The major questions doctrine, explained.

  • @delial
    link
    English
    5
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The President could stop this at any time. All he needs to do is pack the court with more justices to rebalance it. Not doing so makes him complicit.

    Foot meet mouth. I’m an idiot.

    • 😈MedicPig🐷BabySaver😈
      link
      fedilink
      English
      201 year ago

      Exactly how does the president do that? He cannot expand the court on his own. Congress doesn’t have enough Democrats to do it. None of the current justices are going anywhere unless they die.

      • @conquer4@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        171 year ago

        Or, charge several of them with taking bribes. As there is plenty of evidence already, they are not above the law.

        • Speff
          link
          fedilink
          English
          51 year ago

          The moronic general public already thinks holding 45 accountable is “political persecution” source. This is with rocksteady evidence. And now you people are talking about charging R-aligned Justices on loose bribe accusations? Just… no. This is how you fire up their base and hand R’s the election with a supermajority.

          This is the Congress’ job to fix. Want it fixed? Stop relying on the president and start figuring out how to make Congress actually work again.

          • @reddwarf@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            8
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            This is how you fire up their base

            Not sure what more firing up the base needs in your opinion? That part of society is lost for quite a while now and if you think these morons could be ‘pulled back in’ as long as you do not insult/antagonize/etc. is a myth. A dangerous one at that. I would even wager that this attitude of soft gloves to not insult or fail to fairly accommodate the other side is what partially got us here.

            • Speff
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              The choices aren’t Democrats or Republicans. It’s Democrat, Republican, or stay at home and not vote. I’m not dumb enough to think people are willing to change positions easily these days. But R’s just got fed some good red meat (Dobbs), which means some of them will become complacent. There isn’t one issue at the moment which motivates their base as good as abortion, which is why they’re flailing around and trying to demonize trans folk

              • @Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 year ago

                The choices aren’t Democrats or Republicans. It’s Democrat, Republican, or stay at home and not vote.

                Staying home and not voting is a vote for Republicans. The GOP are still beating the abortion drum by pushing for national bans and even more restrictions on abortion in the states where it’s still legal. Demonizing trans kids is their new boogeyman to keep those who are past the abortion issue in line and make sure that there’s something new for them to fear.

                The GOP are masters at scaring their voters to the polls, and one of the things they hope for is that Democrat voters stay home in “protest”. You’re not protesting anything by staying home. You’re helping the GOP.

          • Monkey With A Shell
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            Ending the fillibuster would do a lot to make change, but in part the cery purpose of it is to force some measure of consensus by preventing a simple mahority from steamrolling the minority. When one side refuses ANY level of meaningful compromise however you get trades that are so massivly out of balance as to be counterproductive to the wishes of any progressive movement.

            • @Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              Ending the fillibuster would do a lot to make change, but in part the cery purpose of it is to force some measure of consensus by preventing a simple mahority from steamrolling the minority.

              This is why I’m actually against removing the filibuster. Yes, Democrats would be able to make some short term gains in the process. But all it would lead to is the GOP just taking note of everything the Democrats did and just reversing it all on day one the minute they regain power. And then after that, we get to sit back and watch as they continue to steamroll over other rights as well.

              I really don’t want to live in a society where my rights are dictated by the whims of whatever party is in power and likely to change multiple times a decade.

        • @Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          41 year ago

          They made the case for removal twice against Trump. It did exactly nothing.

          Unless you have 67 senators willing to remove them, none of it matters. And right now, I have a better chance of getting blown by every one of the Dallas Cowboys cheerleaders in alphabetical order than getting 15 or so Republican senators to be willing to remove one of their own.

      • @Skyrmir@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Everyone chip in to make sure all the conservative justices have free chicken and big macs at all times. While signing up the liberal justices for free gym memberships.

        Just pointing out there is a public mailing address for the supreme court that I’m sure would happily forward gift certificates, and a chik fil a almost within shouting distance. Don’t make them walk too far, it’d defeat the purpose.

      • @delial
        link
        English
        21 year ago

        You’re right, and I’m an idiot. The US is truly and royally fucked. At this point it’s an unsalvageable shit-show slaughter-fest of slavery and oppression.