262 points

Get these fairy-tale-believing cunts out of government.

permalink
report
reply
82 points

I will do my part by not voting in protest! That will surely work! (/s)

permalink
report
parent
reply
59 points

Politicians famously consider the opinions of people who don’t vote. /s

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Maybe they ought to? There’s quite a lot of potential votes out there. Also want to add that I always vote, and politicians never consider my opinion anyway.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

I mean they do, insofar as it might be easier to convert someone not voting into someone voting for them than it is to convert someone voting for their opponent.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points
*

That’s why you vote uncommitted. There’s no way to ignore that message or use any of their usual excuses.

But the Democrats understand what they need to do in order to win election, they’re just so latched to the corporate tit that they won’t do it. Think they can get a few more gulps of that sweet lobby money before things get “serious”. The pigs are too busy feeding to give a fuck about our democracy collapsing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points
*

Protest voting would be aimed at reforming a democratic party that’s unfit to confront fascism. It’s a legitimate strategy whether you agree with it or not.

Another Biden term will not do anything to mitigate Democratic complicity with fascism. Establishment dems are quite literally worse than useless.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

Except it doesn’t reform. You win elections from the center, so if Dems lose they go further to the center. Because those are the voters that exist.

No-voting accomplishes literally nothing. It never has and it never will. In reality, it’s counter productive every time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

Whose idea was it to appoint Supreme Court justices for life? That seems like asking for trouble.

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

Blame the conservatives for abusing the system.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

Honestly as much as the lifetime appointment wasn’t the worst idea the drafters had in terms of something for long term stability when the positions in every other branch have varying degrees of volatility, not having some process baked into the Constitution to deal with bad actors in the judiciary was a gross oversight.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points
*

The Constitution seems to have been written with the idea that politicians will have good intentions. The checks and balances seem to be just to enforce compromise and prevent a single bad actor.

It doesn’t have any protections about and entire political party colluding to grab power. I don’t know how we fix this without amendments or a brand new constitution

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

There is a process. They can be impeached just like the President.

It’s more than just the Judicial branch that’s broken.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

not having some process baked into the Constitution to deal with bad actors in the judiciary was a gross oversight.

They can be impeached. That requires both houses of Congress to be on board with it though, and most people wanting a solution to that problem currently don’t want a solution that requires both houses of Congress or a supermajority of state legislatures to be on board because that’s not a kind of support they can get. the only other way to remove a justice from SCOTUS is one casket at a time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

There’s a funny thing about lifetime appointments.

You can end them whenever you want.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Especially religious ones. Maybe we should have religious tests, just not the way xtianists want them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

The framers of the constitution. But to be fair, back then they did not expect people to live this long. If anything, blame science. It’s all their fault!

permalink
report
parent
reply
168 points
*

Windsor goes on to tell Alito: “People in this country who believe in God have got to keep fighting for that — to return our country to a place of godliness.”

“I agree with you. I agree with you,” replies Alito

Disturbing on the face. But then you think, what exactly do they think is ungodly? Business regulation? Gay right to exist and marry? BLM? It’s gay and trans rights isn’t it? Let that sink it, they think human fucking rights are ungodly.

VOTE.

permalink
report
reply
73 points
*

The GOP will be coming for Brown v Board of Education next, and you can bet your ass Clarence Thomas and the other right wing justices will be all for it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

I wonder if there will be a third school for Asian kids. Or do they go with black? Is it white and “other”?

permalink
report
parent
reply
46 points

Schools? Oh, we won’t have any of those when the GOP is done.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Other and white mean whatever the ones in power mean. I recently learned that Russians often don’t see Caucasians (from the caucuses) as white.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Nah conservatives will be eager to put Asians in the “not white” category at the drop of a hat.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I know at least where I’m from, these ghouls pretty much just hate black people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I’m pretty sure they’ll overturn Obergefell before Brown.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

You know godliness when a man could marry and rape a child before starting to whip those slave back into place just as god wanted all along

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Asshole claims to be an “originalist”.

Same asshole: We have to “return” a country founded as a secular one to “godliness”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

“I agree with you. I agree with you,” replies Alito

Send this guy to prison. He’s compromised the Constitution in the open.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

human fucking rights

Literally…

permalink
report
parent
reply
123 points

“I think you’re probably right,” Alito replies. “On one side or the other — one side or the other is going to win. I don’t know. I mean, there can be a way of working — a way of living together peacefully, but it’s difficult, you know, because there are differences on fundamental things that really can’t be compromised. They really can’t be compromised. So it’s not like you are going to split the difference.”

In other words, dude wants some Taliban shit and wants to be able to control people are not prescribed to his religion.

If his family doesn’t want to have abortions, or wants their kids to learn about god in school, there is nothing stopping them from living that way. Just don’t force me to live that way.

The establishment clause yo

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

permalink
report
reply
14 points

Well yeah but the number one thing these people crave is dominion over others. Any professed love for liberty, freedom, and the rule of law will go out the window the second they can successfully do so.

That’s why they are acting now. Because their demographics are cooked after this election, so they are going all in to try and steal control away from the people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

My main concern with the reporting is that the reporter is leading Alito a bit. Alito isn’t pushing back at all, but I feel like that is the narrative fox and others are gonna go with

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

He explicitly says he agrees with what she says. I don’t think it’s worth being concerned over what a propaganda outlet is going to spin up - there isn’t a scenario where they wouldn’t spin up a defense of Alito. Reality isn’t a concern for propagandists; no adjustment of tact will change that fact. To each their own, though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Congress shall”… I wonder if that’s part of his thinking.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

His reasoning. He knew where he stood on the issue before he had any good reasons for it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

He has to be part of an opinion in order for this to work. That opinion stands the test of time best if he can put forth a legal opinion that supports his preferred answer.

permalink
report
parent
reply
118 points

The second flag is the “Appeal to Heaven” flag, a Revolutionary War-era banner. The “Appeal to Heaven” language references philosopher John Locke, who argued that, when earthly political appeals are exhausted, men have the right to take up arms and let God sort out the justness of the cause. While the The Appeal to Heaven flag was not always controversial, it has been revived by militant Christian nationalists and was also a potent symbol on Jan. 6. This flag was flown at the Alitos’ vacation home in New Jersey in 2023.

I didn’t know the flag was literally “kill everyone and let God sort them out”…

permalink
report
reply
15 points

This is some real Sons of Jacob type of stuff…

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

In b4 some pedantic asshole argues about its original meaning, acting like context doesn’t matter at all, and it’s totally cool and normal to fly that flag–like Alito hasn’t told on himself already.

permalink
report
parent
reply
84 points

Excellent job by Lauren Windsor. A full mask off, candid discussion that shows blatant partisanship is a step up from the other wrongdoings we’ve heard of Alito and Thomas so far.

Republicans are a craven mafia family so they’ll do nothing, but this is still a very important news story. Change to the Court will only come once the public passes a critical threshold of distrust for it, and this story brings us closer and closer to that tipping point.

The Court will be reformed in our lifetimes. It’s gone too far and will be course corrected. It’s just a matter of when. And I can only hope it will be while Alito and Thomas and McConnell are all still alive so they can see the consequences of their partisan actions.

permalink
report
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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!
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 12K

    Monthly active users

  • 10K

    Posts

  • 300K

    Comments