Senate GOPers are faced with a choice between an unstoppable force (McConnell's promise of a floor vote for whoever he Trump picks) and an immoveable object (their well-documented opposition to just such a scenario back in 2016)
It must be hard to be this willfully ignorant.
This take was dated before this dope hit send
RedTide#1907 on Battle.net
Come Overwatch with meeeee
This is the worst year in American history since 1929.
Honestly it's vying for worst of all time, to be eclipsed only by subsequent years.
The worst part is the horrible feeling of powerlessness to stop our lives, our country, and the world from proceeding down this course.
Honest question for the thread: I know there were folks who were opposed to court packing for various reasons before today, has this changed your thinking on the matter?
Senate GOPers are faced with a choice between an unstoppable force (McConnell's promise of a floor vote for whoever he Trump picks) and an immoveable object (their well-documented opposition to just such a scenario back in 2016)
Make every United States' Citizen over 18 a supreme court justice.
Now you have a national plebiscite and an active referendum device.
The problem is that there are legitimately judicial issues that need a court to decide. You don’t want a national plebiscite on contract law issues or prisoners rights or whatever. But our current supreme court does this, and serves as a 3rd legislative “upper upper house” as well, and that’s not really ideal, even though it has essentially been the case since pre-civil war times.
I don’t know if its as big of a deal really though as people are making it out to be, there’s a lot that a united congress and president can legally do to reign in a runaway court if it becomes a problem. They would mean blasting away at norms but we are past that anyway. The big focus right now needs to be focusing the anger on getting a democratic president and senate. From there the supreme court can be dealt with as needed over the next 2 years
+7
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
The Supreme Court's power is overemphasized currently because the other two branches of government are (at times willfully) dysfunctional and non-functioning. It is bad to have a 6-3 conservative Supreme Court for sure, but it's effect would be greatly lessened by a Congress willing to actually enact laws and regulations.
The fight for the courts is lost for a generation already because Democrats were unwilling to fight the battles Republicans fought over the last 10+ years. There are entirely ways to survive that, however, and I hope the Democratic Party has learned the necessary lessons.
This is the worst year in American history since 1929.
Try 1877. The US let the white supremacist fascists live and regroup and we still haven't gotten back the gains that were made at the end of the Civil War.
This is the worst year in American history since 1929.
Honestly it's vying for worst of all time, to be eclipsed only by subsequent years.
The worst part is the horrible feeling of powerlessness to stop our lives, our country, and the world from proceeding down this course.
Honest question for the thread: I know there were folks who were opposed to court packing for various reasons before today, has this changed your thinking on the matter?
I'm still unmoved, but I'm too upset over the current situation to really dig in.
When Congress is unwilling or unable to do anything to stop the President's horrific actions, that leaves the SCOTUS as far as direct legal measures go. If none of them are willing to do anything to stop the President's horrific actions almost no matter how illegal they are, that leaves everything in a much worse position. The remaining means of restricting the president's powers ends up being much more indirect such as protests and only works if the president is willing to give a shit.
Edit: Basically the SCOTUS up to now was favorable to Trump. Many of the losses were simply because Trump and his administration were too incompetent to set up a plausible enough pretext for the Court to at least pretend to buy it or too obviously against previous decisions. Now what is to stop from killing off the ACA and other conservative bugbears?
The Supreme Court's power is overemphasized currently because the other two branches of government are (at times willfully) dysfunctional and non-functioning. It is bad to have a 6-3 conservative Supreme Court for sure, but it's effect would be greatly lessened by a Congress willing to actually enact laws and regulations.
The fight for the courts is lost for a generation already because Democrats were unwilling to fight the battles Republicans fought over the last 10+ years. There are entirely ways to survive that, however, and I hope the Democratic Party has learned the necessary lessons.
Problem is this isn't going to happen. We're in the slow death of our democracy, and we're just holding it together as long as we can. Some things like SCOTUS have helped with this. Congress will never function properly again, though.
We were put in this position of power and importance to make decisions for the people who so proudly elected us, the most important of which has long been considered to be the selection of United States Supreme Court Justices. We have this obligation, without delay!
Pretending the Senate is representative of the US electorate when a majority did not vote a GOP senator in 2018 and the Democratic share of the popular vote actually increased is infuriating.
+2
Options
TetraNitroCubaneThe DjinneratorAt the bottom of a bottleRegistered Userregular
The most infuriating, depressing aspect of this - The one that has me despondent to the point of absolutely giving up on hope - is how many people are loudly and happily celebrating this as a way to "Take back America". It's not a small number.
The repeal of basic civil rights for "the right people" is a cause for celebration in this country, and that's all you really need to know about how hopeless our situation is.
+7
Options
ShivahnUnaware of her barrel shifter privilegeWestern coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderatormod
We were put in this position of power and importance to make decisions for the people who so proudly elected us, the most important of which has long been considered to be the selection of United States Supreme Court Justices. We have this obligation, without delay!
Pretending the Senate is representative of the US electorate when a majority did not vote a GOP senator in 2018 and the Democratic share of the popular vote actually increased is infuriating.
Yeah, the statement that "Americans put Republicans in more power in the senate in 2018, so obvs we have a mandate" is so infuriating. In the better measure (the house), Republicans got fucking crushed. It's obvious to anyone who cares to look. Grr.
0
Options
SurfpossumA nonentitytrying to preserve the anonymity he so richly deserves.Registered Userregular
Technically he's saying that they're doing this for the subset of Americans who voted for them ("the people who so proudly elected us").
Whether or not he meant to say that, who knows. It's honest, even if accidentally.
The Supreme Court's power is overemphasized currently because the other two branches of government are (at times willfully) dysfunctional and non-functioning. It is bad to have a 6-3 conservative Supreme Court for sure, but it's effect would be greatly lessened by a Congress willing to actually enact laws and regulations.
The fight for the courts is lost for a generation already because Democrats were unwilling to fight the battles Republicans fought over the last 10+ years. There are entirely ways to survive that, however, and I hope the Democratic Party has learned the necessary lessons.
The things that led to the last attempt at court packing suggests that, while you are correct to some extent, their effect would still be huge even if Congress was functional. They are hacks and will rewrite the law as they see fit. Look at that ridiculous ACA case going through the system. That's the kind of shit that set FDR off.
But yeah, the Democrats have lost the court because they have never bothered to fight for it. And that's not the politicians there, that's the voters that didn't come out to the polls and fight for it the way the Republican base did. You can see during this whole Trump term how seriously they take control of the courts.
The Supreme Court's power is overemphasized currently because the other two branches of government are (at times willfully) dysfunctional and non-functioning. It is bad to have a 6-3 conservative Supreme Court for sure, but it's effect would be greatly lessened by a Congress willing to actually enact laws and regulations.
The fight for the courts is lost for a generation already because Democrats were unwilling to fight the battles Republicans fought over the last 10+ years. There are entirely ways to survive that, however, and I hope the Democratic Party has learned the necessary lessons.
The things that led to the last attempt at court packing suggests that, while you are correct to some extent, their effect would still be huge even if Congress was functional. They are hacks and will rewrite the law as they see fit. Look at that ridiculous ACA case going through the system. That's the kind of shit that set FDR off.
But yeah, the Democrats have lost the court because they have never bothered to fight for it. And that's not the politicians there, that's the voters that didn't come out to the polls and fight for it the way the Republican base did. You can during this whole Trump term how seriously they take control of the courts.
Except the majority of people in the country have voted for Democrats for the past 20 years, its not the voters fault the electoral college fucks them over.
This is the worst year in American history since 1929.
Dude, 1929 wasn't this bad. All it had was an economic collapse. 2020 has had a Pandemic, Economic collapse(due to shit handling of the Pandemic), Riots and now a major constitutional crisis in the making.
I don't want to go all Doom, but.... DOOOOOOOM, DOOOOOOM..... DOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!1
Sorry, had to get that out of my system. I am good now.
The sky was full of stars, every star an exploding ship. One of ours.
We were put in this position of power and importance to make decisions for the people who so proudly elected us, the most important of which has long been considered to be the selection of United States Supreme Court Justices. We have this obligation, without delay!
Pretending the Senate is representative of the US electorate when a majority did not vote a GOP senator in 2018 and the Democratic share of the popular vote actually increased is infuriating.
I mean, yes the Senate is not representative. But it's never been representative and that's the point of the Senate. And this has always been it's job. The thing is that the Republicans filling the position this year is how the system is supposed to work.
But yeah, the Democrats have lost the court because they have never bothered to fight for it. And that's not the politicians there, that's the voters that didn't come out to the polls and fight for it the way the Republican base did. You can during this whole Trump term how seriously they take control of the courts.
Randall Kennedy
April 28, 2011
The Case for Early Retirement
Why Justices Ginsburg and Breyer should retire immediately.
For whatever reason, there was a sizeable segment of the left that seemed to assume the SCOTUS wasn't a huge issue in 2016 while the right seemed to care a lot more about it.
The Supreme Court's power is overemphasized currently because the other two branches of government are (at times willfully) dysfunctional and non-functioning. It is bad to have a 6-3 conservative Supreme Court for sure, but it's effect would be greatly lessened by a Congress willing to actually enact laws and regulations.
The fight for the courts is lost for a generation already because Democrats were unwilling to fight the battles Republicans fought over the last 10+ years. There are entirely ways to survive that, however, and I hope the Democratic Party has learned the necessary lessons.
The things that led to the last attempt at court packing suggests that, while you are correct to some extent, their effect would still be huge even if Congress was functional. They are hacks and will rewrite the law as they see fit. Look at that ridiculous ACA case going through the system. That's the kind of shit that set FDR off.
But yeah, the Democrats have lost the court because they have never bothered to fight for it. And that's not the politicians there, that's the voters that didn't come out to the polls and fight for it the way the Republican base did. You can during this whole Trump term how seriously they take control of the courts.
Except the majority of people in the country have voted for Democrats for the past 20 years, its not the voters fault the electoral college fucks them over.
If you actually look at messaging, it's not even close to comparable.
And shit, there was a fucking seat literally on the line in 2016 in the most obvious way imaginable. And it didn't motivate shit.
Randall Kennedy
April 28, 2011
The Case for Early Retirement
Why Justices Ginsburg and Breyer should retire immediately.
For whatever reason, there was a sizeable segment of the left that seemed to assume the SCOTUS wasn't a huge issue in 2016 while the right seemed to care a lot more about it.
Its because the Democrats didn't have to repeal anything through the Supreme Court. The Republicans have a more vested interest in changing the rulings they don't like.
Randall Kennedy
April 28, 2011
The Case for Early Retirement
Why Justices Ginsburg and Breyer should retire immediately.
For whatever reason, there was a sizeable segment of the left that seemed to assume the SCOTUS wasn't a huge issue in 2016 while the right seemed to care a lot more about it.
Its because the Democrats didn't have to repeal anything through the Supreme Court. The Republicans have a more vested interest in changing the rulings they don't like.
The Democrats have always had a vested interest in things not getting repealed though. Just for starters. Control of the SCOTUS has never not been important during our lifetimes, but you wouldn't know it judging by the differing approaches both sides use.
Randall Kennedy
April 28, 2011
The Case for Early Retirement
Why Justices Ginsburg and Breyer should retire immediately.
For whatever reason, there was a sizeable segment of the left that seemed to assume the SCOTUS wasn't a huge issue in 2016 while the right seemed to care a lot more about it.
Its because the Democrats didn't have to repeal anything through the Supreme Court. The Republicans have a more vested interest in changing the rulings they don't like.
The Democrats have always had a vested interest in things not getting repealed though. Just for starters. Control of the SCOTUS has never not been important during our lifetimes, but you wouldn't know it judging by the differing approaches both sides use.
I know, but its easier to enthuse people with the promise of electing Trump to get a conservative court and repealing Roe V Wade, than it is saying elect Biden and things will stay the same.
Plus Democrats don't view the Supreme Court as an overtly political roll and appoint qualified judges.
Randall Kennedy
April 28, 2011
The Case for Early Retirement
Why Justices Ginsburg and Breyer should retire immediately.
For whatever reason, there was a sizeable segment of the left that seemed to assume the SCOTUS wasn't a huge issue in 2016 while the right seemed to care a lot more about it.
Its because the Democrats didn't have to repeal anything through the Supreme Court. The Republicans have a more vested interest in changing the rulings they don't like.
The Democrats have always had a vested interest in things not getting repealed though. Just for starters. Control of the SCOTUS has never not been important during our lifetimes, but you wouldn't know it judging by the differing approaches both sides use.
I know, but its easier to enthuse people with the promise of electing Trump to get a conservative court and repealing Roe V Wade, than it is saying elect Biden and things will stay the same.
Plus Democrats don't view the Supreme Court as an overtly political roll and appoint qualified judges.
The Democrats absolutely appoint judges based on their politics. They just appoint qualified politically left-wing judges. Sotomayor isn't on the court because of random chance.
I don’t think Trump will let them do a lame duck, I think he will push for a confirmation before the election.
Announcing right now that they are doing a lame duck appointment sends the message “It doesn’t matter if you vote for Trump, you will get your supreme court justice anyway.” Its a great thing for McConnell and the Senate, but terrible for Trump himself.
Trump is going to want the big win before election day, and if not he’s going to want to be able to hold a vacancy over Republican voters heads to get them out to polls.
The smart move (for self-serving, spiteful conservatives) would be to insist that they're "committed" to playing by their own rules and not voting on a justice until the next president is inaugurated. Like magic, any Republicans with a distaste for Trump now have a renewed incentive to pull the lever for him and his SCOTUS nominee in the election, just like they did in 2016. And the senate GOP can keep their 1-atom-thick veneer of honesty.
And then of course if Trump loses they just push a justice through in the lame duck session because haha fuck you they don't really care about their made-up rule and they're not going to pass up a lifetime superconservative SCOTUS.
I'm really a little baffled that Mitch isn't going for the truly most self-serving option.
Taximes on
0
Options
Metzger MeisterIt Gets Worsebefore it gets any better.Registered Userregular
forum bug post plz ignore
0
Options
TetraNitroCubaneThe DjinneratorAt the bottom of a bottleRegistered Userregular
In case you had any doubt about where this is eventually heading.
Two months ago, I pledged to vote only for #SCOTUS nominees who understand and acknowledge that Roe was wrongly decided. I stand by that commitment, and I call on my fellow Republican senators to take the same stand
I mean, it's heading after Roe v. Wade for sure. But it's very definitely heading toward a reversal of Obergefell v. Hodges as well. Let's not ignore that this is also still an explicit part of the Republican platform. Gay marriage is back on the ballot now for 2020.
I think the most fair and even way for them to do this would be to have one justice removed every year, starting with either the oldest or the one who has been on the court the longest as decided by an internal vote with no member being allowed to serve a greater term then 7 years. Also, make it so that it's codified that a list of nominees (numbering at least 5) be found within 2 weeks and that the vote be held within the following week of nomination. In doing so the court would remain fresh and prevent situations like with Ruth (who served for so long I was starting to think she might be a lich) by making it so they don't feel obligated to be there until their death.
Also, this would ensure that there could be no more instances of delaying a SC.
I mean, it's heading after Roe v. Wade for sure. But it's very definitely heading toward a reversal of Obergefell v. Hodges as well. Let's not ignore that this is also still an explicit part of the Republican platform. Gay marriage is back on the ballot now for 2020.
Oh for certain. This is only the start.
I've been terrified for the last 14 hours because of what's going to happen to trans folks. I don't think it's an exaggeration to presume the worst will happen to us.
I mean, it's heading after Roe v. Wade for sure. But it's very definitely heading toward a reversal of Obergefell v. Hodges as well. Let's not ignore that this is also still an explicit part of the Republican platform. Gay marriage is back on the ballot now for 2020.
Oh for certain. This is only the start.
I've been terrified for the last 14 hours because of what's going to happen to trans folks. I don't think it's an exaggeration to presume the worst will happen to us.
Yeah, I know it's a hard thing to consider, but GTFO seems like a not unreasonable option. Because I'd be concerned ot could go very badly.
Unless you have a strong and encompassing social network and a job that's already overwhelmingly accepting (and not just "tolerant"), emigration out of the country, or at least to a rock solid blue state, might be the only safe choice.
Short of Biden winning and the Republicans having integrity (not all of them, just four), I can see this going badly for a lot of non-hetero white demographics.
+4
Options
ShivahnUnaware of her barrel shifter privilegeWestern coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderatormod
I mean, it's heading after Roe v. Wade for sure. But it's very definitely heading toward a reversal of Obergefell v. Hodges as well. Let's not ignore that this is also still an explicit part of the Republican platform. Gay marriage is back on the ballot now for 2020.
This is specifically why I left. I think that was on the docket even even before Ginsberg died, now it's definitely going to be chipped away.
Posts
This take was dated before this dope hit send
Come Overwatch with meeeee
Honestly it's vying for worst of all time, to be eclipsed only by subsequent years.
The worst part is the horrible feeling of powerlessness to stop our lives, our country, and the world from proceeding down this course.
Honest question for the thread: I know there were folks who were opposed to court packing for various reasons before today, has this changed your thinking on the matter?
Now you have a national plebiscite and an active referendum device.
Kayfabe must be maintained at all times.
Steam ID XBL: JohnnyChopsocky PSN:Stud_Beefpile WiiU:JohnnyChopsocky
The problem is that there are legitimately judicial issues that need a court to decide. You don’t want a national plebiscite on contract law issues or prisoners rights or whatever. But our current supreme court does this, and serves as a 3rd legislative “upper upper house” as well, and that’s not really ideal, even though it has essentially been the case since pre-civil war times.
I don’t know if its as big of a deal really though as people are making it out to be, there’s a lot that a united congress and president can legally do to reign in a runaway court if it becomes a problem. They would mean blasting away at norms but we are past that anyway. The big focus right now needs to be focusing the anger on getting a democratic president and senate. From there the supreme court can be dealt with as needed over the next 2 years
The fight for the courts is lost for a generation already because Democrats were unwilling to fight the battles Republicans fought over the last 10+ years. There are entirely ways to survive that, however, and I hope the Democratic Party has learned the necessary lessons.
Try 1877. The US let the white supremacist fascists live and regroup and we still haven't gotten back the gains that were made at the end of the Civil War.
I'm still unmoved, but I'm too upset over the current situation to really dig in.
Edit: Basically the SCOTUS up to now was favorable to Trump. Many of the losses were simply because Trump and his administration were too incompetent to set up a plausible enough pretext for the Court to at least pretend to buy it or too obviously against previous decisions. Now what is to stop from killing off the ACA and other conservative bugbears?
Problem is this isn't going to happen. We're in the slow death of our democracy, and we're just holding it together as long as we can. Some things like SCOTUS have helped with this. Congress will never function properly again, though.
The repeal of basic civil rights for "the right people" is a cause for celebration in this country, and that's all you really need to know about how hopeless our situation is.
Yeah, the statement that "Americans put Republicans in more power in the senate in 2018, so obvs we have a mandate" is so infuriating. In the better measure (the house), Republicans got fucking crushed. It's obvious to anyone who cares to look. Grr.
Whether or not he meant to say that, who knows. It's honest, even if accidentally.
PSN: ShogunGunshow
Origin: ShogunGunshow
The things that led to the last attempt at court packing suggests that, while you are correct to some extent, their effect would still be huge even if Congress was functional. They are hacks and will rewrite the law as they see fit. Look at that ridiculous ACA case going through the system. That's the kind of shit that set FDR off.
But yeah, the Democrats have lost the court because they have never bothered to fight for it. And that's not the politicians there, that's the voters that didn't come out to the polls and fight for it the way the Republican base did. You can see during this whole Trump term how seriously they take control of the courts.
Except the majority of people in the country have voted for Democrats for the past 20 years, its not the voters fault the electoral college fucks them over.
{Twitter, Everybody's doing it. }{Writing and Story Blog}
Dude, 1929 wasn't this bad. All it had was an economic collapse. 2020 has had a Pandemic, Economic collapse(due to shit handling of the Pandemic), Riots and now a major constitutional crisis in the making.
I don't want to go all Doom, but.... DOOOOOOOM, DOOOOOOM..... DOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!1
Sorry, had to get that out of my system. I am good now.
I mean, yes the Senate is not representative. But it's never been representative and that's the point of the Senate. And this has always been it's job. The thing is that the Republicans filling the position this year is how the system is supposed to work.
But Biden doesn't innnnspiiiire meee
I’m going to go back in to the woods and scream in to my sleeping bag.
This was 2014:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/14/ruth-bader-ginsburg-retire-liberal-judge
2013:
https://newrepublic.com/article/115973/ruth-bader-ginsburg-should-retire-supreme-court
2011:
https://newrepublic.com/article/87543/ginsburg-breyer-resign-supereme-court For whatever reason, there was a sizeable segment of the left that seemed to assume the SCOTUS wasn't a huge issue in 2016 while the right seemed to care a lot more about it.
If you actually look at messaging, it's not even close to comparable.
And shit, there was a fucking seat literally on the line in 2016 in the most obvious way imaginable. And it didn't motivate shit.
Its because the Democrats didn't have to repeal anything through the Supreme Court. The Republicans have a more vested interest in changing the rulings they don't like.
{Twitter, Everybody's doing it. }{Writing and Story Blog}
The Democrats have always had a vested interest in things not getting repealed though. Just for starters. Control of the SCOTUS has never not been important during our lifetimes, but you wouldn't know it judging by the differing approaches both sides use.
I know, but its easier to enthuse people with the promise of electing Trump to get a conservative court and repealing Roe V Wade, than it is saying elect Biden and things will stay the same.
Plus Democrats don't view the Supreme Court as an overtly political roll and appoint qualified judges.
{Twitter, Everybody's doing it. }{Writing and Story Blog}
The Democrats absolutely appoint judges based on their politics. They just appoint qualified politically left-wing judges. Sotomayor isn't on the court because of random chance.
The smart move (for self-serving, spiteful conservatives) would be to insist that they're "committed" to playing by their own rules and not voting on a justice until the next president is inaugurated. Like magic, any Republicans with a distaste for Trump now have a renewed incentive to pull the lever for him and his SCOTUS nominee in the election, just like they did in 2016. And the senate GOP can keep their 1-atom-thick veneer of honesty.
And then of course if Trump loses they just push a justice through in the lame duck session because haha fuck you they don't really care about their made-up rule and they're not going to pass up a lifetime superconservative SCOTUS.
I'm really a little baffled that Mitch isn't going for the truly most self-serving option.
Josh Hawley is a US senator from Missouri.
Also, this would ensure that there could be no more instances of delaying a SC.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/additions-president-donald-j-trumps-supreme-court-list/
Yes, Tom *hork* Cotton and Ted *hurggh* Cruz are on the list
Oh for certain. This is only the start.
I've been terrified for the last 14 hours because of what's going to happen to trans folks. I don't think it's an exaggeration to presume the worst will happen to us.
Yeah, I know it's a hard thing to consider, but GTFO seems like a not unreasonable option. Because I'd be concerned ot could go very badly.
Unless you have a strong and encompassing social network and a job that's already overwhelmingly accepting (and not just "tolerant"), emigration out of the country, or at least to a rock solid blue state, might be the only safe choice.
Short of Biden winning and the Republicans having integrity (not all of them, just four), I can see this going badly for a lot of non-hetero white demographics.
This is specifically why I left. I think that was on the docket even even before Ginsberg died, now it's definitely going to be chipped away.