|
Dave Weigel@daveweigel.bsky.social |
If you want to turn SCOTUS into a weak House of Lords, that's its own thing. If you want a liberal SCOTUS you elect Dem presidents until Thomas and Alito die.
18 replies 9 reposts 184 likes
|
RRRVVVWWW
@rrrvvvwww.bsky.social
[ View ] |
“Yes sir may have another” is quite the status quo to keep! Nice.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
@jakemadtown.bsky.social
[ View ] |
"Weak House of Lords" is the correct response. SCOTUS has no enforcement mechanism, and we should not pretend they do.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Rob
@robloblaw.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Dave stop posting clown style. There are no more rules
0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
@bknox.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Seems like you’re describing a very stupidly structured system that is desperately in need of drastic reform.
0 replies 0 reposts 7 likes
|
riffle
@riffle.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Gotta win the Senate too. Open SCOTUS seats don't necessarily get filled anymore.
0 replies 0 reposts 6 likes
|
|
@boredompeejeterson.bsky.social
[ View ] |
SCOTUS already has overreached a lot. They have no codified power to e.g. make up fake immunities for cops, prosecutors or presidents. They made that power up, too
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
We Are Standing Still
@nothingfromnada.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Is expecting that kind of sustained success in a system that has a heavy pendulum pattern to elections remotely realistic though?
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
James Jordan
@jkjordaniii.bsky.social
[ View ] |
The actuarial tables give them 10-11 years, so keep up the pressure on the ethics stuff. Make sure their wives are angry. Pump up the blood pressure. If you serve them at a restaurant, bring out giant plates of fried food on the house.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Ian Gaida
@trainsfan.bsky.social
[ View ] |
We should have one branch of government be incredibly silly, as a treat
1 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
WASMBAPPEN
@makeitsnow.bsky.social
[ View ] |
let’s do its own thing
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
BuffnTuff
@buffntuff.bsky.social
[ View ] |
You need 66 dem senators too, since they won’t do anything with the filibuster and the merrick garland situation proved republicans can block anyone pretty much indefinitely.
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
pixelatedboat aka “mr bluesky”
@pixelatedboat.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Optional retirement makes this hard to pull off (you can’t risk losing a single election), so the answer is to make it illegal for justices to ever retire. The Drop Dead On The Bench act
9 replies 1 reposts 64 likes
|
Warhammerchick
@celticdragon1.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Dem Presidents AND Dem Senate control for the next 25 years isn't a plan
0 replies 0 reposts 6 likes
|
@ravenlasagna.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I seem to recall we had a Dem president and still weren't allowed to have him appoint a justice during his tenure.
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
|
@gpthacker.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I pick weak ass House of Lords court given the general awfullness of the court since it’s inception
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Greg Lastname
@orpach.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Doesn't congress have something to do with this process, or are we assuming those elections move in lockstep?
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Conor Conneally
@ernekid.bsky.social
[ View ] |
The good news is they’ve ruled that the president ordering air strikes on their houses is fine as long as it’s an official act.
0 replies 1 reposts 17 likes
|
Matt マット
@mplewis.com
[ View ] |
The oldest justice is 75. When was the last time the Democrats won four elections in a row? Do you really think this is your best bet?
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes