this post was submitted on 04 Jan 2024
240 points (96.9% liked)

politics

19144 readers
3028 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

You can thank one liberal pipe dream and one overly cautious Justice Department.

“It’s up to the Supreme Court.” These days the phrase is as much a statement of fact when it comes to a major legal issue that the justices will resolve as it is a cause for concern. After all, in the past two years alone, the conservative supermajority of justices installed by Donald Trump has upended the law on abortion, gun control, voting rights, affirmative action, executive power, and discrimination in public life.

The same group of justices is now poised to consider two major legal questions that will significantly shape — and perhaps even indirectly determine — the outcome of the 2024 presidential election. The Court’s handling of these issues will constitute a roiling, monthslong subplot of the 2024 presidential contest, one that remains, according to recent polling, a statistical dead heat between Trump and President Joe Biden and couldplausibly turn on the progress of Trump’s criminal cases before Election Day.

It is an unsettling, if not outright maddening, situation that should concern anyone who has watched the politicization and deterioration of the Court in recent years or who recalls its intervention in the 2000 election in favor of George W. Bush. The uncertainty before us is the result of two ostensibly different problems that are converging before our eyes: the emergence of a solidly conservative majority on the Supreme Court, whose decisions often align with the partisan political priorities of the Republican Party, and the Justice Department’s needless delay in moving to investigate and prosecute Trump over his effort to steal the 2020 election.

all 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 68 points 10 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I turn 39 this year. Growing up in the 90s it seemed like post cold war things might be looking up. Lofuckingl.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

It did. Then SCOTUS threw the presidency to Bush and commercial airliners flew into tall buildings in NY.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

Imagine the Gore timeline. I know we can agree this is the culmination of Nixon and the Southern Strategy for 60+ years. Or maybe that we let things persist by not cleaning house after the Civil War.

But imagine the restoration of all the good will toward America deteriorated by decades of imperialism btwn WW2 and 9/11.. and Gore was at the helm instead of the Neocons.

The climate alone.. peace in the middle east instead of oil wars.. banking regulations.. so many other timelines we'll never know.. Too much power in that court.

[–] [email protected] 46 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Our elected Democrats keep trusting their Republican colleagues to do the right thing, and they keep getting fucked over. When will they learn?

[–] [email protected] 28 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Democrats have been Charlie Brown to the Republican's Lucy for as long as I can remember. Every time they run to kick the ball, every time the Republicans pull it out of the way, and every time the Democrats fall on their ass.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago

A perfect analogy. Good grief!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago

This is fantastic.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The delays in the justice department are because they've never prosecuted a previously sitting president to this degree before. If they make a misstep, he wins on appeal. This is being taken very slowly, very deliberately as to not pervert the course of justice. Unfortunately for us, the very rich and very influential can essentially delay this almost indefinitely.

Trump will die before he ever ends up in prison. Honestly, I think that's the best we can hope for.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

So sorry, I'm confused, your start off by saying that the justice department is responsible for the delays because they're working hard to get it right. That's an excellent point.

But then you say that unfortunately the rich and influential can delay this indefinitely. Also a good point, but flies in the face of the first.

Can you clarify?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

It doesn't fly in the face of the first at all. That's how the law ends up working (or not working) for people. If you can hire a team of educated lawyers, they can postpone, argue merits of, wording of, conditions of, etc -- written law.

If you can't hire that same team of lawyers, you just get told "that's how it is" and you don't get the same protections.

Like Trump saying he never vowed to "uphold" the constitution. That teeny tiny argument ended up costing like 2 weeks worth of court...

It's these little things, that lawyers then argue in appeals court -- to justify overturning a previous ruling. Things like the previous judge misapplying a ruling, etc. These "small" injustices are done every day to normal people who can't afford a team of lawyers to scrutinize every single little thing that a judge does.

In some cases, if a lower court gets it wrong -- then the decision gets overturned. However...if the lower court is slow, methodical, and steps very carefully - appeals will look at the person filing the appeal and laugh. But every single I has to be dotted. Every T has to be crossed. Everything has to be performed perfectly. It reduces the amount of scrutiny that the lawyers can use to their advantage.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 10 months ago

They already did it before, why not again?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 10 months ago (2 children)

It's astounding just how far Very Important People will go to bothsides blame at every opportunity and give sympathy to blatantly dishonest 'interpretations'.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 10 months ago (3 children)

i call the both sides people 'conservatives'. they live in a different era, where 2 parties attempted to work together (or at least pretend).

they are desperately trying to conserve that at all costs.... while the system burns around them.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Back in the before times, they two parties worked together quite fine in the backroom dealing, and only blustered when there were cameras, or the public, around.

Now that garbage is leaking into the backroom dealings, and it shows.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

The "in the before times" also included segregation, Jim Crow, and chattel slavery.

So "worked together quite fine" seems disingenuous at least.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

Out of curiosity, what is your vision of government where the players are simply at all-out war with one another instead of seeking compromise? Outside of an autocracy, I'm struggling to picture a stable government where people on different sides make no attempt at working together.

And if what you're seeking is a left-authoritarian government then I'm going to have to agree with the both-sidesers on this one. I don't want any flavor of authoritarian rule. Fascism is probably the worst, but the Soviet Union was a real shit show, too.

[–] RaincoatsGeorge 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

These are the real problem group. They are hooked on partisan politics and would never support a Democrat, but this comes at the cost of the cancer growing among their ranks. I dont think these people are all classical racist fascists. These are Christian church going family men entering middle and elderly age. They are in fact generally good people and they are proud of that fact. These are the 'nobody wants to work anymore', 'I worked two jobs to make it through college ' crowd. But they have done well and raised good families. They are in my mind good people, hard workers, and good leaders. But they can't get past this us vs them mentality. They don't like trump and the maga shit but only because it makes them look bad. They want to be taken seriously and maintain their honor but it's real hard when your new maga friends keep wearing swastikas.

They are conflicted and angry and have signaled that no matter what, the majority of them will place their pride above all and vote for Trump again and again. They just can't accept that shit got away from them and their great monolith party of principles and honor is anything but. They have to find any way to both sides it and make the maga cancer seem like a common problem amongst their enemies ranks as well. To them it's not a maga problem if they can create a boogeyman. BLM and trans people invading schools.

It falls apart quickly under review, so that's why they don't review. If you get your news by reading headlines and you get your headlines from fox news, you'll always have a safe space.

These men and women are inadvertently killing America. They are blind to it because their victory would seemingly benefit them and cause no problems. They don't realize the true ramifications because they dismiss all of that as liberal overreaction.

This is the group that scares me, just because they yield so much influence.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago

Yeah, all of that adds up to not good people, sorry. You can't keep your head down and ignore what's going on and empower the worst among us because you don't want to have to think, and still be a good person.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

Who are these so called vip? I don't think there's any legitimate both sides accusations.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 10 months ago

Illegitimate government is illegitimate

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago

What's also insane is that the supreme court in the US is so partisan. I don't think the people in virtually any other country could name their supreme court justices, and certainly not say what party they're loyal to. The appointment process in the US is designed to result in partisan justices, which is yet another way that the US constitution is flawed and needs to be amended.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

What’s even more maddening is that there are tons of people now that are willing to throw away their vote because of their stance on foreign affairs- while simultaneous ignoring the fact that Biden’s opposition- a twice-impeached treasonous rapist, would do the exact same thing, if not worse over there.

Seriously… the Palestinian conflict is the best thing to have happened to Trump since Mexico agreed to pay for his wall.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago

Could. Haha.