I’d argue that we’re getting awfully close to the time when serious people have to consider what “let” is going to mean going forward.
2 Likes
Without a significant majority in both houses, there was no way he could have addressed this shitshow. The only hope is for a total Republican wipeout in Nov. If things go the way I think they could, we might be able to actually do this. But it has to be a historic and catastrophic Republican disaster. Let’s make that happen.
26 Likes
That’s the point. The Republicans won’t want to limit the power of their corrupt court but they need to be forced into public and shown to be thoroughly on the side of wrong-doing.
12 Likes
A friend pointed out that, while this has a snowball’s chance in hell of making any difference whatsoever, it’s still hopeful that maybe dems will start pushing back against letting the Overton window continually slide right.
5 Likes
This could help make that happen too. Even a majority of Republicans support these types of reforms. They’re all popular.
While it may be to much to Google Project 2025, this is going to end up directly on the news, local, cable, print, web. We’ll have front and center policies that are hugely popular with one candidate supporting them and one arguing against. That’s not a good look for the one arguing against.
I expect we will see lots more of “I haven’t seen it yet” and “I’m not aware of it” along with “sorry I cannot talk, let me just run out of here with a fake phone call quick” in the future. It’s become better to look uninformed and stupid in congress than state actual policy positions for many.
Of course, this all assume the Democrats don’t self destruct with a self defeating message they’re pushing as many seem to have accepted loss before the fight and are trying to convince the rest of us.
7 Likes
The catch is they are the one to decide what is “presidential duties,” like forgiving student loan is not but turning US to Gilead is definitely presidential duty. Fuck this court. They’re needed to be booted with Citizen United and presidential “immunity” bullshit revoked, also gerrymandering.
7 Likes
Failure is not an option. Your life may not be affected but a whole lot of other will. This is existential threat for people that is not white, cis male.
6 Likes
This feels like the right place to leave this. I loved it. Senator Warnock returning to what he did before being a Senator. ETA: not thinking the dude with the drink adds to this, but … TikTok. 
8 Likes
He still preaches each Sunday, as far as I know…
12 Likes
Does he? That’s great. I don’t know much about anything happening in Georgia, but I’ve been happy when I listened to him.
6 Likes
There ya go!
12 Likes
Thanks!
7 Likes
9 Likes
Warnock is awesome, and telling the truth as usual.
10 Likes
7 Likes
They did hand him the keys, and were dumb enough to include “no backsides!”
But seriously, they wrote the order. And they have no means of enforcing a way to pick and choose. Biden could just withhold funding to the Court, close the building, and they might as well go home.
He wouldn’t do that, but maybe he should at this point.
7 Likes
They absolutely do. They did not define what constitutes an official act. Hell, they didn’t even define what constitutes a Constitutionally authorized act, the type for which they said the President has complete immunity. Also, for the official acts, it’s merely presumptive immunity. Presumptions are rebuttable. Which means a prosecutor could argue that a specific act, even though official, does not have immunity in a specific case for reasons. And who decides if those reasons apply? The court does, because that’s a question of law, not a question of fact. And who is the ultimate arbiter of questions of law? The Supreme Court. They absolutely gave themselves a way to say immunity applies in one situation but not in another. They did not create some well defined black letter law. They made a very gray, amorphous mess of law that will allow them to grant immunity to a president they like, and deny it to one they don’t.
18 Likes
What’s so weird about how the ruling is written, though, is that for those official acts, they severed judicial review. So if the president acts in a way that is prima facie official, SCOTUS cut themselves out of even reviewing it.
I’m not making this batshit crazy facet of the decision up. It’s right there front and center.
7 Likes
… SCOTUS in the past can’t stop SCOTUS in the future from reviewing anything
They’re always free to change their minds 
4 Likes
I like the idea. I have no idea how legal systems work on the inside, so I have no idea whether it could be made to work.
3 Likes
