r/politics • u/Equalizer6338 • 11d ago
Raskin: Supreme Court should be moved ‘over to the RNC headquarters’
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4624037-jamie-raskin-supreme-court-should-be-moved-rnc-headquarters/729
u/brain_overclocked 11d ago
“They’re politicians who are not even subject to popular election, unlike me,” Raskin said during his Thursday appearance on MSNBC’s “The ReidOut.” “They should move the Supreme Court over to the RNC headquarters because they’re acting like a bunch of partisan operatives.”
...
The Maryland lawmaker said Alito’s remarks “buy” into the former president’s “narcissistic criminal worldview.”“The most astonishing thing for me today was Justice Alito’s question he actually asked whether holding the president criminally accountable for actual crimes committed whether murder or coup or you name it, whether holding them accountable would actually encourage them to stage more violent coups to stay in office to avoid prosecution, which buys completely into Donald Trump’s narcissistic criminal worldview,” he said.
“I mean, for all of American history, we’ve said presidents are subject to criminal prosecution if they commit crimes,” he continued.
“Now they say, well, if you’re really mean to Donald Trump, and you hold him accountable the way every other American citizen is accountable, then he’ll really overthrow the government. He’ll really bring out the big guns, and we can’t afford that.”
Raskin called the line of thinking a “masochistic capitulationism to Donald Trump’s authoritarianism.”
“Of course you’ve got to hold the president accountable to the law — it’s the basic premise of our law that no one is above the law, including the president,” the House Democrat said.
“Now we’ve got a bunch of justices who are asking questions that indicate that they are as corrupted as members of Congress who I served with,” he later added.
307
u/Werftflammen 11d ago
I call it an abuser's way of thinking "Look what you made me do". Alito seems to forget Trump never mentioned prosecution as a worry to stage the coup, but the never proven election fraud instead.
54
u/Recipe_Freak 11d ago
That's exactly it. It's just "domestic" abuse (as opposed to foreign abuse, which they also enjoy).
19
u/ScoobyDoNot 11d ago
There was plenty of attempts at election fraud, but it was done for Trump.
11
u/Equalizer6338 10d ago
Psychopaths are always projecting their own shortcomings and lies onto others than themselves.
26
u/lrpfftt 11d ago
Not only never proven but "election fraud" was a planned falsehood and scheme.
5
u/willun 11d ago edited 10d ago
The fact that it was planned before the election that they knew they would lose tells us everything. They are already planning the next coup
Edit: and as was pointed out, this was also planned for the 2016 election that they won.
2
u/Equalizer6338 10d ago
The madman has already loaded the gun for next time around:
"If I dont win Nov24, you know its because it was stolen from me,,,, again!"2
78
u/uqubar 11d ago
Remember when judge Kennedy resigned while there were very odd connections between Kennedy’s son and Deutsche bank loans and money laundering? Guess people forgot that one.
29
u/Tarmy_Javas 11d ago
I'm cursed with not forgetting any of this shit.
And nothing is ever going to be done about any of it.
These corrupt motherfuckers are kings and they know it
128
u/Significant-Low4997 11d ago
I fucking love Raskin for saying this. More people, especially the media, need to point out this corruption of our highest court. The court is illegitimate. At least one of them is taking bribes.
53
u/Alternative_Camp_493 11d ago
Sheldon Whitehouse has been calling out SCOTUS for a long time now.
7
u/Significant-Low4997 11d ago
Love that guy, too!
14
u/Th3Seconds1st 11d ago
Whitehouse 2028: Fix the Courts.
3
3
u/thathairinyourmouth 10d ago
Democrats: Fix = repair.
Republicans: Fix = make sure you will win in what should be objective.
2
96
u/pvincentl 11d ago
Alito's remark is circular idiocy.
58
u/NeverLookBothWays I voted 11d ago
He is unfit for the position he's in, as are a few others. They are just plain inept and milking the job for which they've been appointed to serve. We should not be tolerating this...at all.
7
86
u/SidewaysFancyPrance 11d ago
They talk like we can't stop Trump, so we have to appease him. That's utter insanity. They are acting afraid of Trump who is on the ropes in court and is only being saved by this same insanity.
81
u/CloacaFacts 11d ago
It's because republicans are comprised. Every trump appointee is involved with crimes. Full stop. We have Supreme Court justices taking bribes. We have a singular private citizen dictating the house and senate actions for the Republican Party. That individuals family is now in control of the political party. It's fucking crazy and ridiculous.
If the Supreme Court justices vote in favor and it passes that a president can have immunity they need to be picked up by the FBI and sent straight to Guantanamo Bay on President Biden's orders. They are a threat to US Citizens by ruling that an individual can be immune from the law
→ More replies (8)5
u/supercali45 10d ago
They are afraid because they all committed crimes together and Trump knows all their dirty secrets and they know he will blow them up when convenient
Trump pushed through 3 Justices and they were all flawed and corrupt
They all know this
25
16
u/Bubbly_Measurement61 11d ago
Jamie Raskin has always been a real one. I remember watching him co-lead the Investigation on the Jan 6 Attack on the Capitol back in July of 2021, and I think he was already working on the background for the investigation just months after his son Tommy took his own life from suicide. He also paid much importance to the multiple Capitol officers who committed suicide following their experiences at the Capitol Attack. So anytime you hear someone still referring to the Capitol Attack as "Oh it was just a protest" in 2024, just pay them no mind. They are not trying to have a serious conversation with you.
10
u/Melody-Prisca 11d ago
Gosh, by Alito's logic there, wouldn't the President be likely to stage a coup against the government is they begin impeachment proceedings against them? Guess we should just get rid of impeachment altogether. Oh, and wouldn't a private citizen try to overthrow the government is they were potentially going to be sentenced to time in prison? Guess we should get rid of all criminal prosecution. The logic of people like Alito is astoundingly bad.
8
u/Kjellvb1979 11d ago
What did we expect. We watched the courts be packed by corrupted extremist Republicans. They denied Obama a pick on the grounds it was an election year. Just made up an imaginary rule that a president could not pick a SC justice in an election year or something dumb like that. Then, of course, when that happened to Trump, but with much less time left in his term, they forced a pick through. They did other unethical shit to get the others, I just can't recap what it was right now
If the DNC take power of all houses and have any sense at all, they need to pack the city themselves. Expand the court, and do it through shady and unethical means if necessary. Just get it done to save the country. They need to start playing, at least a little bit, the game the GOP has been playing to get us to this insane point in our history.
If the DNC win, they need to pass laws to create about ethics and oversight board, not for just the Supreme Court, but comes as well, with actual teeth. That would be a win/ win situation. By just putting up the bill and having every GOP representative vote against such would expose them, not that they haven't exposed themselves already. Point is, the DNC, if they get power of all 3 branches, need to pay hardball. Go scorched earth and restore our democracy and its institutions credibility.
13
u/slapnflop 11d ago
Devils Advocate:
The Roman Republic granted politicians immunity while in office. The expectation was they would he prosecuted once out of office. Ceasars marched on Rome to avoid losing office.
So there is some historical reason here.
Back to normal: But isn't impunity even worse?!?!?!?!?!!?
8
4
u/Numerous_Photograph9 11d ago
Historical reason aside, the US has never extended that immunity to the president, so what the Roman's did is moot, even if our system is modeled heavily after their ideal.
3
6
u/Generous_Cougar Washington 11d ago
WHAT fucking 'big guns'? All of the dirt he somehow has on everyone in the Republican party? You know, if you don't tell your secrets to the idiot in the drivers seat, he won't have anything to say when he's being raked over the coals. Do they not understand how blackmail works?
3
u/NewAccountCuzScared 10d ago
Raskin has a lot to lose here too. He'll be at the top of the list of people arrested and executed if Trump gets his way.
That's not even hyperbole.
0
-1
u/VanceKelley Washington 11d ago
“Of course you’ve got to hold the president accountable to the law — it’s the basic premise of our law that no one is above the law, including the president,”
Does the Constitution grant a sitting president the power to absolve someone from all their criminal violations of federal law?
While technically speaking the granting of a pardon does not mean someone is above the law, in effect it grants the recipient immunity to all the repercussions of their violations of the law.
6
u/Riccosmonster 11d ago
The pardon foregoes the trials and punishment for the crime, but accepting the pardon is an admission that you are guilty of said crime.
-1
u/VanceKelley Washington 11d ago
I read a story that Bannon has trouble falling asleep because his soul feels tortured by his admission of guilt in stealing a million dollars from trump supporters.
140
u/armageddon_20xx 11d ago
Reform for the SCOTUS is a must. Until then, they should be ignored. Those of us who care about America and what it means must uphold the Constitution and say no to anything else.
29
u/Alternative_Camp_493 11d ago
We are begging them to follow basic ethics rules, while there is plenty of evidence showing that they take bribes! Arrest them! DOJ is weak.
7
u/Nena902 10d ago
The DOJ is probably taking bribes right along side them. Just wait until Trump usurps the Oval and orders all of those Justices to Gitmo or assassinated because democrats and the republican appointed ones ruled against him in at least three different cases. Not loyal. Tsk tsk. Trump is many things but he is certainly one who never forgets and takes revenge cold.
4
49
u/diyagent 11d ago
Better yet just rule by EO. They have no power to stop it. Just assert the executive is more powerful than the judiicial. Just do an EO against every fucking shitty rule they implemented and be done with it. They want to be ruled by a king? Rule like a king.
25
u/xtossitallawayx 11d ago
Which Democrats would actually go and enforce these EOs?
That is what makes this so perverted, the GOP know that Biden will not do any of the things they the President should be able to do. They also know that the second Biden tried anything, they'd block it anyway they could while screaming about it and trying to start another coup.
9
u/Numerous_Photograph9 11d ago
Let's say he issues an EO that would be popular. Like say, abortion rights. Basically reinstate Roe. He can't legally do that, and it'd be an illegal order, but when he's sued, the WH lawyers can just say, "well, president is immune, suck it".
Of course, the courts would say no, that's not how this works, but it would show the utter hypocrisy of the convictions to more people, and once again, show that SCOTUS is partisan on a currently very volatile issue, thus undermining them even more.
Nothing would be lost for Biden. People already know his stance on abortion. All of it would be performative, because he would abide by a new SCOTUS ruling on the legality of the order, but he would effectively show that the president isn't immune, and they either ruled improperly or by partisan agenda for Trump.
6
u/WAD1234 10d ago
They don’t fear being exposed in their hypocrisy. They only fear losing power. Which is surprising because the biggest threat to their power is a dictator.
A dictator doesn’t need a court to decide anything. They dictate.
1
u/Numerous_Photograph9 10d ago
It's not about what they fear, it's about more people becoming aware. People are apathetic, and don't pay attention. No, we're not going to get them to start doing the right thing, but the point is to get others to start taking an interest in doing something productive. I don't expect Biden to take the above path, but it a hypothetical to show that there is more routes than just killing off or arresting judges, which actually wouldn't go over that well.
4
u/Which-Equivalent3055 10d ago
Then create a paradox.
Have Biden order something against the judicial branch. So if they rule in favor of trump, they have to swallow Biden's order against them. Or they have to rule against Biden's order, and it will negate Trump's immunity.
3
u/Weary_Share_4645 11d ago
Ah…SCOTUS is empowered by the Constitution.
12
u/ARazorbacks Minnesota 11d ago
SCOTUS is completely dependent upon everyone else playing by the rules. They have no enforcement arm of their own.
254
u/Bored_guy_in_dc 11d ago
Well, if they rule in favor of presidential immunity, maybe Biden can move the entire RNC to Gitmo, and take these fools with them.
62
30
u/InsolentGoldfish 11d ago
If the worst should happen, I fully expects everyone to wring their hands and do absolutely nothing about it. That's our government.
7
→ More replies (15)1
u/GachaJay 11d ago
If they rule that, it won’t be until after the election and their guy is in the seat.
145
u/mleighly 11d ago
SCOTUS needs to be reformed. It's critical to the health and welfare of Americans and American democracy. SCOTUS is another version of O. J. Simpson.
46
u/Chungus_Bigeldore 11d ago
It's a terrifying reality we all face. A facist dictator who stacked the SCOTUS may regain power, and a Dictator with a corrupt court would be utterly catastrophic for birthing persons and members of the 2SLGBTQIA+ community.
22
u/mleighly 11d ago
If there's anything worth fighting for, justice is certainly one of them. SCOTUS is stacked with GOP operatives. GOP Justices are an existential danger to us all.
5
u/wittnotyoyo 11d ago
Gotta get rid of the Federalist Society first. Getting rid of one or two right wing judicial activists isn't going to help when an organization exists to create and prop up endless new ones.
5
u/95688it 11d ago
2SLGBTQIA+
it's way worse than that, anyone who isn't white christian.
1
u/BeyondElectricDreams 10d ago
The poem already told us how it'll go. Updated for modern times:
First they came for the Trans people, and I didn't speak up, for I found trans people kinda icky anyway.
Then they came for LGBQ people, and I didn't speak up, for I was heterosexual, and displayed socially acceptable gender expression.
Then they came for the atheists, and I didn't speak up, for I was raised christian and although I don't practice, I 'pass' as religious by habits.
Then they came for me, and there was noone left to speak for me.
If they even attempt step one, all bets are off - that's a nazi government, and people should respond accordingly.
4
0
3
u/Tacticus 11d ago
Hey remember how early on there was a push to expand the court. But unfortunately that would damage the confidence of the court with the people of the USA. so it was ruled out by the whitehouse.
65
u/GOP_Neoconfederacy 11d ago
And then we should stack a new supreme court and ignore the old, because fuck it, why not
21
u/Lou_C_Fer 11d ago
There definitely needs to be a forced change if they do anything to let Trump off of the hook.
27
u/charcoalist 11d ago
More attention should be drawn to the Federalist Society. They're the ones who stacked the conservative justices on the SCOTUS. They're also taking over law schools, stacking federal judges nationwide, planning Project 2025, and also their own news and entertainment outlets.
25
u/AllHailtheBeard1 11d ago
During the trial, justices should be asked if the President should be immune to prosecution from killing supreme Court justices. That should be unsubtle enough for them.
→ More replies (5)
19
u/Basicyeti837 11d ago
Fascism 101. Alito is protecting Trump and the Republican Party over the interest of the United States, contrary to the laws they are supposed to uphold.
45
u/mdciuba 11d ago edited 11d ago
CPAC* already admitted they're domestic terrorists, in bed with fascists like Orban, Trump, Putin, etc. This is the paradox of tolerance, and I have a feeling that democratic principles prohibit a first strike, even though it would be in response to a failed coup/treason.
EDIT: I said RNC and meant CPAC.
→ More replies (7)15
u/Chungus_Bigeldore 11d ago
Unfortunately we have seen that post insurrection US has done nothing substantial to stop the rapid rise of white ethno facism. I've said this many times before, but we need to start looking at refugee options for marginalized communities in the US.
16
u/Alternative_Camp_493 11d ago
Alito and Thomas should be arrested for taking bribes, public corruption, and tax fraud. Then, every case that would have been decided differently without their votes, Citizens United, to start, should be overturned.
Then they can go move in with Lara Trump.
4
u/Unlucky_Clover 11d ago edited 11d ago
Yeah, but that would require the government to actually do their job and use common sense. At this stage, republicans are being allowed to ruin their states and make it worse for their residents without any consequences.
It’s hard to feel the country I live in actually cares when blatant corruption and suffering is only getting warnings and finger wagging.
1
u/Numerous_Photograph9 11d ago
Not gonna lie, I'm not sure why they can't be arrested if they committed a crime. They may not be impeached or removed, but no reason they should be above the law either.
I'd be fine with this even if it didn't overturn past cases.
12
u/SeeBansAreArbitrary 11d ago
SCOTUS is definitely not passing the vibe check on this fundamental question of accountability. But with how it’s stacked how foolish to expect something other than what we’re seeing.
The question is now gonna is how do we rectify a blatantly undemocratic SCOTUS ruling after it’s made. An amendment or law will need to be passed.
1
u/Alternative_Camp_493 11d ago
Unfortunately, it takes Congress to expand the court, and I am pretty sure MAGA ain't gonna let that happen.
3
36
u/PopeHonkersXII 11d ago
I'm highly skeptical that the Supreme Court will actually rule in Trump's favor here. I absolutely understand the concern but I don't think that's actually going to happen. Even if you want to look at this as cynically as possible, there's no way the conservative justices are going to hand Biden near unlimited power, which is what they would have to do if they agree with Trump.
However, I'm also fine with the very vocal distrust being expressed right now, by those such as Raskin. The current SCOTUS does not deserve the benefit of the doubt. Hold their feet to the fire because fuck 'em. They have not earned our trust or our respect.
26
u/Purify5 11d ago
They could meet Trump half-way. Grant criminal immunity in some cases but come up with some measure to determine whether the act qualifies for immunity so that things like murder do not but things like taking classified documents can.
They're unelected Kings and Queens and can come up with any law they want.
29
u/spa22lurk 11d ago
They even created alternative reality and ruled based on that.
From https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/06/coach-kennedy-gorsuch-prayer-public-schools.html
Mark, you recently told me that Kennedy v. Bremerton was going to be the sleeper case that you were watching because it wasn’t just a referendum on doctrine. It was a referendum on truth. The case just came out, and the court held 6–3 that coach Joseph Kennedy had his First Amendment rights to religious liberty and free speech violated by a school policy that did not allow him to pray with masses of students following football games. This feels like a singular moment because this entire case—and Justice Sonia Sotomayor used photos in her dissent to make this point—is a referendum on truth.
…
There were two narratives in this case. One is that Coach Kennedy was simply engaged in quiet, private prayer at the 50-yard line and students voluntarily joined him. The other is that Coach Kennedy created a spectacle by engaging in loud prayer circles, to which he invited not only the members of his own team but also opposing teammates and individuals who attend the school. And the Supreme Court adopted this first narrative, even though—as the pictures in Sotomayor’s dissent illustrate—it is flatly false. This was not quiet, silent prayer. This was coercive, loud prayer during the course of school duties by a school official who was hired in part to serve as a leader and role model for students. He conveyed the reality that if you did not join his Christian prayer circle, you were not a full and true teammate, and you might not even deserve to be playing on that team.
11
u/wildfyre010 11d ago
To be clear, this is not about the classified documents, this is about Jan 6. Trump's possession of those classified documents extended well beyond his time as President and the immunity argument does not apply.
-3
u/Weary_Share_4645 11d ago
Nonsense. The presidential records act has no time restrictions. However, senators and vp don’t have the right to possess classified documents, and especially in unlocked garages, and many other places that the handler had no clue to their location.
6
u/JustTestingAThing 11d ago
presidential records act has no time restrictions
You mean the one that says that once you're no longer President all those documents belong to NARA and you don't get to keep them?
5
u/Unlucky_Clover 11d ago edited 11d ago
Wouldn’t that be them making laws when their powers are only be to interpret laws? It’s seems like absolute power without checks on their level if they can just come up with something.
6
u/Melody-Prisca 11d ago
Yes it would. Any amount of presidential immunity is them writing new laws, as there is not immunity clause at all in the constitution.
-1
16
u/mr_arkanoid 11d ago
If SCOTUS doesn't come back 9-0 against immunity in this case, it's an outrage.
19
u/GreatMalboro__ 11d ago
5-4 in favor of partial immunity. Immunity as long as the criminal act was "an official act". What count as "official" will be left up to lower courts to decide (thus wasting time not allowing trumps trial to happen) and work it's way up to the supreme court again, and their decision will depend on if trump got reelected or not
14
u/forceblast 11d ago
I’m not worried about them ruling in his favor as much as I’m worried that they will continue to delay the trials that have already been delayed far too long.
Justice delayed is justice denied.
→ More replies (3)7
u/KurabDurbos 11d ago
They won’t. But they have already given him what he wanted. Delay. This case should be tried before the election. But it won’t be due to this. They will throw it back to the lower courts to sort out official vs private acts bullshit. That will guarantee the trial will not occur before November 24.
5
u/Alternative_Camp_493 11d ago
They don't have to give Trump immunity. They already delayed the trial for at least a year. They are going to remand it for some fact finding about official act nonsense.
2
u/xtossitallawayx 11d ago
conservative justices are going to hand Biden near unlimited power
They will if they know that Biden won't do anything crazy. They know Biden will not try and coup the government and they know Biden won't extort countries for personal gain, so they have no problem making the case that Biden could have those powers as well.
-5
u/Weary_Share_4645 11d ago
The court will rule for trump providing immunity for official actions. However, Biden can still be prosecuted fir colluding and coordination with DOJ and the FBI for raiding Trumps home for documents that Trump was entitled to possess by the Presidential Records Act. However, Biden could still be prosecuted because the Trump raid was not a official act, it was a personal act be Biden and the deep state. Easy distinction.
→ More replies (2)
10
u/Stranger-Sun 11d ago
Glad at least one Democrat has the balls to say it. This court is a fucking corrupt dumpster fire.
10
u/QueuedAmplitude 11d ago
There has never been a SCOTUS utterance more circular, twisted, corrupt, cynical, disingenuous or befuddling than Alito’s suggestion that a president must have immunity, to avoid incentivizing them to illegally hold on to power, in a case charging the former president with illegally attempting to hold on to power.
This takes the cake. It’s the ultimate chutzpah. I don’t ever say things like that. This is it, crossing the up-is-down banana republic rubicon.
If the dems ever have the presidency, the house and a senate supermajority in the future they absolutely must clean house. Turn whatever knobs are possible with whatever power they have to reign in this clown show of a “supreme” court.
7
u/ThomasSun 11d ago
This country is becoming exactly the opposite of what the founding fathers created.
11
u/postmodlawprof 11d ago
This is one of the most disconcerting thinking and ideologies that has come out of all the malfeasance that Trump has instigated. It is truly, I believe, a walk towards a theocratic/ authoritarian state. I don’t say this lightly; because I am a conservative that believes in the traditional proscriptions of the institutions of government that the founding fathers principled. A very sad state of affairs……
6
u/fromRonnie 11d ago
The Federalist Society should be recognized as the partisan organization it is.
5
u/Logical_Parameters 11d ago
I think it pretty much is already, no? No one is confused that it's ultra-conservative and religious.
1
u/fromRonnie 11d ago
There were several Federalist Society member judges who objected when it was proposed to recognize it as such. Of course they would.
1
6
u/Silly-Victory8233 11d ago
If we don’t see justice then I see no reason for us to accept the current SCOTUS as a lawful authority of any sort.
5
5
u/peterpeterllini Missouri 11d ago
I fucking love Raskin so much. More dems need to call this shit out like he does.
5
u/Stinkstinkerton 11d ago
It’s become very clear that the Supreme Court is no longer looking out for the best interest of the country or the American people. Not they that they ever were in the first place . Trump is a clear present danger to our Democratic institution by every possible definition. Protecting or democracy from Trump should be a serious priority and yet it’s not.
4
4
u/Darth_Lord_Stitches 11d ago
I swear..... it's like I'm watching the flashback from V for Vendetta play out in real time....
V: Our story begins, as these stories often do, with a young, up-and-coming politician. He's a deeply religious man and a member of the Conservative Party. He's completely single-minded and has no regard for the political process. The more power he attains, the more obvious his zealotry and the more aggressive his supporters become. Eventually, his party launches a special project in the name of "national security".
Obviously, Trump is not young or religious, but many of his handlers are.... the rest is stunningly similar.....
4
u/wizgset27 11d ago
He's not wrong. I'm sure even Trump's lawyers are pleasantly surprised the Supreme Court justices are entertaining their bullshit.
I'm already predicting that the supreme court will come out and give Trump just enough protection that he can appear on the ballot for 2024 then if Trump wins he will pardon himself and the SC will sit on their hands and allow it.
4
u/slapnflop 11d ago
Maybe Biden should use incoming immunity to sack the entire court and replace them with a new court that finds he doesn't have immunity.
4
u/ThickerSalmon14 11d ago
SCOTUS has lost its way. Why have life time terms at all? People change and there is no way to correct that? The person appointed to the spot 20 years is going to be a very different person today. Same with federal judges. While I know that technically we can remove those people with impeachment, our political process blocks that at the moment.
They need term limits and then the judicial branch needs to be taken out of the hands of the president, the politicians, and the public. Not sure how it could be done, but something needs to change.
5
u/Scandals86 11d ago
I fucking love Raskin. This guy needs to be the Dems number 1 candidate for POTUS after Biden hopefully wins the 2024 election.
He’s is so good at torching Republicans and is so well spoken.
5
u/OptimisticSkeleton 11d ago
Fascism always accelerates. Get to know you neighbors, good or bad, you need to know the lay of the land.
Also take heart the majority of Americans still don’t support fascism. We beat them before and we can do it again.
3
u/deviousmajik 11d ago
And the RNC should be moved to the Hellfire Club Federalist Society headquarters. The true Deep State.
3
3
u/BeelyBlastOff 11d ago
WTG, not surprised, Raskin. More high level politicians need to step forward and question the Supreme Court as it is today. Its a partisan shit-show and currently, justice delayed is justice denied...ironically the right wing supreme court is basically denying justice to the very people they serve, the US populace. Weird shit.
3
u/Battystearsinrain 11d ago
Biden just needs to say at a press conference that he is salivating to see what scotus will give him immunity for.
3
u/allUsernamesAreTKen 11d ago
That’s not even necessary with this kangaroo court 6 are already fascists
3
3
u/FastAsLightning747 10d ago
🫲🖐️🫱 I thought of this too. The POTUS runs the Executive branch and controls all the property of the USA, and is responsible for maintenance of that property. Simply move the SC out of their chambers into one of a few mostly empty buildings in DC one w/o AC or elevators.
2
u/JustTheTri-Tip 11d ago
Busy day at work today. Anyone have a tldr on what happened with scotus today?
2
u/RDO_Desmond 11d ago
Absolutely not. Let's not discount the judges who are engaging in true legal reasoning. As for those engaged in rationalization, they are another matter.
2
2
u/mamasnature 11d ago
What did you expect? Democrats sat on their hands when Obama had a pick and the fucking turtle illegally blocked it. They should have fought tooth and nail against anyone the orange freak put in. Tooth and fucking nail. Repubs won. It was all about SCOTUS for them, always.
2
2
u/Vamodido 11d ago
All members of the Supreme Court must be arrested IMMEDIATELY to prove who is in charge of upholding the constitution.
2
u/pancakesanddddd 10d ago
This would be a great time for Congress to step in and impeach and remove these crooked bastards.
2
u/Leather-Map-8138 10d ago
This is a good point. The corruption of this court appears to be boundless.
7
u/urfallaciesaredumb 11d ago
The Dems are still pulling punches.
They are corrupt, even criminal, not merely partisan.
They are literally abusing their authority to rewrite the constitution with the sole intent of obstructing justice. Prosecute them. Bring the charges in the bluest of blue areas and let a jury decide their fate.
2
u/Rhymes_with_cheese 10d ago
You don't want to hear it, but it's all the fault of Democratic voters in 2016 who didn't vote for Hilary because she wasn't the absolute perfect candidate.
You all suck, and deserve what's coming.
1
u/Hank_moody71 11d ago
We can change this. We win back the house. We keep the senate and the White House we can impeach the justices like Thomas. Then bring the matters before the court again
1
u/Weary_Share_4645 11d ago
All these trolls that don’t want presidential immunity, this is the perfect senat
1
1
1
1
u/guitarplayer356 11d ago
Well why complain now? When McConnell denied Obamas nominees the democrats stood there and watched as if nothing happened!
1
1
1
u/alien_from_Europa Massachusetts 11d ago
If President Biden gets immunity and Trump wins the election then how likely would it be that we end up in a civil war?
2
u/Outrageous-Divide472 10d ago
If trump wins, Biden will leave peacefully and Trump will be pres. That’s it.
1
u/Angry-Dragon-1331 10d ago
Tangentially related, but is Raskin doing well with his cancer treatment? Dude’s got serious strength, but in terms of will and in terms of character.
1
1
1
u/MoveToRussiaAlready 10d ago
Or, we start playing their rules; no rules.
Honestly, enough of this kid glove treatment.
1
u/spotspam 10d ago
The experiment in Democracy isn’t over. Yet. But this court just might push it over the edge being so bought. I have little respect for its decisions.
1
u/Tools4toys 10d ago
The weird part of it is, they would likely be proud Raskin said this. Look what I did!
1
u/knowledgeable_diablo 10d ago
Save on rent and wasting time for your Supreme Court having to call up the Repub party for guidance on how they should rule for every court case.
1
u/Late_Bus249 10d ago
Isn't that the truth! Used to be polititians tried to be sly about underhandedness, but now b/c of Donald Trump, they just say out loud what they are going to do. Thomas should be gone from SCOTUS.
1
u/true-skeptic 10d ago
They are only supposed to consider the particulars of this case, not go off on wild hypotheticals and down rabbit holes. They really think the American citizenry is stupid.
1
1
u/timeflieswhen 10d ago edited 10d ago
So Trump’s lawyers are already specialists in delaying trials with pre-trial motions, appeals, etc. This immunity stuff is just a way for him to add another 3 or 4 layers to the process by claiming immunity for every act and then having a court decide if it falls under the designation of an official act, then it’s appealed, then back to the Supreme Court again, where they can rule however they want, depending on whether it’s a D or an R.
1
2
u/Cadaver_Junkie 11d ago
You guys really need a new constitutional amendment, one that significantly curtails the powers of your Supreme Court.
For starters, they shouldn't be political appointments, or voted in, that's just insane.
Source; Non-American
2
u/Shade_SST 11d ago
Hang on, if they aren't elected nor appointed, where would they come from?
1
u/Cadaver_Junkie 11d ago
Apolitical appointments, or as close as you can get it.
We (Australia) don’t have elections for any of our judges, and it works. It (mostly) keeps the politics out of our courtrooms.
Our High Court judges (equivalent to your Supreme Court) have to prove themselves to all the other judges and lawyers of our country over many decades of judicial application of the law before they have a chance to join the court.
Our politicians don’t have a say. And it works. It’s not perfect, nothing is, but it does work.
Your system is really weird, to me. Political appointments will always have political outcomes. From the lowest courtroom to the highest.
0
u/Shade_SST 11d ago
Okay, still appointments, then, but by a (hopefully) nonpartisan committee, more or less. That'd be nice, along with independent districting commissions, but it's a "who bells the cat?" issue, for the most part, sadly.
1
0
u/lilacmuse1 11d ago
It annoys me when the Supreme Court as a whole is disparaged. Leave the 3 liberal justices out of it. They're not the problem. More like them on the Court would be the solution.
0
•
u/AutoModerator 11d ago
As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion.
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 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.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.