Today I came to the sobering realization that right-wingers can now repeal literally any law they don't like by just challenging it in a lower court and then appealing it all the way up to the Supreme Court. In this way, the SCOTUS is effectively acting as a legislative body. The system is broken. I don't think people realize just how fucked America is.
@Phracker2Art No, that’s not how this works at all.
It’s really the opposite, in fact.
Recent rulings demand that laws be followed and not effectively repealed by the executive branch.
So much misinformation out there these days, and this is an example of it. It’s the exact opposite of what it sounds like you’ve heard, so you need to stop listening to those people that are lying to you.
Most people criticizing don't realize for example that the court has had an overwhelming number of cases that ended up being 7-0 recently, and there's cases where some liberal justices and some conservative justices combined to get a slim outcome. They're not politicians, they're judges and have a different view of the world. Under Trump most Republicans hated Roberts for example.
Many such people think they would have opposed the Nazis if they were Germans in 1936, while loving who the establishment tells them to love and hating who the establishment tells them to hate and not realizing their behavior would have aligned them directly with the Nazis in Germany in 1936.
- replies
- 2
- announces
- 1
- likes
- 1
> They're not politicians, they're judges
difference being that you can punish politicians for having wrong opinions
@sj_zero @volkris @Phracker2Art My behavior definitely aligns with the Nazis.
No you can punish judges for being wrong. That’s why we have the impeachment option. It’s the entire point of that.
Of course you can. They can impeach anybody for any reason. We elect our representatives, and the people that we choose to elect, we are hiring them to decide whether to impeach anybody. That’s one of the powers that they get with their offices.
If you think they should have impeached but they didn’t, then hold them accountable for that. If you think they should not have impeached but they did, again, hold them accountable for that.
The decision is purely up to them. They have that lever to pull if they want to and we hold them accountable for whether they do or they don’t.
So maybe the key is to consider, who gets to review the impeachment? Who gets to appeal? If a president is impeached, what does he get to do?
The answer is nothing. There is no appeal. It’s not like a normal Court proceeding where the defendant gets to appeal to a higher court to review the record as he is on his way to jail.
No, the way this is set up there is no appeal, whatever our elect ed representatives decide is final.
Aunt if you think about it that means that the people that we elect can impeach for any reason that they think is justified because there is no higher power to reverse it.
@volkris Is that why Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are trying to have the entire NLRB declared unconstitutional and subsequently dissolved so they'll be allowed to underpay and overwork their employees with complete impunity? They're using literally the exact tactic that I talked about in the OP.
@Phracker2Art having the nlrb declared unconstitutional would not allow them to break the law and underpay their employees.
So no?
That’s not how that works.
@volkris You're nitpicking. The broader point is that they're using the tactic of challenging a law in the lower courts and then appealing all the way up to the Supreme Court to repeal any law that governs how they treat their employees.
@Phracker2Art It’s not nitpicking because pointing it out completely undermines the claim that they would be able to underpay their employees.
If you’re saying that’s the mechanism by which they would underpay employees than it really matters that the mechanism you’re identifying doesn’t exist.
No, challenging that law would not lead to the result that you bring up, so it’s core to what you’re saying.
@volkris The claim that they are doing it specifically because they want to underpay their employees wasn't my central argument, so it is nitpicking.
@Phracker2Art then I don’t understand what your central argument is.
What are you trying to say?