The Supreme Court has shown us who they are.
Yeah, we knew before. But I would have thought that they would want to preserve at least a fig leaf to cover up their blatant corruption.
It would have been possible for them to have granted cert in this case – based on a principled stand – to make it clear once and for all that the President of the United States is not a king, so there could be no doubt. No one is king – not a serving U.S. President, not an outgoing U.S. President, not an incoming president.
They could have laid down a marker to say that the office of President of the United States is not a get out of jail free card for any or all crimes.
But to take up this case on the timeframe they set forth – where we don’t even know for sure if we will get a ruling before the end of this term in July – and where even a ruling by July could quite possibly delay the D.C. trial until after the election – this is in-your-face corruption, proudly on display, with a fuck you to the country (instead of a cherry) on top.
Well, I say fuck you back.
It’s up to us now, and I guess we have the currently serving SCOTUS to thank for the clarity.
Be sure to share your thoughts about SCOTUS helping Trump avoid justice to the Supreme Court. No threats though!! pic.twitter.com/1nJzVUBS0Q
— Rachel Bitecofer 🗽💡🔭🦆 (@RachelBitecofer) February 28, 2024
So, besides making our opinions known to the Supreme Court, what else are we gonna do about it?
Open thread.
TBone
I think it’s a “heads, I win, tails you lose” situation. I’m inclined to get arrested protesting with huge sign and bullhorn. If I (and hubby) were younger and healthier, I’d already be on my way there.
hrprogressive
The real question is what is America prepared to do about the potential outcome other than tweet things about voting blue and so on.
Unless/until that answer is provided with something concrete, I think everyone should be quite worried.
Further, what does Biden do if they actually do declare presidents to have criminal immunity for actions taken while in office?
Does he use that brand new immunity to save the republic? Or does he issue a mild statement about this being a nation of laws, and how he’ll respect the court’s decision and if he loses he’ll transfer power back to the last potus this country will ever have, peacefully, because something something framers?
If people aren’t planning contingencies now, again, beyond tweeting platitudes or reminding people to “vote while you still can!!!!1111oneone” then I fear the republic isn’t actually much longer for this world.
“Well fine what do you, random internet commentator, suggest?”
People need to consider both the idea of legitimate shutting down of this country, and or armed civil conflict coming to pass.
Believe them when they go up on stage and say things like “welcome to the end of democracy”. They mean it.
dr. bloor
Wish the minority court members would stop observing decorum and start making some noise publicly about what’s going on.
Van Buren
I know it is bad karma to wish ill on someone, but nevertheless I am soaking in bad karma these days.
Raoul Paste
It is ridiculously obvious and brazen. Why would you destroy your lifetime reputation for the likes of Trump?
Albatrossity
The arrogant assholes on the Supreme Court clearly do not care about the public’s opinion of them. They had an opportunity to do the right thing, and they figured that they could do the wrong thing, because they have been getting away with that for a while now. They are unleashed and unhinged, and there is a lot more where this came from.
Mustang Bobby
“So what are we gonna do about it?”
Make sure that every living soul that gives a shit about democracy and the rule of law overwhelms these pigfuckers in November by such a margin that when they scream about a “stolen election,” they get laughed out of court.
Either that or hope a blob of fat tears lose from one of Trump’s femoral arteries and travels to his lungs sometime within the next couple of months.
Dangerman
It was well proven in 2000 that the USSC can act with appropriate haste in a shitstorm. I don’t see how this isn’t a Cat 5 shitstorm.
The good news is if the USSC gives Trump immunity, Biden can send Trump packing to Gitmo. With that orange paste, I don’t know if he would need sunscreen.
The answer is clear. They won’t grant immunity. They just want to avoid the shitstorm. Good luck with that dream MF’s.
RandomMonster
Do we know for sure that the SC will be ruling on presidential immunity in general? Or will they be ruling on whether, in this particular case of January 6th, Trump had immunity for any of his actions on that day?
WaterGirl
Pulling this post – will put it up later.
Paul in KY
@hrprogressive: I would think that Pres. Biden and his National Security Team would make sound and sober decisions based on the threat to our Democratic form of government and if certain actions needed to be taken to preserve the Union, I would think he would have them completed and would then submit to the Senate for any examination required.
Omnes Omnibus
Protests at and around the Court will have no effect on their decision. I would rather see people channel their anger and energy toward a Democratic victory this November. Don’t mourn, organize.
twbrandt
@Omnes Omnibus: exactly.
schrodingers_cat
@Omnes Omnibus: Yes. Turn this DC conventional wisdom on its head. Make this delay a political liability for the Orange Man and his party minions.
Rs did it with something innocuous as an email server. Rs should be the ones who are defensive about their nominee being an indicted criminal not us.
Elizabelle
Be like (our own) Nelle.
Get out there and talk to people. Voters. Really like Nelle: listen to them, carefully, first.
Do not just scream on the internet.
Suzanne
I mean, vote, donate, volunteer, of course.
But, like, we can let people be sad and angry about it. Not everything needs a pep talk. It’s okay to grieve right now.
WaterGirl
Omnes Omnibus
@Suzanne: Then grieve. Maybe some people need a pep talk. Should they be denied what they need?
ETA: There have been a bunch of threads about this grant of cert. already. A lot of them heavily featured grieving and anger. Why is it wrong to have a thread that is aimed in another direction?
schrodingers_cat
What do the BJ legal eagles think about spamming the Supreme Court with mail. Will it affect their decision making process at all?
TBone
I just wrote an email to the head guy on this project:
“Dear Sir,
I am interested in your project and wondering, in light of yesterday’s Supreme Court grant of certiorari on the immunity case, when might we expect to be able to read your report and take action as citizens? I’m losing confidence that we’ll be able to fend off the possible consequences of further delay. I have no social media accounts with which to stay current on this subject.
Thanks for your consideration and all of your efforts (and that of all of your collaborators).
Sincerely,
TBone
https://rooneycenter.nd.edu/research/january-6th-project/
Josie
I seriously doubt that complaining online, protesting in the street, or sending messages to the SC about their decision will change anything. All we can do concentrate on the upcoming election. So:
1. Identify a group that is registering people to vote and sign up for recurring monthly donations to help them do the work from now until November.
2. Identify one or more (whatever your finances permit) candidates who can make a difference either in the national, state or local elections and sign up for recurring monthly donations to help them plan ahead for the coming fight.
3. Make sure you are stocked up with post cards and stamps to be ready to write when called upon.
Do others of you have positive concrete suggestions to add to this list? Please chime in. I’ve had all the doom and gloom I can stomach for the morning.
Omnes Omnibus
@schrodingers_cat: Protests at and around the Court will have no effect on their decision.
WaterGirl
@Suzanne: You read the post up top and you don’t think I’m sad and angry?
schrodingers_cat
@Omnes Omnibus: That’s what I thought but IANAL or a Supreme Court watcher hence the question.
SiubhanDuinne
@Suzanne:
Wise words, Suzanne. And, of course, just because we’re grieving right now doesn’t signify that we’re going to live in a state of perpetual grief from now on.
I had a similar thought in an earlier thread’s discussion of anti-Eeyore rhetoric. Even non-Eeyores have their Eeyore-ish moments now and then.
schrodingers_cat
@Josie: The senate map is not great for the Ds this year. Adopting a senator to donate to would be a good idea. Tester or Sherrod Brown say. Or Collin Allred who is mounting a challenge to Ted Cruz.
Suzanne
@Omnes Omnibus: And some people need an internet forum to process their feelings of loss with others of like mind, especially if their families or communities are pretty toxic.
Even here, a valued commenter was accused of trolling last night, because she dared utter a lack of positivity.
I get that we want to remain resolute. But, like, this decision is not even 24 hours old. It’s okay to not be okay all the time.
comrade scotts agenda of rage
@Van Buren:
For me it’s been decades.
Ksmiami
@hrprogressive: I think we start with national protests, then sitins , then shutdowns and then civil unrest
Josie
@schrodingers_cat:
Yes. Thanks. I have very little disposable income since I am on Teacher Retirement, but a small amount of it is going to Colin Allred every month. The other small amount is going to Beto’s Powered by People to register voters.
WaterGirl
@Ksmiami:
None of which will influence the SCOTUS ruling – that may or may not even come out before the election.
None of which will improve the chances of winning the House, keeping the Senate, and getting Biden another term.
Suzanne
@WaterGirl: No, I think you’re sad and angry. I have just detected a strain of “anti-Eeyore” sentiment here that, at times, goes too far IMO. I don’t think people need to always keep a game face on.
Ksmiami
@WaterGirl: I’m not sure just voting will cut it anymore. These are in addition to focusing on the elections
Melancholy Jaques
@hrprogressive:
Is there something about voting blue that is inadequate to the task?
Wouldn’t electing a Democratic president, senate, and house go a long way toward making things better?
Omnes Omnibus
@Suzanne: I didn’t weigh in on that thread last night to say “Buck up, little campers.” I am also not saying it now. I do think that a thread discussing how to fight back is not inappropriate. Everyone is different.
WaterGirl
@Ksmiami:
We can’t afford to split our focus. It takes a ton of time and energy to organize national protein and sit-ins and shutdowns.
We don’t have the luxury of time for what you’re suggesting. We need to organize, volunteer, donate, and try to protect our elections.
We need to be organized. Furious about what they are doing to our country and our institutions. Focused. Determined. Resolute.
TBone
@Suzanne: I appreciate that comment, I’m under extra stress IRL right now and this community helps. Immensely. It helps me keep my chin up and my head screwed on straight.
Suzanne
@Melancholy Jaques:
Uh…. yes.
At core, the problem is that a significant minority of our countrymen and -women are terrible people who would happily bring down fascism and destroy American government to punish us. That’s still really difficult for me to live with. And I can and do vote blue, but this will still be there.
Betty Cracker
I’m still clinging to the sanity of believing SCOTUS won’t grant immunity, which would basically reconstitute the George III monarchy. But I think this is a terrible decision because it helps Trump kick the can down the road, and I believe that’s what it’s designed to do. I’m pissed off about that.
TBone
@Betty Cracker: me too!
WaterGirl
@Betty Cracker:
Yes, yes, yes, and yes.
Josie
@WaterGirl:
“We need to be organized. Focused. Determined.”
This is what you do best. I should add to my list–Be ready to join in any organized project that WaterGirl proposes.
Omnes Omnibus
@WaterGirl: For example, I think the 2011 recall elections in WI were a waste of effort and money. They were always a long shot. If that energy and money had been channeled into the 2012 elections, it, IMO, would had a much greater impact.
Suzanne
@TBone: I didn’t chime in because I was working late and I was just reading comments later on while my Revit model was syncing, but I hated that. I’m sorry.
Cacti
Can we all finally admit now that we’re paying for Merrick Garland’s lack of resolve?
WaterGirl
@Omnes Omnibus: Pretty sure you are right about that.
TBone
@Suzanne: I guess I needed to hear it at the time. WG especially, was gentle as she could be in light of my comments. Sometimes you need to slap a person who is hysterical and might cause others to be … But at the same time, I can’t put blinders on and ignore what might be coming. Your support TODAY is just as meaningful to me!
RaflW
If your US Senator sits on the Judiciary Committee, email them as a constituent. Write about expanding the Court. Write about a Senate committee hearing to properly investigate Thomas and the other member’s egregious financial scandals.
Let the Senate know that we are watching this rogue Court and expect the Senate to not be passive about these abuses.
Geminid
@schrodingers_cat: Democrats have a pickup opportunity in Florida as well, with former Rep. Deborah Mucarsel-Powell running against Rick Scott. As Mucarsel-Powell points out, Scott has never won by more than 1% in his 3 statewide races, and he has never run in a Presidential election year.
If Florida Dems can put an abortion rights referendum on the ballot, so much the better.
Melancholy Jaques
@Cacti:
Would that be helpful?
Soprano2
@Omnes Omnibus: Yep, regardless of what the SCOTUS does we have to win elections. It’s that simple.
hrprogressive
@RandomMonster – I don’t know, but the fear is that they are potentially ruling on wholesale immunity. Some commenters don’t think this is going to happen, and, I mean, honestly, again, I think that even this court would recognize the pandora’s box they could open if they say “Presidents are immune”. Again, what would stop Biden from theoretically dismissing the entire court because they can’t hold him accountable?
@Paul in KY – The same Biden & National Security Team that has completely fumbled supporting Ukraine even after the Fascist GOP telegraphed their intent to stop helping them before the election last year? The Same Biden Team that has been an institutionalist his entire life and put Merrick Fucking Garland in charge of holding Trump Accountable? Yeah.
@Ksmiami – I agree, but does the rest of the public know this? Probably not yet.
@WaterGirl – Maybe it doesn’t change the Fascist SCOTUS’ mind, but it needs to get the attention of Biden & the Democrats so, you know, maybe something can be done about it.
@Melancholy Jaques – In theory, if a full Dem Trifecta was restored, perhaps things might not get as bad as they could, but my concern is that if people only read twitter and re-tweet feelgood hashtags without actually understanding the implications of a full Fascist Takeover of the USA – voting might not go far enough. That’s what I’ve been trying to get people to understand for the last few years, but I am just one random nobody with very little following anywhere, so what do I know?
RSA
One suggestion:
Soprano2
This is true. I think every time someone in the press talks about how Biden should step aside due to his age, D’s should bombard them with inquiries about why they aren’t saying TFG should step aside due to his 91 indictments. It’s crazy that the guy who has been accused of multiple crimes isn’t being pounded daily about how he should step aside for the good of the country.
Baud
@Geminid:
Didn’t the mayor of Jacksonville and some other state rep in FL win despite the odds? Not gonna lie, Republicans have made gains in FL, and I think FL might be an even bigger challenge than TS. But Scott is pretty odious.
Cacti
While the United States may continue for a time due to the political law of inertia, I don’t think we’re much longer for the world in our present form. We’re now one bad election away from a fascist dictatorship, every 4 years, for the foreseeable future. This isn’t sustainable.
I’ll keep voting against the dying of the light, but mostly I just try not to think about how dire our political circumstances actually are.
Soprano2
@schrodingers_cat: I’ve been giving Lucas Kunce money. He’s running in the Dem primary to be the Senate candidate against Josh Hawley. Even though it’s hard in MO for Dems, I think he’s the D candidate who would have the best chance against Hawley in MO.
Kay
@Cacti:
The Biden Administration agrees with you:
Balloon Juice is sort of the last line of defenders for ol Merrick Garland :)
IMO Garland loves the institution more than what the institution is supposed to stand for – it’s a real problem with a lot of people, IMO. They just lose their way.
oldgold
@Betty Cracker: “I’m still clinging to the sanity of believing SCOTUS won’t grant immunity..”
The Court is not going to render an opinion granting Presidents immunity. But, what the Court did was to cynically and corruptly employ procedure to in effect grant Trump immunity for fraudulently and violently attempting to overturn a Presidential election.
Trump’s lawyers have from the get-go understood, as far back as the Mueller debacle, the importance of time. Sadly, except for Smith, the other side has not placed sufficient value on the precious commodity of time.
Betty Cracker
@Geminid: We have the required number of signatures, and I think there’s a decent chance we could get 60% of the vote. But first the Florida Supreme Court has to sign off on the ballot initiative language. All seven FL SC members were appointed by Republicans — five by DeSantis. Some pro-initiative legal analysts were encouraged by the questioning, but I don’t know. One of the justices, who did not recuse, is married to a lawmaker who sponsored the 6-week ban. I think their decision is due by in April.
Cacti
@hrprogressive: Come sit by me. lol
The time for swift and drastic action was January 2021 after Biden was inaugurated. Going hammer and tongs after the J6 principals, nuking the filibuster, appointing a sane majority to SCOTUS, etc.
It still might not have been enough, but if we’re going down, it might as well be swinging. But the Dem political class had no stomach for any of it, and now we’re in deep, deep shit.
Not to put too fine a point on it.
Kay
I had already lost faith in (most of) the justice system so it’s easier for me, although obviously as a lawyer losing faith in the justice system is not good – I’m retiring soon though.
We knew the SCOTUS were hacks and we knew the justice system more often than not doesn’t hold powerful people accountable so to me it’s the status quo.
So we try to win the election – I think we’ll win- which of course doesn’t solve the problem of a broken US justice system packed with dishonest, venal hacks on one side and cowards on the other, but winning will put off a reckoning and I’m for harm reduction.
Josie
@Soprano2:
What a blessing it would be to get rid of Hawley.
Sure Lurkalot
Joe brings some snarky levity:
https://nitter.esmailelbob.xyz/JoeBiden/status/1763210154575548687#m
kindness
What are we going to do about an imperial Supreme Court? Well, it’s easy to whip up the MAGA masses. They look favorably on their folk lashing out against their enemies. Liberals? Yea no. They don’t rile up quite the same. I’m thinking though, at some point some yahoo will exercise their 2nd Amendment lunacy on the judges. Not looking forward to that at all. This is all going to get ugly before it gets nice again.
TeezySkeezy
@Ksmiami: Normal people do not like civil unrest and it would not be helpful. Creating chaos for the present administration is not going to help them be re elected. Please stop trying to get people into trouble.
Suzanne
@Cacti:
Yeah.
I actually think — if I was a betting person, I’d put money on it — that Biden will win this year. (But I also thought Hillary would pull it out, so my prediction skills are crap, and undoubtedly colored by wishcasting.)
But, as you point out, we have problems that winning one election at a time won’t solve.
Cacti
@Kay: As a fellow lawyer, I’ve always thought that there are two types of people who become lawyers. Those who do it because they believe in the system, and those who do it because they don’t.
I’ve seen long-time practitioners move from the first group to the second, but have never seen anyone move from the second to the first. YMMV
Suzanne
I think Garland is a deeply normal and nice and fair person, who wants things to be normal.
But they are not, and I fear that makes him ill-suited to this moment.
mikefromArlington
Mitch McConnell’s legacy.
He enabled this.
hueyplong
@Betty Cracker: I’ve said it in a bunch of threads but for fun I’ll repeat that I agree with Betty that they’re unlikely to find immunity, but are transparently delaying any and all criminal trials to the extent they can do that. Until conclusively proved otherwise, my theory is that this delay + no immunity combination is a “compromise” worked out among the six justices who control everything.
Gives you a hint as to whether we need to brace for bad things on other fronts (most of which can be generally described as “whether women are human beings with full rights”). The upside, such as it is, is that it’s difficult to imagine a more effective triggering of a blue wave. I continue to think that Dobbs/Roe is the biggest deal out there, as it has been since Dobbs was handed down.
Cacti
@Suzanne: I also think that Garland is a careful, fair-minded, consensus building sort of person. All qualities which would have made him a fine Supreme Court Justice.
And all of which made him the wrong person for spearheading a charge against a fascist insurgency.
There is no consensus building with fascism.
gvg
@Baud: I don’t think he is very visible to normie Floridians, same Rubio.
Cacti
@mikefromArlington: Whoever dubbed MM “the gravedigger of American democracy” was inspired.
No name has ever been more accurate.
John S.
To quote Sheriff Bill Sharp:
Showing their ass to America is all the Seditious Six have left.
Suzanne
@Cacti: I agree with that assessment.
Betty Cracker
@gvg: I agree, but I am interested in seeing how Scott fares in a post-Dobbs presidential year where there’s at least some evidence of a backlash to the interminable FL GOP shitshow. Scott really is terrible on every policy and one of the worst retail politicians I have ever seen.
jimmiraybob
@hrprogressive:
“…if he [Biden] loses he’ll transfer power back to the last potus this country will ever have, peacefully, because something something framers?”
Joe would have more than ample justification via the founders to stand for the liberal Constitutional order that they envisioned by standing against the demagogue that they detested.
TBone
@hrprogressive: apparently we are of the same mindset. I bark like a hound and stand “on point” toward danger as I was trained to do by my ex-military, former cop-turned-Professor-of-Russian-History dad. I was trained to react immediately before the other guy had a chance to land another one.
Jinchi
What are you talking about?
Actually, it’s better if you don’t spell it out.
catclub
I think there is a chance they cynically and corruptly grant Trump immunity or partial immunity plus higher burden of proof, for the crimes that Jack Smith is charging.
New Deal democrat
@kindness:
We have always had an imperial Supreme Court. As I have showcased a number of times, in 1789 the anti-Federalist “Brutus” forecast that the Supreme Court would be exactly thus. His writings are what provoked the famous Federalist #78, in which Hamilton’s rejoinder was that Justices would be little more than clerks, increasingly hemmed in by precedent, and thus “the least dangerous branch.”
I have become so radicalized that I do not think even expending the Supreme Court and mandating term limits are enough. Because as we have seen from the likes of Shelby County, they can interpret away entire Constitutional Amendments. Btw, to my knowledge, since 1789 not a single other country has established a Supreme Court with lifetime tenures and all but un-reviewable Constitutional authority. So the solution must start by ripping Article III of the Constitution down to its studs and rethinking what a Supreme Court should be in a Republic from scratch.
gvg
I want more discussion about expanding the court. Biden has been too afraid that it would look political. Well first, what if it is? The court is really out of step with the voters in a corrupt way. They are being bribed and it has been going on for decades, in fact there are whole groups of them that have been flattered and promoted through the system for at least 2 generations. Being wealthy does not entitle someone with more value. And second, it has been noted that this court and most of the rest are overburdened by cases. The load has grown, the courts need to keep up. And as an aside I think that means funding more judges throughout the federal system. Cases that take too long are not justice. Many get settled because of the overall load, and that may not be the best justice. Biden should hear about this.
There is no chance I won’t vote for him, but the next democratic candidates might. Senate candidates might.
Skippy-san
@hrprogressive: Absolutely. I keep asking myself, “What is it going to take?” I think until these people feel some real pushback, they will just keep stealing.
jimmiraybob
@Soprano2:
Look up Josh Hawley’s commencement address at King’s College a couple of years ago (C-Span). He comes out squarely against unchecked and unregulated freedom & liberty. And yes, his Medieval remedy is checking and regulating freedom & liberty via submission to God. Of course.
Patricia Kayden
Regardless of how SCOTUS rules, it will be up to the electorate to reject Trump — again. A rightwing dominated SCOTUS was never going to save us.
P.S. Thanks to all the purity ponies who couldn’t bring themselves to vote for Secretary Clinton in 2016 for the SCOTUS mess.
Jinchi
@schrodingers_cat: I doubt the Supremes read their own mail. But if you have the opportunity to write an op- ed for the NYT calling for major reform of the court, or better yet, get Alito’s speaking invitations cancelled, you’ll get a reaction. The best way to hit these guys is to destroy their reputation and threaten their power.
Cheryl from Maryland
@gvg: at the very least, once re-elected, President Biden could add more justices to match the number of Circuits. That some justices oversee two while some just have one is wrong.
TBone
@Jinchi: John Oliver just whacked Clarence Thomas right over the head. But the people who need to see that are the ones who never will. They don’t give a shit about public opinion unless we’re too big to ignore, and that’s pretty darn big.
Baud
@Cheryl from Maryland:
No. It takes Congress.
Skippy-san
@oldgold: Garland needs to pay a price for that.
Jackie
@Omnes Omnibus: I posted this last night at the end of a dead post:
On the Ari Melber show tonight (now yesterday) (MSNBC) he had prosecutor attorney Neal Katyal on. Neal said this:
“I think now two things should be happening,” said Katyal. “One is the court … needs to hear from the American public about how the court needs to decide this case quickly after April 22nd. This is not a hard case, Ari … Donald Trump’s arguments here, I think the technical legal word is ‘absurd,’ and the court shouldn’t take much time in deciding it. If they can decide it quickly by the first or second week of May, this trial can take place.”But additionally, he said, “Jack Smith should be going to the trial judge here and saying, look, I know you were going to give Donald Trump 88 days to prepare for trial, but now he’s filed all of these delay motions, and he can certainly begin some of that preparation now. And so the judge could effectively announce a smaller amount of time than 88 days so that trial could happen. Indeed, I think for the judge to do that while the court is considering this case is a wise move. It’ll tell the Supreme Court exactly what the time is.”
https://www.rawstory.com/jack-smith-chutkan-tool-delay/
So, what POSITIVE STEPS can we do to let the Supremes know and hear our anger? WaterGirl posted contact info above; anything else we can do?
I respect Neal Katyal’s viewpoint, so I take his advice to contact the SCOTUS as ONE feasible way to protest, but are there other ways? Positively; not negatively.
PS WaterGirl, thanks for this post!
Jeffg166
The Catholic Church now runs the country.
Elizabelle
@gvg: Yes. This is a great time to push for expanding the Court. Won’t happen overnight, but has to happen. Get rid of lifetime tenure, and have enough “Justices” that you can have panels voting on various cases. Might prevent so much gaming of the system.
@New Deal democrat:
I would be more interested in articles and information on this.
We can talk to fellow voters, and we can write letters. To politicians, to the editor, to our fellow voters.
Jinchi
@catclub: The court could expedite the decision and declare TFG immune if they wanted presidents to have it.
I think they want the pretense of being above the fray, hope that Trump wins the election and pardons himself, making the point moot.
De facto immunity for TFG without having to extend it to a Democratic president in the future.
Skippy-san
@Melancholy Jaques: Because there are too many people in this country who are: 1) Too Stupid to understand the danger and only care about IGMFY. 2) Thanks to Fox, gerrymandering, and voter impression, the best we can hope for is a narrow majority IF we get that.
And the GOP will still used the courts to subvert democracy even if that happens.
Skippy-san
And for God’s sake subpoena and sue the hell out of Leonard Leo. One may not be able to get to Alito and Thomas but they can make their servant poorer.
Kay
The proof of the justice systems operation is that it gets the person who did the coup and thereby ensures that he can’t run again. It failed. So all we have left is beating him in 2024, but that only works until 2026. Buys us 2 years.
I think we have to roll this into how we think about young people and their attitudes and participation and level of trust. If you came into adulthood after 2016 this is normal to you – they may not respond to us claiming “an emergency!” because this situation is all they know. They’re “ahead” of us in that – we still harken back to some period of “normalcy” but the youngest ones don’t have that.
Elizabelle
@Skippy-san: Prosecute Ginni Thomas for sedition and corruption. And impeach her husband for corruption.
jimmiraybob
@Jeffg166:
“The Catholic Church now runs the country.”
Death to all papists that owe their allegiance to the Anti-Christ of Rome!
Sorry, is it too early to restart the wars of religion yet?
WaterGirl
@Elizabelle: First we have to win the Presidency, the House and the Senate.
That’s where the energy needs to go. Because without all 3 of those, there’s no chance to make changes to add justices to the court, or change any of the other rules.
Jinchi
@Jeffg166: I’m critical of the church, but this isn’t them. Republicans cater to religion a lot, but they have no problem going their own way when the Pope starts talking about feeding the hungry or housing the poor.
Jackie
@schrodingers_cat:
Does BettyCracker or any other Floridians have any opinions about Deborah Mucarsel-Powell’s chances of beating Rick Scott? I haven’t seen any articles (that aren’t paywalled) about her.
TBone
I made comment here a while back that the Supremacists Court had burned women like Salem witches, using arcane, archaic reasoning. I expect nothing less anymore but will be happily surprised to be wrong about my gut feeling. I hope for the best, still and always. It’s what I got, today.
🎶https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0Uc3ZrmhDN4
schrodingers_cat
@Jackie: I haven’t heard much about her. So IDK. That’s a good question.
glc
Reactor’s SF Club (announcement)
(Reactor being the new face of tordotcom
Also, free short fiction from a new author getting a lot of attention.
WaterGirl
I am tired of the Garland bashing that is based on false information. Look at the 2021 dates.
Geminid
@Jackie: I saw a good, short interview of Mucarsel-Powell a couple months ago in The 19th* news site.
Jackie
@RaflW: Oh, jeez, I just looked at the MAGA members on that Committee. The lowest of low “human beings.” Quite a jolt after first seeing the awesome Democrats list!
My two Blue senators aren’t on the Judicial Committee, but I’ll contact them, anyway!
Elizabelle
@WaterGirl: Talk to me like I’m dumb, please.
It would seem to me that dealing with the Supreme Court and the dangers it poses can be an organizing method. It is certainly a conversation starter, in this era of Dobbs.
It is a way to get “independents” into the Democratic fold, sliding them into the conversation before they put up defenses against the “nanny state” Democratic party. Because they are so virtuously “nonpartisan” or, for the really not paying attention, “bipartisan.”
You would be surprised how many men who lean GOP were horrified at the Terry Schiavo case years ago, and do not want the Supreme Court or state governments making decisions for their wives, daughters, and other loved ones.
Sure Lurkalot
Looks like the Nitter I posted is broken. This from Biden on the accursed Twitter
https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1763210154575548687
John S.
@WaterGirl:
Take it up with the Biden administration. They don’t seem to be very pleased with Garland’s performance, either.
And if Biden does get re-elected, I don’t think anyone should be surprised if Garland gets replaced.
Betty Cracker
@Jackie: I think it will be an uphill climb but I plan to donate and maybe volunteer. As was pointed out in another thread (I think), Scott hasn’t ever won by more than 1% and has never been up for reelection in a presidential year. He’s also a terrible retail politician.
However, he’s smart and disciplined and is able to self-fund with his Medicare-fraud money. Outside donors have given up on FL, and I can’t blame them. But I think it’s possible a building backlash to Dobbs and anger at the FL GOP more generally for the nonstop shitshow during DeSantis’s failed run could deliver a surprise. I sure don’t count on it but don’t discount it either. We’ve had a couple of surprising results in special elections recently.
New Deal democrat
@Elizabelle: The lifetime tenure, actually for “good behavior,” comes directly from the UK’s Act of Settlement following the 1689 Glorious Revolution. But their courts only interpret Acts of Parliament. There is no Constitution to enforce.
Canada has a “notwithstanding” clause, allowing provinces to nullify their Supreme Court’s rulings in each province. Most other countries split off courts that perform statutory vs. constitutional reviews, and also allow for some sort of legislative “Board of Revision,” where by some formula the legislature can overrule the courts, even on Constitutional review.
I’m pretty sure Theodore Bickel in his famous tome, “The Least Dangerous Branch,” made this point as well. But I haven’t read a meticulous country by country breakdown.
Hope that is of some help.
ETA: Madison also changed his mind, and argued for a Board of Review, in several essays only a few years after 1789.
schrodingers_cat
Teri Kanefield is tired of talking people of the ledge.
Baud
@John S.:
The whole cabinet will probably get replaced.
But keeping the Senate is imperative to getting rid of Garland, so hopefully that will motivate some.
wjca
Better yet, don’t get them cancelled. Then show up and boo, early, often, and loud. And, when the media are (inevitably) doing interviews outside afterwards, calmly and clearly discuss his shredding of the Constitution in favor of his personal ideology.
Elizabelle
@New Deal democrat: You got me interested in the topic, so thank you there.
I knew other sane countries were not adopting our health care system (thank dog) or the deadly Second Amendment. Hadn’t thought about justices; the courts and their tenure.
WaterGirl
@John S.: I’m talking about the people who say Garland and the DOJ didn’t do anything until Jack Smith got there.
I’m talking about the people who don’t or won’t acknowledge that good folks at the DOJ started investigating very early on in 2021 and won’t acknowledge that there were Trump holdovers in highly placed positions at the DOJ that obstructed some early investigative actions.
I’m talking about the people who won’t acknowledge that Garland had to take into account that he was taking over the DOJ from a lying partisan GOP hack (Billy Barr) and that all bets on getting back to an institution that supports the rule of law would have been off if he had charged out of the gate and arrested the insurrectionists who are in congress, for instance.
There are surely things I wish Garland had done differently, but it’s disingenuous to not recognize the complex situation, promoting only facts that support your position and ignoring or lying about facts that do not.
Percysowner
Well I bought 100 post cards and an saving them for the General Election, no big Democratic contests or any issues where I live in Ohio. Once the General Kicks off I’m ready to go. I’ll contact the Supreme Court and ask them to move up the decision, for all that will do. I’ll start increasing my donations as well.
Shoot! I got to live in Interesting Times.
Madeleine
@Geminid: an organization of Reform Jewish women is kicking off a campaign to get the abortion bill on the Florida ballot. It’s a national campaign and they’re ramping up right now. The organization is the Florida Religious Action Center.
For those of you who don’t know, Judaism recognizes that there are reasons that abortion is needed.
Eyeroller
@New Deal democrat: As we’ve discussed, Hamilton also seemed convinced, or at least argued that, the (white, wealthy, male) President and Senators would surely always only appoint (white, wealthy, male) distinguished jurists toward the end of their careers, so they could bring all their experience and accumulated knowledge to their tasks. We see how that worked out.
It occurs to me that the one “originalist” interpretation that seems accurate is the assumption that white, wealthy males should be in charge of everything.
FelonyGovt
@Madeleine: Yes, I’m a mostly secular Jew, but it infuriates me that these awful decisions are premised on religious beliefs that are NOT universally shared and in fact, differ.
Marcopolo
Not reading this entire thread.
To those saying organize, support, and get out the vote: that’s it, that’s what we need to do. Most of that kind of activity takes place off line in the real world.
This blog has already shown its chops in raising money for candidates & orgs. It’s been awesome. We’ll keep on doing that.
If you have the desire & coin to do more consider giving to Run For Something or Voteriders (sorry in a parking lot on my phone so no links). I give to them & planned parenthood & the aclu & moms demand action (small monthly donations—but I can budget it).
If you have the desire & mobility & energy find a local (state) candidate you like and volunteer for their campaign. I am collecting sigs to get the pro-choice ballot initiative in MO on the ballot. Maybe find something like that. If your mobility is more limited write postcards to voters.
If you haven’t already, meet your neighbors. Test the waters. If they seem receptive, slow walk them (or faster if they are on the same page) into getting more active too.
Maybe sign up to help the local Board of Elections as a poll worker.
There’s a shit ton of concrete actions that we can do to increase the chances we succeed in November. Strikes, protests, on line petitions are not helpful like that (though I suppose you could try to organize folks who show up to do more impactful things.
Everyone have a great day! Grieve if you need to but at some point move on, there’s a lot of work to do!
Paul in KY
@Betty Cracker: How about the Henry VII monarchy?!?!
Omnes Omnibus
@Paul in KY: I doubt that Biden’s daughter would be willing to marry Trump.
Paul in KY
@hrprogressive: Don’t misunderestimate my President. If the SC makes the mistake of making POTUSes essentially ‘immune’, he will use his power as he must.
narya
@WaterGirl: Also: he was coming into a DOJ where he couldn’t be sure who could be trusted (and remember the pushback about the warrant to search MAL?).
Madeleine
@Madeleine: oops—to get the abortion bill passed.
Burnspbesq
Someone needs to go there in an amicus brief.
Just say it straight out: if Trump is correct about presidential immunity, then Biden could order the assassination of the entire Supreme Court with no accountability.
Paul in KY
@Kay: Garland is definitely too milquetoast or nebbish for these times. In hindsight, a mistake by Pres. Biden in appointing him.
zhena gogolia
@Burnspbesq: Wow, that’s pretty radical for you!
UncleEbeneezer
I’m pissed but not surprised by SCOTUS. They are who they thought they were. But I also always assumed that the likelihood of Trump being convicted before the Election was always very improbable and it was always going to come down to us voters to stop him from another term. I’ll probably steer clear of this and other political spaces for a while because there will be way too much doom and gloom and Garland-bashing from all the usual suspects. It’s predictable, boring and does absolutely nothing positive for our chances in November. This shitty SCOTUS decision is yet another reason I will never forgive the people who spent the Fall of 2016 whining about how the primary was stolen from Bernie and spreading harmful lies about Hillary instead of trying to help us avoid a Trump presidency and the horrible Supreme Court we all knew was coming if he won. Especially those who were threatening not to vote and claiming it was “blackmail” to bring up the fact that stopping Trump was more important than their feelings about any one particular issue.
VFX Lurker
Addendum to your excellent suggestions…
Charles Gaba of HCASignups.net has a page with links to ActBlue fundraisers.
I got started writing postcards because of Balloon-Juice. I once wrote for Postcard Patriots, but I switched to Postcards to Voters because of their automated system. I always feel better after writing some postcards.
Burnspbesq
@zhena gogolia:
Desperate times etc.
WaterGirl
@Paul in KY: I think the SC probably won’t rule on that until the outcome of the election is known, and the way they rule will be influenced by that.
Their moms must be so proud.
WaterGirl
@narya: Yes, that’s one of the things I was thinking about as I wrote my earlier comment.
Kay
@Paul in KY:
I just think the issue of whether Garland was a good fit for this position or not is pretty much settled by the fact that the guy who chose him (now) believes he (Garland) “caves to outside pressure” – I’m not going to second guess Joe Biden on Joe Biden’s hire.
WaterGirl
@Kay: So you trust the Biden people – who are willing to talk behind his back – to be telling the truth, and that they don’t perhaps have a personal axe to grind?
Hoodie
@Burnspbesq: It might be better to say Biden could arrest and hold the entire Supreme Court in military custody because of a national emergency. That’s essentially what Trump is arguing in saying his scheme was to address alleged election fraud as an official act even though he had exhausted all legal remedies and had overwhelming evidence that there was no election fraud. The Biden hypothetical would be that the court had been fraudulently packed by a minority political faction and thus is illegitimate. It’s important the hypothetical not be too outlandish. I think the Seal Team Six hypothetical was flawed in this sense; it might have been more effective if you used a hypo in which Trump used his official acts to steal from US taxpayers. . . . Wait, I think that already happened.
Jackie
@Betty Cracker: Thanks, BC! Being a presidential election year may be the possible way to dethrone Scott! And, yes, the recent Florida special election wins show that anything’s possible!🤞🏻
Josie
@VFX Lurker:
Thank you.
Paul in KY
@Omnes Omnibus: Touche on that! Was just saying (in a way) that George III had many more limits on his power than Henry VII did. To me, this is setting up the Presidency (if they agree with his crazy proffer) as a medieval king, with all the powers they commanded.
That is (of course) all kinds of fucked up.
Ksmiami
@WaterGirl: stop defending Garland- he’s been a horrible AG for the times we are living in. Period end of story.
Paul in KY
@Burnspbesq: So long as it was for sound National Security reasons…
gwangung
@WaterGirl: They (the corrupt six) are telling themselves that they do not want their decision to affect the election, ergo, they are fine with delaying until after the election.
Of course, the decision to delay is affecting the election…
Paul in KY
@WaterGirl: He will win re-election. If, however, he is worsted by TFG, he’s still POTUS till that rat bastard gets inaugurated.
What Have the Romans Ever Done for Us?
Honestly even before the Trump 3 we knew SCOTUS were carrying his water. The fact that the emoluments clause cases were slow rolled through the lower courts rather than expedited even though they enabled Trump to sell the US out to anyone willing to line his pockets. That was a major national security issue and they didn’t care to resolve it in anything like an appropriate amount of time.
Paul in KY
@Kay: I’m sure Pres. Biden is also ruing his choice.
Ruckus
@Raoul Paste:
What lifetime reputation do they have to save?
This is who they are, this is what they believe.
Democracy, or rule of the “elite.” Which is it going to be?
Equality or power. Which is it going to be?
Voting or following. Which is it going to be?
Equality or money. Which is it going to be?
Kay
@WaterGirl:
I do. I think Biden has been around a long time, he knows how this game is played and his administration doesn’t have any leaks other than what they want to leak.
It’s more than Garland. Bigger. Garland comes out of an institutionalist culture that rewards deference to power. They just weren’t up to the challenge – admittedly it’s a big challenge but they didn’t meet it.
Baud
Design porn subreddit – abortion poster
WaterGirl
@Paul in KY: Yeah, but if I’m right, they won’t rule until after Jan 20, 2025.
edit: I would love to be proven wrong about that!
Kay
@WaterGirl:
It’s no reflection on you, WG. You trusted the justice system you have to work properly. There’s nothing wrong with you expecting that – you should expect it. They failed, you didn’t.
patrick II
I was not surprised when they did something like this for Bush. Trump is at another level altogether. I can’t believe they have decided to aid a lying, rapist, fraudulent, murderous, man who has pledged to abolish the constitution, quit NATO and endanger Europe, put in place high tariffs against China, and have retention “camps” for hundreds of thousands of immigrants, kill our economy by deporting immigrant labor, and has called for using missiles on Mexico. I know he is a fellow Republican, but fuck.
artem1s
So it’s OK if we or BLM do it but not if 1/6ers do it? Right now you sound a lot like the election deniers who were ramping up the rhetoric leading up to 1/6.
This is exactly what the GQP, TIFG and Bill Barr wanted to happen on 1/6. They wanted to declare martial law. What makes you think GOP governors in swing state won’t start rounding up people from now until the election in order to ‘keep the peace’. don’t think they aren’t above murdering a few thousand protesters to swing a couple of EC votes the way they want them to. How many people are going to stay home on election day because they are terrified they’ll get swept up in some asshole’s armed civil conflict’ wet dream.
WaterGirl
@patrick II: I feel you, patrick II. It’s beyond appalling.
Citizen Alan
@Cacti:
This is just ridiculous, and it makes me inclined to think you’re just a troll for saying it. Appointing “a sane majority to SCOTUS” would have required Congressional action to increase the size of SCOTUS. Such Congressional action in a 50-50 Senate would have required the vote of 50 Dem senators + Kamala. And we didn’t have 50 Dem senators because Sinema and Manchin were opposed! And yes, possibly others. Independent Angus King was a quiet no, as were Jon Tester and Dianne Feinstein. But it was Sinema and Manchin who loudly said “No, that’s not going to happen.”
And you KNOW THAT! Which makes this comment nothing but trolling about how every problem is the Democrats’ fault because Joe Biden wouldn’t use his Green Lantern Power Ring to magically gain the power to appoint 6 new Justices.
artem1s
People need to consider both the idea of legitimate shutting down of this country, and or armed civil conflict coming to pass.
this whole post should be shut down now. This was comment #2 and it’s only getting worse.
Citizen Alan
@Cacti:
I do agree with this. I feel like I’m trapped in that scene from The Deer Hunter where American soldiers were forced to play Russian roulette for the entertainment of a ghoulish orc-like mob of Vietnamese POW camp guards that laughed at their trauma and despair.
Ruckus
@schrodingers_cat:
Not in any way a legal eagle but I think that if this court had a decision making process that didn’t say, wealth is the only arbiter of power they would not have made this decision. Flipping off an entire nation is not a good look for them.
Some people have been saying that democracy has gone as far as it can. I do not believe that. This is bad place in our democracy but it has seen worse. Conservatives have been slowly losing power over the last few decades as this country has been returning to it’s basic core of concept of equality and not monetary power. This is a blow to that basic concept that money does not buy standing and power.
If one looks at the Forbes 400 one sees wealth as the basis of power, if one looks at this decision one sees the same. At the time of the founding of this country there were wealthy – and everyone else. We have just returned to that concept.
JMG
As of today, more voters than not SAY they want Trump back. The MAGA types want a Trump dictatorship. The rest, the decisive rest, just feel vaguely unhappy so they are against the incumbent. I am not counseling despair, because I also know that in elections, incumbents get to bat last. But the second group I described is whom Biden must speak to. Alas, he can’t tell them the truth. “Wise up, you spoiled children” is not a winning slogan.
Raoul Paste
@Ruckus: The choice is quite stark to any informed person.
This latest SC episode drives me to donate to additional Senate candidates who might have a chance. Get rid of Rick Scott? Sounds good to me
schrodingers_cat
The Supreme Court was on the ballot in 2016 but leftier-than-thous pooh poohed anyone who said that. Now they will complain that I am relitigating 2016 while continuing to shit on Biden from the left for not giving them their sparkle pony. Seriously it is hilarious hearing about the talk of revolution from the contigent that thinks voting is onerous.
WaterGirl
@artem1s: Hard disagree.
From Cole’s comment policy, a statement that I wholeheartedly agree with:
TriassicSands
I have no doubt that you already know this, but they had to act quickly in 2000 in order to ensure a Republican won the election. In 2024, they have to act slowly in order to give a Republican the best possible chance of winning the election. It’s actually all very consistent. Corrupt, but consistent.
It reminds me of McConnell’s actions on SCOTUS nominations. First, he had to act slowly (or, in that case, not at all) in order to have the best chance of putting a religious zealot on the SCOTUS. Then, he had to act at the speed of light to make sure that another religious zealot was seated. Again, it looks hypocritical, but to corrupt people with no integrity or principles, it’s what passes for consistency.
In the end, all that matters is the agenda, the goal, the outcome. The old saying, “It’s not the destination; it’s the journey” is turned on its head. The only thing that matters is the destination, i.e., total Republican power and an end to democracy.
Geminid
@Raoul Paste: Trump has been a constant presence for people like those on this blog. Not so for most Americans; they’ve had three years without him snarling away in their faces. I think the Independents especially are gonna react, “Sheesh. I’m not voting for another four years of that!”
WaterGirl
@schrodingers_cat: Seems to me this is an excellent thing to share far and wide.
WaterGirl
@TriassicSands: Most excellent comment!
Subsole
@UncleEbeneezer:
Don’t look now, but that shit’s happening again (aided and abetted by foreign and Alt-Right ratfuckers, natch).
@WaterGirl: Who cares what their moms think? Their pimps are happy, and that’s all they care about.
schrodingers_cat
Shannon Watts, has a good question:
Nelle
G’day from New Zealand. Here for a little break from ongoing insanity, but back to being asked what the hell is happening up north.
We were walking on a very popular trail yesterday and chatted with a young couple, who turned out to be proud Texans. “We need a strong leader like Abbott. Immigration is horrible,” he said, smiling. We did not linger. Another day, I would have explored more. Not here in my heart’s home.
The air is clean, so very clean. The atmosphere is relaxed and open. No fear, anger, hate being founded into the populace.
If Biden had immunity, he should shut down all American forms of Radio Rwanda. Turn off the spigots that feed the ongoing bile. Then move tax rates back to the good old days of the late 1950’s.
Ruckus
@Josie:
I seriously doubt that complaining online, protesting in the street, or sending messages to the SC about their decision will change anything.
Eventually it might. But it might not go in a reasonable direction. The SC does not care, that much is obvious. They are not above the law, they ARE the law. We have reached a position in this country where money does speak louder than votes and in my mind that is not supposed to be the way it works. But we have some, a few, in this country that are billionaires, who have so much money that they are being given, if not legitimate power, actual power. That Forbes 400 list I mentioned above, those 400 are all billionaires. We have people that have so much money and wealth and a lot of people that make and live on 20-25 grand a year – or less. And because the class and amount of wealth they have is so large, they can control bits and pieces of the economy for their benefit and to the detriment of a large portion of the population. This was the main concept of taxation levels rising in relation to income and wealth. But that has been changed over the last few decades such that the wealthy can get a lot wealthier and the vast majority – normals, once again suffer. I’m not saying that where we had gotten in the realm of taxation was not possibly over where it should be but that where we are now has reverted to creating once again a multi level economy of the HAVES – and everyone else. IOW money doesn’t buy happiness but it can and does buy power.
I’d suggest that possibly the Supreme Court needs to have a limitation to time served. I see it as possible that won’t change much but that it might change the concept of money as the arbiter of power in this country once again. Because I see it that we have gone backwards in this area. Not fully backwards but very likely too far.
WaterGirl
@Subsole: You took my comment more literally than intended.
Just my way of pointing out what pathetic shameful people they turned out to be.
schrodingers_cat
@Nelle: I know at least two Indian families who left New Zealand for the US. Race relations are not a uniquely American problem.
Chris
@Nelle:
“Immigration is horrible.”
“I agree. Now what country did you say you were from again, Yank?”
WaterGirl
@Nelle: Glad you are getting to recharge at home in New Zealand!
Nelle
@schrodingers_cat: Absolutely right, this isn’t perfection. I’ve already heard one pom (immigrated about twenty years ago) that “they” (in this case, Maori) are trying to take over everything. Nothing like an immigrant complaining about indigenous people getting back something of what was stolen.
I do think the divisions are worse in urban areas. I’m in a smaller town. And immigration has pakehas (whites of European ancestry) uneasy, though more concern is about Chinese than Indian, from what I’ve picked up.
The atmosphere for me (a pakeha) is clearer. I’m sorry to hear that those you know felt the need to leave. Thanks for bringing that up.
TriassicSands
@Ruckus: I think you are over-attributing here. Money is not the only motivating factor behind the decisions of these abhorrent six justices. For example, Dobbs was not motivated by money, the wealthy, or power. It was motivated by religious zealotry.
Religion is not a secondary concern of this court’s majority. It is as important as anything, and their efforts to destroy the separation of Church and State have been profoundly destructive and will continue.
Soprano2
I think the people saying the Supreme Court won’t decide about TFG’s immunity until after the election don’t understand how the court works. You’re saying that they’re going to hear arguments on April 22nd but not rule until sometime in November? I don’t think even this court would do that. Unless I’m completely misunderstanding what some people in this thread are saying.
Elizabelle
@Nelle:
Yes. I like your thinking.
It would actually be good for the US of A. Patriotic, even.
A being America, although too often Aholes these days.
schrodingers_cat
@Nelle: I know two families, one owned a car repair shop and the other was a family of doctors. Both families felt that their kids would be better off if they left NZ. Thanks for not taking my comment personally and reacting defensively. I appreciate that.
They loved NZ, said its a very beautiful country and urged me to go visit.
Soprano2
@Geminid: This is true, it’s hard to remember that most people don’t follow politics like we do, and actually a lot of them change the channel the minute anything political comes on. The closest they might get is seeing Biden on a late night show.
Ruckus
@Betty Cracker:
But I think this is a terrible decision because it helps Trump kick the can down the road, and I believe that’s what it’s designed to do. I’m pissed off about that.
It does. It shouldn’t. That is supposed to be one of the tenets of this country, your rights, your position, your life do not depend upon your wealth and or position. Joe Biden is a citizen. He was elected to be in charge and serves for a limited time in one of the premier positions in this country. Towards that I ask, what is the pay and amount of time one serves in the federal government leadership positions? President is 2 terms/8 yrs, senate is 2 terms/12 yrs and house is 6 terms/12yrs, while the supreme court is lifetime. I think it should be no more than 12 yrs. Humans like power, at least some humans like power, and some of those that do abuse it. I’ve been in power positions over others and see it as a necessary concept because of experience and that some can lead and some cannot. However, ALL humans have to understand that power can be misused and if it is it HARMS others. The examples would fill a library of large, thick books. That is why I believe that a rational government has to have limits upon the time ANYONE can serve in a position of power over others. ANYONE, ANY JOB.
WaterGirl
@Soprano2: As I understand it, the Supreme Court is not obligated to rule – on any case they have taken up – before the end of the session that was current when they took it up.
So there’s no guarantee they will rule before July 1, 2024 – and they could indeed rule any time after their next session starts on the first Monday in October, in 2025
edit: Not to mention that I think they would bend or break any rule that didn’t suit them.
Case in point, just look at how they disregard ethics standards!
zhena gogolia
@schrodingers_cat:
I agree.
Delk
Good lord: Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS) blocked the Senate bill that would have protected IVF treatment on a federal level, claiming it was an issue that should be left up to the states. But she had another reason: IVF could lead to “human-animal chimeras.”
John S.
@WaterGirl: I can’t argue with you there. 🙂
Soprano2
@WaterGirl: Maybe, but I think it’s catastrophizing too much to believe they won’t rule on this case until after the election. They might wait until sometime in June, but I don’t think they’ll go after July 1st.
Soprano2
@schrodingers_cat: I will never forgive the people who were too pure to vote for Hillary because she gave some speeches to Goldman Sachs or made money after she left office or didn’t vote the right way on a bill once. It’s not a requirement of being a good politician to be so poor you have to live in the gutter. What kind of lifestyle do you think Susan Sarandon has?
Brachiator
@Ruckus:
Term limits at the federal level are restricted to the executive branch and some agencies. Judicial appointments at the federal level are made for life and are not subject to election or to term limits. The U.S. Congress remains without electoral limits.
Any constitutional amendment to change this should be carefully considered. This might also include mandatory retirement ages for some offices.
WaterGirl
@Soprano2: Just sharing what the legal eagles were saying yesterday – that SCOTUS is not obligated to rule on this during the current term – so there’s no guarantee that they will.
Baud
@Delk:
It’s back!
WaterGirl
@Soprano2: What we didn’t know in 2016 is that there’s a whole set of people that won’t vote for someone, ostensibly for stated reason “A”.
But if you remove or disprove A, then suddenly they can’t vote for that person for Reason “B”. And so on.
Not everyone is as straightforward as the person in my extended family who said “I sure wasn’t going to vote for the lying bitch!”
Marcopolo
House just passed a clean stopgap measure to fund the gov’t through May 10. Kinda thought this was coming but admit its passage just now (410-19) def caught me off guard.
Lol, hope this counts as good news!
WaterGirl
@Baud: Everything old is new again.
WaterGirl
@Marcopolo: That is good news!
But not the Ukraine funding, I assume?
edit: more hoops to jump through as it goes through the senate, with possible amendments or voting on amendments I presume?
Baud
Via reddit
Ruckus
@TriassicSands:
You do have a valid point but I was trying to say that while it’s the money that motivates some, I saw that in the military and while money does come with rank, for many I saw they took joy in the power, it was the pure power that counted. And I believe we are seeing that in some of the justices. There is the old saying – “Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
randy khan
Don’t send them emails or even letters. All you’ll do is annoy the staff – they won’t see them and they won’t even know how many emails or letters they get. Spend your time on something that will make a difference, like electing more Democrats.
Marcopolo
@WaterGirl: oh, you funny 😄 (alas, in a most awful way)
Also Suozzi has been sworn in some one more D house member.
Manyakitty
@schrodingers_cat: or all three. I refuse to look at polls, but Sherrod Brown knows how to win in Ohio. Four Directions seems like a good investment for Tester, and Allred probably just needs money. Let’s go!
Miss Bianca
@Jinchi: to say nothing of welcoming the immigrant.
Citizen Alan
@Ruckus:
I am not sure it’s been worse than this since the Civil War. Which is logical since a lot of the anti-democratic movement is driven by bitterness over how the Civil War ended over 150 years ago. I genuinely think we’ll see a serious effort to bring back slavery in some sense by the end of this decade. Mike Huckabee already floated the idea of selling prison inmates to corporations because the 13th Amendment doesn’t ban slavery as punishment for a crime.
Miss Bianca
@WaterGirl: Right on!
Chris
@Brachiator:
I’ve always been against term limits for congresscritters. It sounds like a formula for bringing back nineteenth century style machine politics with a vengeance. Instead of an elected official that people take seriously, you’re going to end up with a revolving door of congressmen-of-the-week with the real power being in the party machine that runs them (which isn’t elected by anyone and whose bosses won’t be subject to those sorts of restrictions). No one’s going to take them seriously because they won’t be there that long anyway, everyone’s going to want to talk to their boss instead. And you’re not really incentivizing good governance, because if you’ll be gone in a term or two no matter how well you do, why would you give a shit about doing well? Lastly, you’re doing away with a fair amount of institutional memory among the legislators themselves (and, again, shifting it to unelected bosses instead). For all the people who say Biden’s a good president because he knows how to work through Congress – well, that’s because Biden was sitting in the Senate for close to four decades, which he wouldn’t have done if term limits were a thing.
For Supreme Court justices, my view is completely different, because that’s not an elected position. Not only do the people have no say in choosing them in the first place, but they never have to justify their jobs with any equivalent of re-election. Imagine if we picked a senator or president the same way – what’s that, you made a mistake and picked a completely unqualified piece of shit? Well, it happens. What’s that? Remove him? Oh no. You’re stuck with him for life now. Sorry! (I think after 200 years it’s pretty clear that “the only way to remove this person is by impeachment” is functionally equivalent to “there is no way to remove this person.” Only once in history were there even enough votes to do it to a president; I don’t think it’s ever even been tried for a Supreme Court justice). Yes, they should absolutely be term-limited.
As for presidential term limits, that’s the only branch of government on which I have no strong opinions.
rikyrah
Eric Holder (@EricHolder) posted at 10:22 PM on Wed, Feb 28, 2024:
There is no cavalry coming. No miracle solution. No saviors.
In the end, we, the American people – not any of our institutions – have to save our democracy by voting in defense of that democracy this fall.
We are the cavalry. The responsibility is ours.
(https://x.com/EricHolder/status/1763057187411161176?t=4Rp0-9kxP2BaUJaxLaMVZw&s=03)
VFX Lurker
Those were the plausible reasons they gave when they wrote in Wilmer or voted for Jill Stein, candidates with no chance of winning.
If they said out-loud what they thought of women, minorities and/or LGBTQ+ folks, they might lose invites to social events.
Manyakitty
@Soprano2: oh right! He’s another one with a chance!
Old School
@Marcopolo:
As far as I can find, this applies only to the FAA.
The short-term funding kicks the ball a couple weeks down the road:
Chris
@Citizen Alan:
Arguably even worse than the Civil War, since that only involved states trying to leave the Union, not overthrow it. Something like 1/6 is totally without precedent in U.S. history.
hueyplong
@Citizen Alan: Seems like corporate slavery for prisoners would at least raise the spectre of “cruel and unusual” elsewhere in the Amendments.
Citizen Alan
@Chris: To me, the last thirty years of American politics have only proved how utterly pointless the Civil War was. If the slave states had been more cunning, they’d have stayed in the Union and abused parliamentary procedure to make it impossible for Lincoln and his party to govern. “Let us keep our slaves, or we will burn the house down from the inside.” That probably would have worked at least for a few more decades.
Nelle
@Old School: So the airports will be open when I’m scheduled to return to the US? I can’t win, can i?
Citizen Alan
@hueyplong: “Cruel and Unusual Punishment” is somewhere on the level of “A well-regulated militia” to the current SCOTUS. I think a majority of them would be okay with outright torture of prison inmates so long as it was a kind of torture that was acceptable to a 17th century witch finder.
Elizabelle
Well who knew? Nikki Haley has been rallying at the Westin Hotel about 3 miles from my home in Richmond, at 12:30 today. Virginia is among the Super Tuesday primary states.
And: this typo from our local ABC station had me laughing:
Keep that venue small, so he can fill it!
I think they meant Convention Center. And even then, maybe not the biggest space there.
I hope the K-Pop fans are snapping up the tickets, as we speak
In their honor, I should go vote for Biden-Harris today or tomorrow. Go Joe!
rikyrah
Right-wing clown trying to double vote.
aubrey savela (@aubrey_savela) posted at 7:14 PM on Wed, Feb 28, 2024:
Maricopa county at its finest…
My first time ever voting in a presidential preference election and I received not one but two mail-in ballots![]()
Thank you @stephen_richer
And the response:
Stephen Richer—MaricopaCountyRecorder (prsnl acct) (@stephen_richer) posted at 8:53 PM on Wed, Feb 28, 2024:
Hi Aubrey!
Thanks for reaching out.
You changed your voter registration on the last day of voter registration (Feb. 20) from your Chandler address to your new Tempe address.
Because early ballots must go out on Feb. 21, your Chandler ballot was already set to go out, and so it did.
Then we sent out a new ballot to your Tempe address when we processed your voter registration modification.
That’s why you had to redact out different lengths in the address (because they were sent to different addresses).
You’ll also notice that one of packet codes ends in “01” (the one to your old address) and one ends in “02” (the one sent to your new address). As soon as the “02” one goes out, the “01” packet is dead. Meaning even if you sent it back, it wouldn’t proceed to signature verification, and it wouldn’t be opened. That’s how we prevent people from voting twice.
So just use the one with your new address ending in “02” — that’s the only one that will work.
Hope this helps! Have a great night! Happy voting!
(https://x.com/stephen_richer/status/1763034707745468857?t=_mJ87elrjyOG2G9-a1X9Nw&s=03)
Old School
@Nelle:
You can always root for Homeland Security/Customs to be shut down. They are in the March 22nd group. Not sure when you are traveling.
Brachiator
@Chris:
I agree with you here. We have term limits in California. Some believed that it would help elect more fresh faces and progressives. It has not worked out that way. Politicians play a game of musical chairs to move on and run for vacated seats, and favored people are heavily endorsed for termed out positions.
Veteran lobbyists love newcomers without deep political knowledge.
I might also agree with you here, but I think we need to proceed carefully. I suppose the idea was that if Supreme Court justices would have some independence if they were not worried about reelection.
For the courts and Congress, I think we should look at a mandatory retirement age. And for the Court, maybe term limits. I am not big on retirement age for members of Congress because voters can throw them out.
WaterGirl
@rikyrah: I had that one set up for a late night post.
It’s really good.
Chris
@Citizen Alan:
Oh Lord, yes. The extent to which Northerners were willing to bend backwards for the South was unbelievable – they could have milked that for decades. As with the fascists in the 1930s, they had to go extraordinarily far to finally provoke their own bitch-slapping.
But then that’s just the nature of the beast. The more you compromise with people like this, the more they take the lesson that they can ask for anything because they’ll always get what they want.
Geminid
@VFX Lurker: I think Gary Johnson attracted as many potential Clinton voters in 2016 as Jill Stein did, probably more. He got twice the votes Stein received and more than double the Libertarian vote in 2012 amd 2020. Some of Johnson’s voters may have thought Clinton had the election sewn up and figured tbey had a “free” protest vote.
NotMax
Boy oh boy, is this joint crying out for a respite (decompression) thread.
Manyakitty
@VFX Lurker: Gaba is on Bluesky with that every day. He’s walking the walk.
rikyrah
@WaterGirl:
Thanks WG. Can’t wait to read it.
Another Scott
@rikyrah: Thanks for that.
Imagine. A clear, sensible, easily understood system for sending out ballots.
Of course, monsters who want to break everything – including the brains of their followers – and who think that Dr. Evil was the hero – try to turn it into some corrupt thing because they cannot conceive of others doing their jobs with integrity.
Grr…,
Scott.
Martin
@rikyrah: So many conservatives don’t understand how you secure mail-in voting, and just assume that there is no security around it.
It’s not _that_ complicated, but they are so motivated to not learn.
sab
@Brachiator: We brought in term limits in Ohio and we now have a completely Republican dominated legislature (both houses) with everyone scrambling for their next gig, and the only people with any institutional memory are the lobbyists.
The one exception to that was the Sykes family, where father (Vern) and daughter ( Emilia) swapped their seats when their terms were up. That dynastic thing could itself be very problematic with a family less ethical.
WaterGirl
@NotMax: Ask and you shall receive!
Chris
@Brachiator:
What seems to have happened in practice is that Supreme Court justices generally follow public opinion, unless it’s to side with minorities marked by their elite status. Obergefell being an example of the former (gay marriage legalized, but only after a majority of public opinion had become in favor of it), Citizens United being an example of the latter (public opinion wasn’t for it, but the rich were, so fuck the public).
Agree on all points, I think.
WaterGirl
@rikyrah: Not much to it!
I figured it would be a good conversation starter for a late night thread. I try not to make those posts too heavy or fact-filled so I tend to just throw out a couple of thoughts or tweets to get things going.
Marcopolo
@Old School:thanks for the clarification. all I can say for myself is what I read wasn’t clearly written —sure it wasn’t my poor reading comprehension 😂
Jackie
@Baud: I saw that and 😂
90% means “someone” is depriving him from the 101% he should have!
Chris
@sab:
It’s like this perfect metaphor for so many things wrong with modern society, all rolled together. The financialization of everything. The gig economy. The five-second attention span of the social media age. Perfect early twenty-first century enshittification.
sab
@Elizabelle: That is such good advice. The kids are mostly not idiots and they are genuinely very upset by a lot of things they are seeing that are indeed very upsetting. But in our history everything good has come after a long haul and lots of backwards sliding, with people working for years to turn things around.
NotMax
@Martin
More than enough stuff lost, diverted or delayed in the mail to remain on the skeptical bench. if must mail out ballots, lean more to numerous dedicated, secure drop boxes to return them.
Had a letter mailed from NY, postmarked Feb. 5th, arrive here on the 23rd only this month. Not to mention not all that infrequently receive mail sent to someone else’s address (I always make a trip to the post office to pass it over the counter and explain why).
Subsole
@WaterGirl:
Yeah. That is a weakness of mine. Sorry.
Subsole
@Delk:
In retrospect, and present company notwithstanding, the internet was a Mistake.
Brachiator
@sab:
In California, Democrats control the state legislature, but this may because voters rejected extremist Republicans. Lobbyists have too much power.
The sad thing is that the death of newspapers, physical and online, means that it is harder to keep an eye on state and local politicians, even if they are doing good.
rikyrah
southpaw (@nycsouthpaw) posted at 4:31 PM on Wed, Feb 28, 2024:
DOJ sought expedited review of the immunity issue last year from the Court. The Court refused, punting the issue to the DC Circuit, which took months. Then Trump appealed from that ruling on the same grounds. The MAGA majority then burned weeks before granting. Months more delay.
southpaw (@nycsouthpaw) posted at 4:32 PM on Wed, Feb 28, 2024:
The handling of these petitions from first to last has seen the Supreme Court’s majority acting in alignment with Trump’s desire to delay his trial until after the election and possibly thereby escape justice.
(https://x.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1762969159460168188?t=oha2Kr3TcPp9X5ENE6fNiw&s=03)
Sister Golden Bear
@Omnes Omnibus:
Word.
A reminder that except for a brief period in the 1960s, the SCOTUS has invariably been reactionary. Most of the major changes for the better during during last 200+ years have come through political change.
sab
@Madeleine:@FelonyGovt:
I have repeated this every so often in blog comment threads: at the first Continental Congress, before we even got our act together for the current government structure (aka the Constitution) they had a kosher table. We have never been an officially Christian nation. The Christian nationalist originalist stuff is just bunk.
Chris
@Brachiator:
Trying to find out anything about local candidates at election time is fucking horrific. It’s not rare for there to be literally nothing on the Internet about them. Now, to add nightmare fuel to the issue, add the fact that Republican groups in deep blue states have started simply running candidates under the D label that are blatantly nothing of the kind but counting on the fact that lower turnout plus generally low information about all the candidates means at least a few of them will get in…
sab
@Burnspbesq: Tsk tsk. (I was just thinking that I like the lawyers here calming us down, yet on this current cert with schedule y’all are being more excitable than the rest of us except the usual bricklobbers.)
wjca
California put in term limits for the legislature, in the hopes of getting legislators who were closer to the voters, rather than “career politicians.” The main result has been a loss of institutional memory, and lots and lots of legislation essentially written by those who are around long enough to know the ropes: lobbyists.
Unintended consequences. Pity there’s so little chance of collectively saying “Oops. That isn’t working as intended, so we need to cancel it and try something else,”
Subsole
@Citizen Alan:
Debatable. Congressmen were a lot more comfortable beating the tar out of each other back then.
And I know who I’m putting my hundo on if it’s Fetterman vs Hawley.
Sister Golden Bear
@Delk:
That’s one of the conspiracy theories Alex Jones has been pushing.
sab
@Manyakitty: Emilia Sykes (House not Senate) could also use a few bucks. Her seat (after the iffy reapportionment) isn’t +D like it was when Tim Ryan had part of it.
sab
@Citizen Alan: Robert E Lee only needed to stall for quite awhile. Grant and Sherman trounced the West, but things were still in the balance. Then Marse Robert decided to be a hero and lose the war in the East. Moron.
sab
@Sister Golden Bear: Yes. The Warren Court was such an anomaly,
prostratedragon
@Delk: “We already have those😶”
Captain C
@Citizen Alan: Alito would cite Torquemada, and then make the ruling such that torture was allowed if he (Alito) was invited to watch/participate.
glc
@Suzanne: That was indeed a stunning question. Or a stunning formulation of the question, at least.
Ruckus
@Citizen Alan:
I’m saying all things considered, in my very, very close to 3/4 of a century, and with far better education possible and a communications device in every pocket/purse, a working economy (unless you are one of the idiots that think everyone should give them a billon or 3, and allow them to be pure shit 100% of the time – like DJT does) we have a working economy, we seem to at least be trying to move everyone up the scale of reasonable life, liberty and so on, IOW continue to build upon the concept of democracy, equality, and reasonable life (OK not the rethuglican party for the most part…) Life is better today for most people than it was when I was born in the first part of the last century. Could it be better? Fucking Absolutely. Has it been actually worse in my lifetime? Fucking Absolutely.
It’s humanity, parts of it are pure shit, but it’s always been that way and likely always will. In my lifetime we’ve been at war, civil and internationally for less than my parents generation. Life seems better for a lot of people around the world and here in the US than it was. And yes it could be better. One suggestion I have is to tax huge fortunes and incomes at least closer to what we did not all that long ago. We seem to have a concept here that the individual matters far, far more than the whole, especially as far as more wealthy individuals. That in my opinion is the entire basis of the republican party – I’m better than you and don’t you forget it.
One of the problems with that is the population. It is of course growing. We all like consenting sex, but maybe some of us don’t actually need a battalion of kids and if those that seem to make up at least some of the rethuglican party weren’t living in what looks like 2 centuries ago time, possibly we could get better and get along.
I’ve been wrong before and I surely may be now but that’s what I see.
Chris Johnson
Of the Republican PRIMARY! What is it, as low as 60%?
If that man can’t pull more than 60% of REPUBLICANS he is beyond fucked. Mind explaining why he can’t put up Biden-like primary numbers in a republican primary?
Ramona
I felt horrible yesterday upon finding out that SCOTUS granted cert after sitting on their hands in December. But after listening to AG and AM on their podcast Jack and reading what you fine folks have written here, the following line of reasoning occurred to me:
1. This latest example of the arrogance of SCOTUS is redundant to establishing in our minds how corrupt it has long been. Their action now redounds to our advantage as we go into this election with a fresh reminder of the stakes to rally around.
2. We all watched January 6 unfold and the January 6th committee did an excellent job of laying out Trump’s role in his attempted autogolpe. Those of us who can be convinced that no one should vote for someone who would do such a thing are already convinced to vote against him and I do not believe the Republicans who claim in polls that they’d be less likely to vote for Trump if he were convicted. No reasonable person can continue to believe that a conviction should be necessary to decide against voting for Trump. A conviction by an informed jury of his peers should be necessary to imprison him for what he has done but keeping the office of the presidency out of his hands is not a deprivation of life or liberty so I feel very confident in saying, Trump incited an insurrection and should not be president.
If the trial proceeds before the election but a hung jury leads to a mistrial which is always a possibility that would be disastrous. Even if Trump were convicted he could still win the presidency; I really do not believe those GOP poll respondents when they say, we remain unconvinced and we need a guilty verdict to change our minds… HAH!
3. With the federal trials in abeyance, we can watch Bragg try Trump in NYC in March for the crime for which he was first indicted! This is going to be fun! Thank-you SCOTUS for bringing that forward.
4. What should we do? Declare the 28th of every month “Pack the Court” day. Meanwhile, carry on what we are doing and hopefully win the House, Senate and White House, kill the filibuster, pass a federal law guaranteeing a right to abortion with the stipulation that it is beyond judicial review, pass a voting rights law (again with judicial stripping), pass a law that codifies Chevron deference (judicially stripped) …
And keep getting together with all of you at Balloon Juice.
Chris Johnson
Sometimes they don’t even need that.
Lil’ reminder that in New Hampshire, Joe Biden got 9.6% more of his primary than Trump did of his primary… as a write-in.
Biden can beat Trump’s percentages when he’s not on the fucking ballot. That’s because Dems are prepared to fight for him, and not all the Republicans are prepared to fight for Trump, nor should they because he’s an asshole, a criminal, broke, and not really a Republican anyway.
They SHOULD be scrambling madly to find some other option, and they absolutely are, no matter how much the fix is in. If Trump can’t control all of them he’s fucked. And he very obviously can’t.
Sphouch
This is way down thread so maybe already covered but this might be the most bad faith cert ever granted by the Court.
I’m confident, based on the schedule, that they are going to hold that no president enjoys absolute immunity, but in such a manner as to ensure TFG doesn’t actually face trial until after the election.
This is the worst Court in American history, and we’ve had courts hold on Dred Scott and Korematsu.
Ramona
@Chris Johnson: that +9.6% is a nice thing to remember. Here’s hoping Haley hangs in till their convention!
currawong
If Trump is given Presidential Immunity, the only upside I can think of is that Biden still has Seal Team Six at his disposal.
Manyakitty
@sab: oh no! Thanks for the heads up. I’ll definitely send a few bucks her way.
patrick II
@WaterGirl:
Andrew Weissman was not kind to Garland on Nicole Wallace This afternoon, saying he did not step on the gas of the Jan sixth investigation until after the house committee happened.
Ruckus
@WaterGirl:
You can’t hear it but I’m applauding this comment.
The investigation and charging takes time, it takes effort and the courts have to have open dates or we have to wait. These are not easy cases to get through, likely because these types of cases are not brought often and there were/are a lot of Jan 6 cases. I believe that the number convicted is already over 1000 and that’s a pretty good number all things considered. I’ve been on a number of juries and none of the process goes fast. And because I’ve been on a number of juries, I can see that rushing things never really works well. All the t/s have to be crossed and the i/s dotted before it gets into court if you want convictions.
Ruckus
@schrodingers_cat:
Race relations are not a uniquely American problem.
No they are not. Race relations are a HUMAN problem. It may be worse in a country the size of ours with the amount of immigration that we have had over this country’s existence. I’d bet that most of us have some part of our bloodline from another country. At least one of my grandparents was an immigrant. I don’t know if the others were or not, I never asked and now there is no one to ask. And I don’t see the point in any event. If you are here legally, you belong here. That means born here or legally immigrated. And the vast majority of our citizens have immigration (willing or unwilling) at some point in their family history. I do. And this may be a higher percentage than other countries but still, there it is, most family lines here have immigration in them.
Ruckus
@schrodingers_cat:
I’ve been to New Zealand. I liked it a LOT.
I inquired about emigrating there. It’s not all that easy or at least it wasn’t when I was there very early this century.
Ruckus
@Brachiator:
Exactly.
And of course it can work both ways, good and bad. But if this is to be a country of, by and for all the citizens, I believe that there needs to be a time limit to many of the positions that serve at the highest levels of OUR government. Maybe 12 yrs isn’t enough, but many countries of yore had shitty rulers that grew into their shittyness over time and that has caused rebellion that didn’t help in pretty much any way. I don’t want that here. But that means that one thing that can be changed – and that I think should be, and that is that lifetime appointments. I believe they are an issue in most governing situations. And while the Supreme Court is not creating laws, their decisions do affect our laws and that can change how we are supposed to govern. It is possible that too much change would be harmful, it is just as likely that not enough change could be as well. And I think it is.