The Supreme Court is returning to a new term to take up some familiar topics — guns and abortion — and concerns about ethics swirling around the justices.

The year also will have a heavy focus on social media and how free speech protections apply online. A big unknown is whether the court will be asked to weigh in on any aspect of the criminal cases against former President Donald Trump and others or efforts in some states to keep the Republican off the 2024 presidential ballot because of his role in trying to overturn the results of the 2020 election that he lost to Democrat Joe Biden.

Lower-profile but vitally important, several cases in the term that begins Monday ask the justices to constrict the power of regulatory agencies.

4 points

Here’s hoping they do the right thing…

permalink
report
reply
30 points

They’ll do the right thing, al-right…

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Everything is all right with this Supreme Court.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

Nope this is the year they dismantle everything just in time for Trump to overthrow our government. We need to impeach and remove all traitors from our government. When do we say enough is enough and bring out the Guillotines, Pitchforks, and Torches?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

We aren’t organized enough to act before it’s too late 😞

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Yeah hard to do that when almost half the country is begging for the dictatorship and loving the boot on their neck.

permalink
report
parent
reply
51 points

The Supreme Joke, more like it.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

Gottem.

permalink
report
parent
reply
49 points

Pack the court.

permalink
report
reply
-13 points

It’s starting to look like we might need a few less justices, actually.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

It’s not like they’re going to resign and there’s no mechanism to remove them so, uh, unless you’re advocating violence I don’t see how that’s going to work. I think we need to pack the court up to around 17 justices and get back to the business of government instead of playing activist on guns, civil rights, corporate power and abortion.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I’m disabled, so not me personally, but frankly when it comes to conservatives that have devoted their lives to causing as many other people to suffer as possible, yeah, I’m advocating violence.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

More

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I think it would be better if the horribly corrupt judges weren’t part of the SC, but that’s just me.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-12 points

Bad precedent, but I get the idea.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I just researched this and that’s not true. FDR tried to get 13 justices on the court, but ultimately failed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

From what I can tell he literally didn’t.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Balance the court. It’s already been packed by McConnell starting in Obama’s second term. It should just be tied to the number of federal appellate courts.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points
*

Honest suggestion: let’s eliminate the court’s fixed size requirement, and simply add a permanent justice in the third year of every presidential term.

If the total number of justices falls below 7 at any time during a president’s term, the president may make one additional permanent appointment per term. Permanent appointments must be confirmed by the senate.

After making that second permanent appointment, the president may make temporary appointments to bring the total to 7. For these temporary appointments, the president may elevate any previously confirmed circuit court judge directly to the supreme court without additional confirmation. Any other nominee must receive Senate confirmation.

Any temporary appointment expires in the third year of the following presidential term.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

This is great. Let’s fucking goooooo

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I’m holding my breath /s

permalink
report
reply
-12 points
*

Glad to see they are picking up more gun cases. Various states have been blatantly disregarding court decisions on this matter.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

Huh I guess if you’re gonna pick a hill to die on, why not something that can actually kill you? There is absolutely no good that will ever come from being obsessed over a tool of death …

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points

It’s a tool millions use to put inexpensive, high-quality food on the table; a critical resource for many poor people. And, for those put in the unfortunate position to need it, it is a tool to save life.

You may not have high opinions, but many people rely on this tool on a regular basis.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I frequently go hunting with my Glock.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Gun regulation doesn’t stop you having guns as tools. Educate yourself instead of spouting idiocy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

Yup. Even if you’re antigun, States blatantly disregarding federal directives should concern you.

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 20K

    Posts

  • 525K

    Comments