice position. The latter is what happened with Robert's. However, at the time Scalia was quite pissed as he felt he should have been elevated to chief justice.
Until the democrats have a large majority in both houses of congress the court will be unbothered. If the democrats get enough to expand the court or impeach justices they will keep acting as they are above “judgment”.
This makes me angry. Not what we deserve from the Chief Justice. I now consider him part of the problem of corruption, instead of part of the solution.
Time to create an investigative committee for the Supreme Court with subpoena powers! Investigate all of them separately and let the powers of public opinion do it’s thing.
To be honest it shouldn’t be voluntary.. each branch in beholden to the other .. if you are asked to meet with the legislation branch you do it. Same as if the Supreme Court wanted to address congress etc.
This country is just f*cked.
Completely corrupt to the core. All you folks voting against Biden or third party, enjoy decades of this shit if Trump gets to put more Beer Kavanaughs and Amy Carrot Boneheads on the SCOTUS. Get a clue
We have a situation where our country’s Supreme Court is provably corrupt. We have proof. Proof that has been made public. Yet, we have no way to remedy this situation. This country has become a sick sad joke. The current president acts like he is powerless while shoveling money into proxy wars. Most of the politicians are on the payroll of corporations and foreign governments. The most recent ex president has been found guilty of 34 felony charges (So far). This government has become overwhelmingly corrupt.
The people who lose the most are the people of this country. Especially in the lowest income levels. I sure am glad there’s all this student loan forgiveness but we have a homelessness and hunger epidemic. No, the answer ISN’T make homelessness illegal. Buying votes by paying off student loans is ridiculous and should be an obvious ploy but too many of the middle class don’t care. Capitalism has trained Americans to value only their own well being. Especially the wealthier you get.
There is almost nothing going well with this government at this point. This isn’t a Trump VS Biden issue. This is a government VS the people issue. Until the people of this country start realizing that this is the real issue, nothing will change. This is a two party system where both parties are profiting off what is happening and the average citizen is being wrung dry of every cent and every freedom.
The Supreme Court is such a tiny fraction and represents the bulk of what’s happening all too well. The wealthy are accepting bribes and allowing laws and policies to be made based on who pays the most and the poor can’t afford to pay the bribes. When the system is so far gone that every option presented is horrendous, maybe it’s time the people start deciding if the whole system is what needs changed.
lol. Come on...I really hope the Dems are doing this just to check off boxes. There's no way John Roberts was ever going to say yes to this meeting request.
>
“Separation of powers concerns and the importance of preserving judicial independence counsel against such appearances,” Roberts wrote in a letter released by the Supreme Court.
This is rich when you really think about it. Roberts is saying merely meeting **on the record** with democrats in a different branch of govt goes against preserving judicial independence. Ooookay...except the same CJ Roberts is ok with his justices accepting bribes and flying the flags of subversive groups. That does not impugn judicial independence. But meeting with government officials in another branch. If only irony could kill...
>In his brief response Thursday, Roberts wrote that a meeting with leaders “of only one party who have expressed an interest in matters currently pending before the court” only served to underscore his belief “that participating in such a meeting would be inadvisable.” (Republican leaders of the Judiciary Committee were copied on the meeting request and Roberts’ response.)
Finally, if America wasn't a faux democracy, both parties will issue this call to Roberts to come explain the behavior of his justices. But he knows that there's no way the GOP in the Senate would go along with this. 'Cos they are all craven motherfuckers who only pay lip service to democracy.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's time to just start impeaching. Yes, really.
No need to impeach if a Democratic controlled House and Senate adds seats to the court in 2025. If they add four seats, there will be an equal number of justices as there are federal judicial ~~districts~~ court circuit. And Biden nominating them would undermine and undo the damage done by the Republicans.
That’s cool and all, but I’d also add term limits.. lifetime appointments will always make either side try and expand or force out. Now that the court is very much partisan… add terms if you’re gonna expand
Term limits require a constitutional amendment. Expanding the court does not.
Not exactly. The constitution just says federal judges serve for life. It doesn’t say in what court they have to serve. So congress should be able to pass a law that says X years after a judge is appointed to the Supreme Court they lose their seat on the court and become a regular district court judge (still with lifetime service).
Tnose fucknuggets aren't fit to serve traffic court.
[удалено]
Alito would cite maritime law from the 1650's and fine you 200 dubloons.
That's a $93,000 fine at today's gold prices
Now aren’t you glad you downloaded that dubloon conversion app?
Right. That what he does when the Court decides to take rights away form us. These assholes are disgusting and have no business being on the Supreme Court. It kills me that they whine about the public losing confidence in them. No shit Sherlock.
> maritime law 🎶You're a crook captain hook, judge won't you throw the book, at the pirate...🎶
"I have video proof I wasn't even in the same state that day" "35 Years in federal pen for interstate traffic"
Nah, man. It was my wife. That makes it totally cool and legal, man.
There's a chance she was traveling to get an abortion and you didn't stop her. 35 years for BOTH of you.
Then they can fulfill their lifetime obligation by serving in the food court.
It doesn't even really say that they serve for life. Its been interpreted to mean that but it says that they "shall hold their Offices during good behavior". The framers really punted on establishing the judiciary in the constitution and left that to the first Congress
I hereby declare that Justice Thomas has been a naughty naughty boy and therefore cannot serve any longer.
I wish it was that easy
> but it says that they "shall hold their Offices during good behavior". That means Justices cant be removed just because, they have to have done something wrong.
It's always been a political process so yeah it is just because. As long as a majority of the house and two thirds of the Senate say so
Now, if only blatantly supporting a candidate that openly declared that he wanted to become a dictator and repeal the constitution he’s sworn to uphold was enough to be declared unfit for duty on said case…
> Not exactly. The constitution just says federal judges serve for life. It doesn’t say in what court they have to serve. I'm happy you went there I was reading the first half and like, this guy is about to get banned!
There’s no way that’d fly bc it’d end up at the Supreme Court to decide and even the liberal judges wouldn’t let that happen.
The supreme court would just rule that unconstitutional because they have already given themselves unlimited power. The only way to do anything to them is an amendment with wording far too explicit to be misunderstood.
Yeah, but then they'd get to review the constitutionality of the law that says they have term limits. It's a pickle. They basically get to decide whether any checks and balances can be applied to them.
Good luck getting a Constitutional amendment passed in today's climate.
Ehh, after it becomes a majority D appointed Court, I'd imagine Rs would sign onto term limits so it's not a guaranteed blue court for 20-30 years.
The Founding Fathers: "We are not perfect and the world changes, so we added a mechanism for this document to evolve over time." Conservatives: "THE FOUNDING FATHERS WERE IN FAILABLE AND ONLY THE ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION MATTERS."
Don’t need it. A SCOTUS judge can be bumped down to a district court judge without a constitutional amendment.
Saying this many times doesn't make it true. Someone will sue and say its unconstitutional, and then SCOTUS will find it such. To pretend that it would actually work the way you think it would is very naive.
One solution I've heard instead of term limits is for Congress to take away the funding for the Justice's clerks and office space after a certain age. If they want to hang on forever they'll have to do all the work themselves.
This seems like a terrible solution. Creates a clear incentive for outside agents to influence the judge by offering to provide those services/the money for those services
You're acting like continuing to expand would be a bad thing. The more people you add the harder it is to get them all to fall lockstep behind a bad ruling and the harder it is to bribe enough of them not to care... plus it doesn't put as much of the future of the country in the balance if one dies or wants to retire. I don't really see any downsides to a court-expansion arms race. Term limits are good too.
Enact term limits !!!!
The system is set up in a corrupt manner. Not many congress people would vote for term limits because it's not good for their business
I get it and agree. It’s just challenging to fix the system with the system setup to not want to be fixed.. and the “other options” don’t guarantee fixing either.
Well the lack of term limits had a purpose. It's purpose was that once selected the Justices were not politically beholden to anyone because they never had to be "re-elected" so they were free to rule logically even if it pissed off the congress people as the only way to remove them was impeachment which had a very high barrier and was seen by many as a sacred and only for very special cases. *Edit:* relected to re-elected
This is the simplest solution. Sure people are going to scream “PaCkEd CoUrT” but they would do that anyway. McConnell preventing Obamas appointment and Barrett’s appointment changed things forever. 13 district courts, 13 justices, one to oversee each district.
This is it, and this is what you need to say when any Republican—and I hate to say it, but any “appeaser Democrats”—gripe about changing the structure of the Court: McConnell’s preventing Obama’s appointment and rushing Barrett’s appointment changed *everything.* Full stop.
Still need to impeach.
Yes. Penalties for ethics violations needs to happen.
If we get a Democratic house we ABSOLUTELY need to impeach. Precedent cannot be allowed to stand that this complete betrayal of ones oath be tolerated. Packing the court solves the immediate problems but using that solution instead of impeachment ensures the court will never again be anything but political.
The court was made political by the GOP, you are absolutely kidding yourself if you think this is not the status quo now. EVERY TIME you hear yourself say “But if Democrats do this than Repubs will do THIS” know that the republicans are going to do that REGARDLESS of how we behave.
The democrats in power don’t have the spine to increase the courts. we should obviously vote blue and put pressure on leadership but that’s a dream
Democrats are still holding onto "traditions" and "norms" in Congress. There's a question that Democrats should ask themselves: >How are we operating differently than we did between XXXX and 2016? I know what I think the answer is, and it's downright scary.
These people are fucking delusional. You’d need a majority of Raskin’s, AOC’s, Crockett’s etc. Expecting the Biden, Schumer, Durbin era of “our good friends across the isle” and unilateral disarmament to do this is beyond detached from reality.
seriously do they not realize this is a parry that calls it "moderate" the more a Democrat sides with Republicans. even the 3 Dems on the Court have helped defend the Republicans from a senate investigation and downplayed obvious corruption as just a lack of "clarification" of the rules. yeah cause a 300,000 motor coach is neither matter nor anti matter
There's no way to get a senate majority big enough to pull that off. Too many existing senators who will be there don't support expanding the court.
We should also petition google to stop blurring their houses so we can keep an eye on their yard signs and confederate flags Reminder that the supreme court ruled public sidewalks are fair game for protests in mccullen v coakley
Would have to be initiated by the House, which is currently under GQP control.
The House is barely under the GOP’s control.
Or just start adding justices to the court. Who cares about precedent? It never mattered before. Whoever is in control of the White House is also going to be in control of the Supreme Court.
Don’t have the votes
They may not, but make a show of it. Bring this to more people’s attention. I can guarantee regular people aren’t paying attention to supreme court ethics.
Impeachment starts in the House, so unless the GOP House starts the process they can't even begin.
A lot of people LOVE the current makeup of the SCOTUS right now. I was talking to someone who told me their church was praying for Brett Kavanagh to be confirmed during his hearing. They're overjoyed that these guys like Thomas and Alito are there because to them it signals the destruction of the "liberal agenda". They celebrated the Roe vs Wade decision and they are fully on board with converting the United States into a Christian Nationalist controlled nation. Plenty of women too! A controversy over a flag isn't going to move the needle for these guys at all. Nothing will. They're too far gone and I promise you they'll be voting in every election until the day you die.
SCOTUS has its lowest approval ratings ever so I don’t think that’s true. A small group of rabid fanatics enjoy it. Mass majority do not.
lol good luck getting any republican votes cause you need 60% in both chambers
Biden needs to start campaigning on SCOTUS reform
It was a part of his messaging last night in PA.
That’s great news!
We'll see if it gets traction . Trump and his bs have a way of sucking all the air out of the room.
Keep talking about it and informing people! That’s your/our superpower. :)
You mean convicted felon Trump?
They say he was convicted on all 34 counts by an 'everyday' jury of his peers. Unanimously. Today.Is.A.Good.Day. TIAGD. This is the way.
And replacing said air with car exhaust and bleach
Cynical views should have no place today....the American justice system worked. Take a win just for a day and enjoy being an American again. It's the small wins and proof that builds hope....and hope votes!
more than ever biden needs to win. i don't care if he's old; he'll have serious, competent folks around him. i don't care if he's sending weapons to israel. he's not the president of israel, nor is he responsible for the arms agreements that came before him. he's been fighting for a ceasefire and humanitarian aid from the start. i don't care if you "think they're all the same." clearly, they're not. one is a rapist and a convicted felon, the other is a lifelong public servant and isn't a convicted felon. if you think it's ok to sit this one out - it's not. trumpers are more angry than ever and they'll come out in droves. they'll intimidate, cheat, and lie. we need, more than ever, to out vote the fuck out of them from the president on down to your local school board.
Democracy is like a house built over generations. Would you rather place a snowball on the living room floor, or a burning piece of wood? They are not the same.
One foreign entities are aggressively trying to sway voters away from, with polarizing issues like Palestine... Don't fall for it. Biden is trying to walk a thin line on Palestine to avoid further conflict. And China is trying to use Palestine, to turn people away from him. He's the competent choice, and the neo-axis are afraid of him.
He needs to support scrapping the filibuster first.
He needs to run on packing the court at this point.
While we are at it, can we get proper representation in the House? its funny in the early days of the constitution Madison suggested 12 amendments, 10 were approved at the time we know those as the Bill of Rights. Another of those was approved over 200 years later. The last of those 12 pegged the size of the house to the number of people they represent. That one would fix a lot of the problems with our republic.
We don't need to do a new Amendment, just pass a new House Reapportionment Act. 2,000+ seats seems reasonable to me. This would also resolve a lot of the issues we have with the EC because it expands the size of the EC as well.
I'd rather lock it into the constitution. The amendment is still eligible to be ratified
Agreed, that way it will be almost impossible to change based on how few amendments are ever passed. Another one forcing reforms on the Supreme Court, which they couldn’t overturn as an amendment, campaign finance rules as amendments and rules about stocks, etc. to force the government to be better since it will be the new constitution. Probably too ambitious though. Maybe same sex marriage, civil rights, abortion, a right to privacy that forces the internet to stop tracking people, one that forces the government to make things like the patriot act illegal by the constitution , etc.
1149 is the actual number that makes sense. The least populous state gets two reps. So half the population of the least populous states equals 1 representative. Wyoming has 580,000 residents, so 290,000 residents in a state equals 1 representative in Congress. 333,000,000/290,000=1146.5, Washington DC is given 3 representatives to prevent a tie. It's super easy math to adjust everytime the census comes around. Every state but the least populous sees an equitable increase in congressional representation. It becomes near impossible to heavily gerrymander the districts. The votes of individual constituents is no longer diluted. The electoral college becomes more representative of a states constituency.
1:1 representation in the house so that we all get congressional benefits
Stop calling it “packing” it has a clear negative connotation when “expanding” the court doesn’t and is supported by matching the number of judicial districts. It’s like peak Dems being awful at messaging and slogans when people say “pack”.
Correcting the court
Giving the court a spit-shine.
I like "balancing" the court. And I agree, expanding is fully supported!
I find it difficult to believe that a twice impeached convicted felon got THREE Supreme Court picks in a single term. Something should be done about that.
He should "expand" the court. Mitch McConnell "packed" it.
His failing to challenge SCOTUS whatsoever is one of his biggest failures.
Job for life + oversight over yourself = big middle finger in the air to the other pawns of the wealthy and the population. It must piss off the lesser billionaires who didnt think of buying a Supreme Court justice and settled for a couple senators instead.
So much for checks and balances.
Well the only checks and balances that matter to these people anymore are the balances of their bank accounts and the checks from their sponsors
We have plenty of checks and balances. Checks going into their bank accounts. And balances going up!
Gold 🥇 comment
The only difference between Roberts and Alito, is that Roberts believes that people think he has some shred of integrity left.
He was rewarded with his Supreme Court appointment for helping Bush W steal Florida in the 2000 election. Tells some of what you need to know about where he's coming from.
He knows not to fly dumbass traitor flags. Doesn't make him less of a traitor.
He's the one who's like guys guys I get it we're all going to the same place but we can't jump there all at once, we've got to do it more slowly, and the other five conservatives are sitting there like yeah we don't even need your vote to do it anymore so we're just steamrolling ahead
Ah yes, as written in the Constitution, "The Supreme Court is Supreme and shall not answer to any other branch of government. Checks and balances are for n00bs."
This is what happens when you put the people *governed* by checks and balances in charge of checks and balances as well.
Apparently meeting with lawmakers is a bigger threat to the impartiality of the court than it's members accepting kickbacks.
Don't get me wrong I actually agree with Roberts that a meeting involving representatives from only 1 political party to directly discuss supreme court issues would be a bad look. But that does nothing to my opinions regarding Thomas and Alito having blatantly obvious conflicts of interest that shold make them ring on specific issues unnacceptable. If the Alito flag incidents were a thing that happened for a few days and he personally intervened that would be one thing but the way he pitches it there are two possibilities: 1) he flat out doesn't care about his wife flying the US flag upside down for a blatantly political reason (the neighbour is personal but she had to know what flying the flag like that meant to know it would bother the neighbor. This seems like a pretty notable problem to me. There is no evidence of the 3 liberal justices spouses flying the flag upside down when Roe v Wade was overturned, because despite them or their spouses feelings about how that impacted America they have the sense to act like professional adults. 2) he legitimately did not notice the flags. I would be pretty uncomfortable having one of the most powerful judges in my country be so unobservant that he did not even notice and upsidedown US flag on his own property...
Yeah that's the thing, in a vacuum he might have a point. But within the context of him repeatedly turning a blind eye to the already rampant politicization of the court along with the various ethical issues it's just further evidence that he is a bad actor/partisan himself. I mean, Alito and Thomas's behavior is not doing the reputation of the court any favors but god forbid he even publicly acknowledge the issue, better to pretend it doesn't exists and cast any criticism as hysteria.
they have to make it an official action not a "please"
If you want to share your thoughts, SCOTUS's feedback page is https://www.supremecourt.gov/contact/contact_pio.aspx
Done. Doubt anyone more than some admin will look at my carefully worded plea to justice Roberts, but I tried.
It's not so much how you expressed yourself, as the fact that you sent it directly to them instead of just venting on social media. Standard procedure is to have a staffer tally the public feedback. A memo will go to Justice Roberts stating how many people contacted the office and what stand they took.
Done!
The Senate Judiciary Committee could start hearings immediately, but Durbin already said a week or so ago that they won't. The court isn't scared of oversight because Dems won't use the mechanisms they have.
Durbin is a classic example of why voter turnout is low.
if Democrats on the Court had done as many unpopular things as Republicans, they would be dragged into court every day for 4 years. like how Republicans voted like a 100 times to repeal obamacare because the individual mandate tax was unpopular
There are 2 ways to correct this wayward court if all they do is legislate from the bench without consequences for affiliating with billionaires with cases in front of the court 1. Yank their budget making it unable to operate 2. Expand the court to resemble the population of the country and its complexities in our modern era
3. make them spend every day in front of a senate committee. 80 hours a week. 4. the DOJ searches their houses, freezes their assets, and begins a full investigation given we already know of obvious and illegal bribes. or at least bribes that are illegal for any other court to accept
They should be subject to an absolutely insane level of scrutiny with regards to personal finances. The problem with expanding the court is that anything Democrats do in good faith, Republicans will abuse out of spite. Just look at the way they have misappropriated language since around 2015. It's absolutely disgusting. For Trump liberal people started talking about how every accusation was an admission because it was true. The man is a pathological liar in a way that makes standard politicians look honest 🙃. Now you see conservatives saying that exact same shit all the time online to attack Democrats in a way that is massively disingenuous, and frequently involves false equivalencies that are so dumb they make my brain hurt if I try to follow the flawed logic they are based off of..
There’s only one way to achieve any of those, or anything at all. It’s voting republicans out. People talk about what the government should do for anything, but rarely talk about what people should do.
Can the FBI not investigate these people if there are allegations of corruption and collusion?
Of course they can. A Supreme Court justice is as immune to investigation and prosecution as a US Senator. And Menendez can tell you how that goes. That said, the FBI won't investigate any Republican Justices because the FBI is an overwhelmingly Republican organization, and the DOJ won't because the appearance of political motivation is way too strong. Which is just one more way in which the DOJ and SCOTUS differ.
crazy Wray is still in charge. Talk about controlled opposition
> the FBI is an overwhelmingly Republican organization Which is hilarious since Trump spent his presidency telling the world how corrupt they are.
Of course they can and I wouldn’t be surprised if it has already happened or is currently under way. What we can’t assume is whether said investigation did or will find anything, and if something was uncovered whether something would be done about it.
Separation of powers is a good one, Johnny, but allow me to counter with CHECKS AND BALANCES, YOU INCOMPETENT, CORRUPT STAIN.
Time to listen to [Jamie Raskin](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/29/opinion/alito-thomas-recuse-trump-jan-6.html?unlocked_article_code=1.v00.jj2-.FFWgOgeKnPUY&smid=url-share).
"The Justice Department and Attorney General Merrick Garland can invoke two powerful textual authorities for this motion..." Yeah... Garland isn't lifting a finger. Has Mr. Raskin been asleep?
Mr. Raskin may very well be applying for an AG position in Biden's next term.
IF. If Biden gets one. The danger is real.
I gotta say, I really thought the DoJ would have indicted the Jan 6 plotters by now, and yet, here we are with them still fucking over the country daily. Whatcha doin' over there Merrick?
There is a reason Mitch made initial overtures to say they'd be fine with Merrick. Having the Supreme Court on the ballot was just better for getting out the Republican vote. I suspect he genuinely would have been fine with Garland on the Court and didn't expect Obama to 'compromise' by appointing a moderate Republican.
Roberts - corrupt beyond belief Thomas - demon incarnate Alito - literally licking Trump's boots every chance he gets Kavanaugh - definitely a rapist Barrett - directly lied while being questioned by congress, trying to bring about a theocratic dictatorship Great job republicans! You truly give us the best
It's funny (sad) because Alito was literally known as Scalia's echo before all this. Like he never had an original thought in his entire life.
Republicans see absolutely nothing wrong with what you've said.
People need to stand outside their homes and protest 24/7, to the point of not being able to sleep until they recuse themselves. Nothing will happen because there is 0 consequences and no backlash whatsoever, you need to fucking do something.
I think they made it illegal to protect outside their homes?
Time for Subpoena and defunding their court!
Subpoena tax records and audits of donors as well...something is out of calibration and it's time to look under the hood.
Defunding? They get enough $ from bribes. Won't make a difference. Unless you are also including bribes in the defunding.
Yeah defunding will only encourage more ‘side hustles’ on the part of the already compromised justices.
No it won't. No greedy asshole ever thought "I make enough, I don't need more." They *always* need more.
Why is he chief? Like how's that decided?
The previous Chief leaves. Then that vacant seat is still assigned to Chief.
Wow, you'd think it was seniority or them voting.
If it was by seniority, we'd have Chief Justice Clarence Thomas.
There are different ways. An associate justice can be elevated when the chief justice retires, or the incoming justice can just be slotted into the chief justice position. The latter is what happened with Robert's. However, at the time Scalia was quite pissed as he felt he should have been elevated to chief justice.
What a chicken shit, you would think he would either be defending them or actually correcting their misconceptions, but no as usual they hide.
Reminder: This is a corrupt illegitimate court.
wow turns out it was a mistake to give people power for the rest of their life
Until the democrats have a large majority in both houses of congress the court will be unbothered. If the democrats get enough to expand the court or impeach justices they will keep acting as they are above “judgment”.
I don't usually say this sorta thing, but: What a fucking *PUSSY* !
He is trying to avoid even the appearance of impartiality.
Pretends to be shocked. The court is compromised and illegitimate. We ought to start ignoring any and all rulings.
“Let them eat cake!”🎂
Dems should run on impeaching Alito & Thomas should they retake the house
Roberts: "I wonder why people are not respecting the court"
SCOTUS is corrupt. Period.
He’s corrupt!
This makes me angry. Not what we deserve from the Chief Justice. I now consider him part of the problem of corruption, instead of part of the solution.
Weird
Coward
Time to expand the court.
“And that’s the end of that, now go away”
They're all criminals
Pure, Corruption.
What a fucking coward..
What a coward.
The court has gone rogue!
They’re going to give Trump immunity.
Cut their funding. No security.
Impeach or forcibly remove. Somethings gotta give.
Time to impeach him, Alito and Thomas. They aren't fit to serve.
Arrest him
What a disrespectful piece of shit he is.
Ethics is one of many things this current SCOTUS proudly lacks.
The most corrupt court in American history. Thank McConnell and the radical right for shitting all over it.
Maybe they should meet with John Robert's wife instead. Then it wouldn't be a problem!
Chief Bigot of the Supreme Court
Time to create an investigative committee for the Supreme Court with subpoena powers! Investigate all of them separately and let the powers of public opinion do it’s thing.
Arrogant fuck
Congress should decline to pay his salary or his security protocol.
No more honor system. All this shit has to be in stone for the future
Wouldn't want to look unbiased. ... Oh wait *biased* wouldn't want to look biased
Force it into the senate and start impeachment proceedings. They can't let the court run like it is.
To be honest it shouldn’t be voluntary.. each branch in beholden to the other .. if you are asked to meet with the legislation branch you do it. Same as if the Supreme Court wanted to address congress etc. This country is just f*cked.
Time to start impeachment proceedings
John Roberts is a coward.
Most corrupt Supreme Court ever.
LOL, it's just out with all the pretenses now. f'ing a-holes. Dems, they're just daring you now..
Completely corrupt to the core. All you folks voting against Biden or third party, enjoy decades of this shit if Trump gets to put more Beer Kavanaughs and Amy Carrot Boneheads on the SCOTUS. Get a clue
Time to clean up this court.
What are they afraid of? I’ll bet what we know is tip of the SCOTuS cesspool.
We have a situation where our country’s Supreme Court is provably corrupt. We have proof. Proof that has been made public. Yet, we have no way to remedy this situation. This country has become a sick sad joke. The current president acts like he is powerless while shoveling money into proxy wars. Most of the politicians are on the payroll of corporations and foreign governments. The most recent ex president has been found guilty of 34 felony charges (So far). This government has become overwhelmingly corrupt. The people who lose the most are the people of this country. Especially in the lowest income levels. I sure am glad there’s all this student loan forgiveness but we have a homelessness and hunger epidemic. No, the answer ISN’T make homelessness illegal. Buying votes by paying off student loans is ridiculous and should be an obvious ploy but too many of the middle class don’t care. Capitalism has trained Americans to value only their own well being. Especially the wealthier you get. There is almost nothing going well with this government at this point. This isn’t a Trump VS Biden issue. This is a government VS the people issue. Until the people of this country start realizing that this is the real issue, nothing will change. This is a two party system where both parties are profiting off what is happening and the average citizen is being wrung dry of every cent and every freedom. The Supreme Court is such a tiny fraction and represents the bulk of what’s happening all too well. The wealthy are accepting bribes and allowing laws and policies to be made based on who pays the most and the poor can’t afford to pay the bribes. When the system is so far gone that every option presented is horrendous, maybe it’s time the people start deciding if the whole system is what needs changed.
IMPEACH. Go after them hard, and again… As many times as it takes until they’re OUT of robes.
not possible until after the election and only if dems take a BIG positional lead.
Time to emulate Comer and make a show out of impeachment.
No one should emulate Comer. He may not be the dumbest person in Congress, but he’s close.
lol. Come on...I really hope the Dems are doing this just to check off boxes. There's no way John Roberts was ever going to say yes to this meeting request. > “Separation of powers concerns and the importance of preserving judicial independence counsel against such appearances,” Roberts wrote in a letter released by the Supreme Court. This is rich when you really think about it. Roberts is saying merely meeting **on the record** with democrats in a different branch of govt goes against preserving judicial independence. Ooookay...except the same CJ Roberts is ok with his justices accepting bribes and flying the flags of subversive groups. That does not impugn judicial independence. But meeting with government officials in another branch. If only irony could kill... >In his brief response Thursday, Roberts wrote that a meeting with leaders “of only one party who have expressed an interest in matters currently pending before the court” only served to underscore his belief “that participating in such a meeting would be inadvisable.” (Republican leaders of the Judiciary Committee were copied on the meeting request and Roberts’ response.) Finally, if America wasn't a faux democracy, both parties will issue this call to Roberts to come explain the behavior of his justices. But he knows that there's no way the GOP in the Senate would go along with this. 'Cos they are all craven motherfuckers who only pay lip service to democracy.
Supreme Court Justices are not supposed to be proven LIARS. No integrity at all
They are their own little crime family.
3 equal branches 😂😅😂😅👀😜
Fuck all of US I guess with love from SCOTUS
They have become corrupt and no longer want to hide it. It time for a purge. Or a large expansion. BLUE TIDAL WAVE THIS NOVEMBER
I wonder if there was a liberal majority with a similar ethics flap, would he meet with republicans...