Supreme Court appears likely to approve Trump’s firing of FTC Democrat
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
But, but, but... justice, laws, the constitution. I'm sure the golden shower dome will protect from this too, because the enemy is definitely not already inside.
Upvote
156
(162
/
-6)
The Supreme Court has shown over and over again it dgaf about precedent. It's just another yes man for the orange one.
Upvote
284
(295
/
-11)
To the incoming questions of "oh why, oh why, would the SCOTUS keep making themselves irrelevant by hoisting a King:"
It's because they're in on it. They're literally all in on it. They're the in-group, and we're not.
It's because they're in on it. They're literally all in on it. They're the in-group, and we're not.
Upvote
264
(269
/
-5)
It's incredible to me how much the Republican Party wants the USA to become Venezuela, North Korea, Russia, or <insert single-party fascist dictatorship here>.
At this point Mexico looks like a better example of good governance than the US.
At this point Mexico looks like a better example of good governance than the US.
Upvote
235
(243
/
-8)
Basically the next Democrat in office needs to create issues for the SCOTUS to pull back power. Like take Justice Thomas's RV he got from his billionaire patron and run it over with a bulldozer.
Upvote
187
(189
/
-2)
Whats interesting is that the 'Humphrey’s Executor' ruling was a conservative court trying to limit the power of a liberal president (Roosevelt). It kind of shows that the laws/principles the Supreme Court defines are meaningless, since it just depends on the feelings of the judges at the time. In other words, there is no right and wrong, only competing interests and how to advance your side.
Upvote
227
(229
/
-2)
Every day I read these articles from abroad and wonder when American citizens are actually going to do something. For now everyone seems content to yap online and continue ignoring the slide.
Watching a democracy die in real-time has been extremely sad.
Watching a democracy die in real-time has been extremely sad.
Upvote
135
(164
/
-29)
They have completely abrogated the responsibilities of the Supreme Court to such a degree that major reforms to the SC have to be part of any future Dem government (assuming there is one). Whether that's more justices, a different way of selecting justices, easier removal of the existing court all have to be on the cards. Arguments about such a change making it easier for a future Autocratic president to bend the SC to his will are moot, because the current court has already shown that it lacks either the spine or the desire (or both) to hold such an autocrat in check.
Upvote
128
(131
/
-3)
It's a massive problem that they're going to slice the independence of agencies and hand all the power to the executive branch. Congress carefully designed a scheme that allowed the agencies a measure of important power in the country an economy but limited the power of the executive branch to slowly evolve the agency over time or to remove members for cause.
How the Court is poised to hand over the full power of those agencies to the President with no regards for the balance of power mechanisms in the laws the created those agencies. It's a massive encroachment of the power of Congress to define the scope and power of the agency through law and cedes that power to the raw decree of the executive branch. It's a flagrant violation of the separation of powers at the core of Constitutional balance. The Court however, does not give a shit and only cares about presidential power, not Congressional power.
How the Court is poised to hand over the full power of those agencies to the President with no regards for the balance of power mechanisms in the laws the created those agencies. It's a massive encroachment of the power of Congress to define the scope and power of the agency through law and cedes that power to the raw decree of the executive branch. It's a flagrant violation of the separation of powers at the core of Constitutional balance. The Court however, does not give a shit and only cares about presidential power, not Congressional power.
Upvote
99
(102
/
-3)
targetnovember
Ars Scholae Palatinae
So is the idea not that these agencies were created improperly to be independent, but no executive agency can constitutionally exist with any independence from the president? If Congress strongly feels that there should be independent oversight in some government functions, which is an enumerated Congressional power, then the solution is to create large, permanent legislative oversight bodies that are not under the executive branch?
Upvote
72
(74
/
-2)
Reps got the Senate, the House, presidency AND the Supreme court.
If you guys don't get the midterms under your belt... fucked and you - would be an understatement.
Not sure what you can do about the SC though, it's my understanding that till someone kicks the bucket there, you're stuck with the same players...
If you guys don't get the midterms under your belt... fucked and you - would be an understatement.
Not sure what you can do about the SC though, it's my understanding that till someone kicks the bucket there, you're stuck with the same players...
Upvote
65
(70
/
-5)
Well of course they are. This is what the right-wing/GOP have been moving towards for decades. All going according to plan.
Upvote
35
(37
/
-2)
So, now what? With each new US regime change, the heads of “independent agencies” will be replaced? What’s the point of terms at this point?
This is insane and will not end well.
This is insane and will not end well.
Upvote
96
(98
/
-2)
Unfortunately, Democracies are a dead-end government. Democracies, by their nature, have to address the needs of and tolerate all citizens. Autocracies or rule by a few/one have no such requirement. What this means is that an element of autocracies will always exist within a democracy and since Democracies are, more or less, popularity contests - it becomes only a a matter of when, not if, the Autocracy element wins the contest and the Democracy is no longer a democracy.
In other words, Democracy depends on all of the citizens within a nation to maintain it. Thats a bad bet since humans are fickle and unreliable.
Upvote
26
(64
/
-38)
In 2029 it’ll suddenly start to care very much about precedents.
Upvote
115
(116
/
-1)
That's alright, cue the GOP's whining when the Dems do it to them when the time comes.
Drunk on power, Republicans are eager to forget that being in power is a cycle, and one that can turn on a dime - especially with the ongoing incompetence demonstrated by the current regime.
Drunk on power, Republicans are eager to forget that being in power is a cycle, and one that can turn on a dime - especially with the ongoing incompetence demonstrated by the current regime.
Upvote
24
(30
/
-6)
I have said it before and will say it again. The Supreme Court is a failed institution that has been seized by capital. It will fail to make decisions in benefit of the people when decisions that benefit the oligarchs can be made.
Upvote
80
(84
/
-4)
And guess who has appointed THREE of the judges. No president should be able to appoint three judges to the Supreme Court, and especially not Dear Leader.
Upvote
93
(94
/
-1)
The Supreme Court seems to be taking a power that is explicitly Congressional, and tranferring it through their intepretation to be an Executive power. . .
I'm speaking of the power to regulate commerce - the Constitution says, in Article I, Section 8, which is a list of Congressional powers, it includes:
"The Congress shall have Power. . .
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"
The Federal Reserve, The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the EPA, The FCC, the FTC. . . what are these things if not Congress organizing government to exercise uniquely Congressional Authority, NOT Presidential Authority.
I'm speaking of the power to regulate commerce - the Constitution says, in Article I, Section 8, which is a list of Congressional powers, it includes:
"The Congress shall have Power. . .
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"
The Federal Reserve, The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the EPA, The FCC, the FTC. . . what are these things if not Congress organizing government to exercise uniquely Congressional Authority, NOT Presidential Authority.
Upvote
149
(150
/
-1)
The responsibility to impeach the SC judges also lies with Congress, and it's been pretty clear how they prefer that process to go. Or not go, as we've seen.
Flipping seats in the mid-term is a requirement for the continued existence of this country as it used to stand.
Upvote
61
(63
/
-2)
Which'll pop first? The AI bubble or the use of the US Dollar's role as the principal global reserve currency?
Upvote
54
(55
/
-1)
Here's the problem from an American: about a third of the population is RELIGIOUSLY on board with the way things are going. Zealously. And they have all the guns and believe that opposing the government (when they control it) is evil terrorism. Any actual action runs into this problem.
Also the Democratic party would be a right wing party in any other country and acts accordingly. The DNC is on board with militarized police and border walls, they just want them a little cheaper and with a few more controls, that's all. There is simply no left wing party and every power that be views the actual left as a violent enemy worse than any outsider and worthy of military suppression.
Last edited:
Upvote
78
(89
/
-11)
You cannot jail a SC judge
Have a White House ceremony with John Oliver handing the keys to another rv to Thomas and telling him to f*** off
Upvote
-8
(4
/
-12)
The Supreme Court only exists to write fanfics with a lot of legal terminology thrown in, describing how precedent & laws don’t matter and that Trump can always do what he wants.
The illusion that they have any principles or consistency is just that, an illusion.
The illusion that they have any principles or consistency is just that, an illusion.
Upvote
43
(45
/
-2)
What exactly are you expecting? A number of institutions that should be pushing back against the Trump administration aren't, but there's a massive amount of pushback happening. People following ICE around blowing whistles is doing something. Filing lawsuits is doing something. Attending No Kings protests is doing something. Writing letters to the editor is doing something. Leaking information to the press is doing something. Courts saying that the administration can no longer be trusted is doing something.
It's not fast. It's not violent. But it's something. Maybe it will be enough, maybe it won't. Best case, we'll be picking up the pieces for decades. Hundreds of thousands of people around the world who didn't need to have and will die. I don't want to sugarcoat what's happening, but there is a lot of opposition to the administration.
Last edited:
Upvote
124
(127
/
-3)
Funny thing is, Congress is supposed to be the most powerful branch, because it can set the number of members in SC, create entire departments, and impeach anybody that gets too far out of line. So, in theory, assuming a blue wave (And the Democrats finding their spines they lost after letting Trump siccing a literal fucking lynch mob after Congress slide.) they can add a bunch of new, not blatantly evil Justices, create a bunch of independent agencies to wrest back control, and impeach Trump, Roberts et. al. for being openly corrupt.
But that's assuming things don't collapse by then, or that they'll actually try....
Upvote
74
(77
/
-3)
To play the pedant, this is actually the SCOTUS returning to their true form that existed prior to FDR scaring the shit out of them. They're a failed institution for the little people, but the institution was never meant to help such people.
Upvote
35
(40
/
-5)
You cannot jail a SC judge for now.
That can change. Hell, I'm surprised The Fascist hasn't figured this out by now and replaced the other three SC judges that aren't actively fellating him.
Upvote
35
(38
/
-3)
Upvote
17
(18
/
-1)
These six care about precedent when it suits them. They've long since demonstrated that their "ideology" is a farce, along with the "movement" behind them.
Upvote
38
(40
/
-2)
Upvote
72
(75
/
-3)
I don't know, something that that actually rattles cages, like a general strike? All those things are better than nothing but the Administration does not give a single shit about any of it, if anything they're just just happy to have more excuses to crack down on protesters.
At least with a general strike you'd be hitting their donors pocketbooks, which might actually move the needle.
Upvote
15
(28
/
-13)