AOC wants to impeach SCOTUS justices following Trump immunity ruling
AOC wants to impeach SCOTUS justices following Trump immunity ruling
The congresswoman said the Supreme Court has become "consumed by a corruption crisis beyond its control."
AOC wants to impeach SCOTUS justices following Trump immunity ruling
The congresswoman said the Supreme Court has become "consumed by a corruption crisis beyond its control."
The statement:
The Supreme Court has become consumed by a corruption crisis beyond its control.
Today’s ruling represents an assault on American democracy. It is up to Congress to defend our nation from this authoritarian capture.
I intend on filing articles of impeachment upon our return.
This is what leadership is, what voters want, and what wins elections.
Doesn't matter if it works, it's trying and highlighting that issues can be fixed. We might not succeed the first time, but we'll keep fucking trying till we do.
Put the votes on record and show voters where people stand.
AOC is earning my vote.
Imagine having a candidate that got more popular after speaking in public...
We literally haven't even passed that low of a bar in over a decade. I don't understand what's happened to people.
People as a whole are more politically aware than I've ever seen, but we're just wasting it.
I want AOC with vice president Bernie.
That man may be in his final years of politics, and perhaps too old to be at the helm, but dammit, he deserves it.
Literally has had one minor mis-step with the railroad union strike, telling them to go back to work, and they still got the deal they wanted in the end. She hasn't just earned my vote for POTUS should she choose to run, but she's got my full support. Heck, I might start throwing campaign contributions her way if she makes a POTUS try.
If we're having elections in 28 and she isn't a candidate. Something is wrong.
AOC will not survive after Trump wins.
"Haven't you heard it's a battle of words?"
\ The poster bearer cried
\ "Listen, son," said the man with the gun
\ "There's room for you inside"
That's the thing though, with the Republicans in charge there will NEVER be a vote on this. They won't allow it.
Yeah. But it's provocative, it gets the people going.
That translates to more voters and more small donors.
Two things that are kind of important 4 months before a general election.
The minority party has seized control by eroding the foundation of democracy. The sad part is that most people don't even realize how fucked we are.
And yet, she'll never win a presidential election because she's too polarizing. There's literally no other way to win here if somebody else steps in. Sad that people try to do good in their job as a public representative for their people, and just fucking can't.
Edit to say: don't just take my word for it. Ask Bernie Sanders. Did he win the presidency at some point? I just must have..,..
And yet, she’ll never win a presidential election because she’s too polarizing
Imagine saying that after Obama flipped a bunch of red states and brought in a shit ton of down ballot races.
AOC is polarizing, but not as much as Obama and it's easier the second time around.
Hell, no body even really mentioned Biden being Catholic in 1988. You should have seen the shit they said about JFK. And similar time-frames passed between.
And strictly police wise, the country is a lot more open to progressive policy than in 08, and again, everyone said Obama was too "polarizing" right up till election results.
She's not polarising. The oligarchy controlled media that constantly paint her as some kind of radical are polarising.
How come Trump gets to be as polarizing as he wants, but nobody to the left of McConnell can?
because she’s too polarizing.
She shares a lot of views with Bernie Sanders, and Berni would almost surely have defeated Trump where Hillary failed.
As I see it, she is not nearly as polarizing as Trump. The only ones strongly against her, are probably extreme Christians and Nazis.
IMHO, the only reason she’s “polarizing” is because the right has chosen to run a smear campaign on her. People like her are a threat to them. She’s young, smart, and charming. She’s like Obama once was, only she’s even younger than he was. She’s still a year too young to run.
I really don't think that's true. People said the same with Obama, and he really never faced that in voters, the GOP was viciously attacking him and it never stuck. There is a stage big enough, that the most vicious attackers do get lost in the crowd.
And yet, she’ll never win a presidential election because she’s too polarizing.
She'll never make it through the primaries because she's a progressive.
You must be quite young. Everything you are saying about AOC was said, word for word, for Obama. Obama still won.
Bernie would have won (according to polls) if the DNC hadn't sabotaged him at every turn. Too polarizing? No, just too left for the Democrats.
No need to. Biden can have the 6 corrupt justices killed. He has the immunity and he can pick new justices. If members of the senate refuse to put the new justices on the bench, have them killed too. No rules anymore.
Strategically speaking liberal politicians are backed into a corner and only have two real options:
They're already in check, but more concerned with soliciting large donations and collecting hot stick tips.
We want them to do option 1, but know they are going to choose option 2.
I want to move away so bad
Liberal politicians do not need to be the ones to make sure #1 happens. The second amendment literally exists so the citizens have the capacity to do that ourselves.
Option 2 is suicide. I guess that's it for American Democracy. Of course, option 3 being that the Democrats win every election until the Republican party collapses. At which point the Democratic party will likely split, with one part becoming a moderate party, and the other half absorbing the remains of the Republican party.
Or .... Ya know.... Get the votes
The quickest way to save the country would be for Biden to kill the 6 justices that ruled in favour of immunity (and I'm pretty sure they wouldn't even mind since they're the ones that made it legal), install 6 liberal judges and the new court can overturn every ruling the corrupt court made. Which means Biden would probably end up in prison, but hey, it's a small price to pay for democracy.
Why would he end up in prison? It would not have been a crime when he committed it. That’s what immunity means.
I mean he would certainly make a mark as one of the most interesting president's yet by doing so...
How? Wouldn’t what he did be legal when he did it?
This is the way.
This is the sane and rational thing to do. Look forward to seeing what comes of it, keep fighting AOC!
Short of federal troops literally kicking down doors as oFFiCiAl aCtS it won't happen. The Republicans want their dictatorship and they're not going to vote against it.
AOC should team up with King Joe to make it happen.
Still. This wild "acting in the public's interests" thing will get more progressives in positions to make such a thing even possible.
We deserve a fresh, genuinely impartial court with term limits - three decades ago.
You can have it, if enough people fight for it. Now the president can practically do it all by himself.
Why does Biden not simply EAT the Justices as an Official Presidential Act?
Because eating poisonous animals is dangerous and we all know that Thomas and Kavanaugh have the most toxic blood possible while being able to pass as human from a medical point of view.
This one is from Omicron-Persei 8
Like seriously, I'm tired of whining on the internet about this shit. Where can I go to learn about joining a protest? It's better that doing fuck all by tut-tutting the establishment hellbent on fucking us over while they count their money.
think you Americans are beyond a peaceful protest at this point, right now you need a revolution. you are quite literally 4 months away from a potential dictatorship.
So you can have a revolution with a peaceful protest. The problem is that requires a general strike to go with it to entirely cripple the economy. And Americans are obviously still too fat and happy to even do that.
Good luck with that, the fans of the potential dictators have most of the guns, law enforcement is packed with fascists, etc...
(Although I agree.)
You could get involved in campaigning for a Democrat running in a local senate race, actually get involved in politics and work for change
why don't you go learn about using firearms and secure communication networks instead? protests accomplish nothing. protests get you put on lists for when the authoritarians really take over.
A few more peaceful protests is sure to fix things in a giffie!
💩💯💯
Peaceful protests build the sense of consensus and unity. Violent solutions can't succeed without both popular support and enough participants to make a difference, but if everybody's scared of standing alone they're doomed. Sudden upheaval is likely to make more people oppose the change, because most people like stability.
Peaceful protests that get gradually more frustrated are more likely to support more drastic measures than a sudden upheaval. Whether or not you believe peaceful protests will fix anything, they're the best solution that's viable right now.
I've always seen it spelled "jiffy" but correct me if I'm wrong
your sarcasm is on point. only naive children are downvoting you.
We need to hold the supreme court accountable.
It's ok, the the president can now just have them assassinated as a defence of the constitution.
Blatant misinformation and a fundamental lack of understanding of the ruling. Nothing changed. President cannot commit a crime and say it was in official capacity. Obviously.
with ropes
The only Democrat worth their salt.
Hey don’t leave out Rashida Tlaib and Cori Bush! IMO they have better politics than even AOC but they just don’t have as much name recognition.
For once, I just want Democrats to take a fucking bold brazen move. Seriously. This is why Democrats never control the narrative because they're always too gun-shy to do the right thing and stand by their own beliefs.
Edit: Sorry, going to move this to the top of the thread because it's too important:
Before going forward, let me be clear: I want to be convinced that we're not fucked. I really do. The past three days I've gone into detail about how I think we're fucked and looking for anyone to make a sound, data-driven argument that shows we are not. I've yet to be convinced by one, and bear in mind I voted for Biden once and would vote for a corpse if it meant preventing the convicted felon getting keys to the WH again.
There is ample evidence that a not insignificant amount of swing voters either saw past the old man voice to what he was actually saying and standing for, as well as recognized how badly Trump did, even though literally everyone only focuses on Biden, just like always.
Please show me these! Because these are all the surveys I've so far seen:
Post-Debate: "72 Percent Say Biden Unfit Mentally, Cognitively."
Post-Debate: "Voters think Harris is more fit than Biden to run the country"
Post-Debate: "Swing state voters react to presidential debate, Biden’s weak performance"
Post-Debate Focus Group: "Undecided voter focus group leans toward Trump after debate"
Let's face reality:
To me I view it as a known loss versus a known risky chance. At this point, personally and given all the data I've thus far presented, I am that convinced that we will lose. Polling shows people deeply unsatisfied with the current candidate. I think critical swing-state voters would just be happy to vote for a fresh face that is younger. Like Mehdi Hasan said, "Americans like new shit."
So I don't know how how you can say with a straight face that Biden is more successful while simultaneously dodging the obvious fact that there is a significant decline in physical and cognitive performance. So let's recap:
We can downplay all we want, but this wasn't "one bad debate," for it wasn't even about the debat eitself but the revelation of Biden's senility piercing through echo-chambers. For the exact same reason Biden ASKED for this debate to reach important voters and show he's mentally fit (akin to the SOTU) and show Trump is not, it backfired 100% and there will not be another chance to reach 50 million voters at prime-tme. Trump has no obligation to take another debate; ending on that note is all that is needed.
If I was a Republican strategist, I'd be doing everything in my power to keep Biden in the race because I know he'd be the weakest opponent compared to a fresh, younger face. Nate Silver, Ezra Klein, even former Obama/Biden staffers from PSA clearly agree.
Now if you agree with this and you say, "okay I see your points, but how can anyone else do better?" then we'll move on to that.
Cause democrats are not a unified faction.
Democrats are basically 15 different political parties shoved under the same umbrella.
15 factions = mostly AIPAC recipients.
That lobby group primarily funded by Republicans.
You're not wrong, but so are Republicans. That's the nature of a 2-party system and why it basically doesn't work.
Yes, beset by a mountain of conflicting interests and decades of infighting and ideological purity testing. Most Democrats are terrified of taking stances on wedge issues because any stance they take could break up a coalition that has all the durability of a Faberge egg. Republicans either don't have this problem, or they don't have it as bad. Despite having as many if not more factions than the Left, they all value loyalty and in-group cohesion, which allows them to come together every 4 years to form a unified voting bloc.
Keep in mind that kremlin still runs massive campaigns to make you think Biden will loose and is unable to run the country.
But he is not alone, this is not a monarchy, there is a full team behind him to make great things for the country.
Of course the Kremlin, and Israel as well as other state actors are; but the obvious question then becomes — what is the Biden campaign actually doing to offset that effect? They are losing the battle and time is running out.
This is all easily remedied. Biden just needs to put out a bounty on Trump's head. Totally legal move.
Yep, totally official move of the president covered by immunity, if I'm reading the Court right!
Hell, just pull the trigger himself next debate. 100% legal and WOW did I just say that? Wow
While I understand what you mean, we also have to recognize that doing that would 100% give trump the election. Splitting the votes is not what we want to do.
With all due respect if we're speaking in terms of certainty, I am 100% certain that Biden will give Trump the election—and I guarantee I have more evidence to support that statement than anyone does to the opposite conclusion. Staying this course is a disaster in slow-motion. The Titanic already hit the iceberg and now we're just sinking for 4 months straight. We either jump ship now, or we are going to lose, or we start gearing up for 2028 now.
We are 100% giving Trump the election now on our present course. Biden is Hillary with worse numbers.
Nate Silver of 538’s Model
Small clarification, Nate is no longer part of 538. He got laid off by ABC out of nowhere a year or two ago. He does his own thing, 538 has a different person at the helm for the model (Morris).
Thanks for that clarification. I was trying to reconcile the differences between the models and couldn't even find info in the Wikipedia article.
They are not gun shy. This is all theater. Every time you hear a massive lie or act you are supposed to believe that it is just incompetence.
When Biden wanted those weapons to israel to commit Genocide all these principles went out of the window.
I'll be honest, Linkerbaan — and you may know this from our previous discussions — I can even see the high-stakes situation with Israel and not like it but understand why in the grand scheme of politics (AIPAC, Jewish American voters, and the risk of withholding arms and then a false-flag terrorist attack occurs on Israeli soil, only to cause an immediate end of Biden's campaign and an installation of someone FAR more pro-genocide).... But nevertheless, your point raises something I think we can both agree on: Ditching Biden also helps, as Mehdi Hasan has pointed out, ditch the baggage of Israeli genocide complicity.
DO IT! DO IT NOW! You have to show them the checks and balances. There is no god king, there is no one that is not accountable for their actions. Impeach every single one that was nominated by him. Illegitimate court.
WHY DOESN'T BIDEN IMMEDIATELY USE HIS NEW POWERS TO DO IT
WHY DOESN'T BIDEN IMMEDIATELY USE HIS NEW POWERS TO DO IT
WHY DOESN'T BIDEN IMMEDIATELY USE HIS NEW POWERS TO DO IT
WHY DOESN'T BIDEN IMMEDIATELY USE HIS NEW POWERS TO DO IT
WHY DOESN'T BIDEN IMMEDIATELY USE HIS NEW POWERS TO DO IT
WHY DOESN'T BIDEN IMMEDIATELY USE HIS NEW POWERS TO DO IT
WHY DOESN'T BIDEN IMMEDIATELY USE HIS NEW POWERS TO DO IT
WHY DOESN'T BIDEN IMMEDIATELY USE HIS NEW POWERS TO DO IT
Cuz hes a milquetoast coward. He shoulda packed the court day one.
*unpacked, by expanding it to 13 minimum, 15 for good measure. But yes.
The president cannot impeach them unilaterally, and is explicitly out of his power.
He could, however, potentially send them to a blacksite as a prisoner or conveniently kill them as part of that arrest. They could claim collusion with domestic terror groups, espionage, corruption, etc, as very plausible justification for arrest, and that would probably qualify as official duties, at least how this SCOTUS would classify the same actions if executed by a republican president.
I mean... in his place I'd probably make them think I was going to do it to see if it would change their mind.
The time has come
It's because the sad fact of the matter is that both of our political parties are working together to fuck us.
I don't know how else to interpret this.
I think it's much more obvious that one party cares about decorum no matter what is going on.
is biden better than trump? yes. am I voting biden? yes, there's no other real option. is he a feckless snivelling coward that only cares about people if they offer him a chance for power? yes. does he actually intend to do anything to improve our country and stave off a christofascist totalitarian takeover? hell no he doesn't lmao
he won't do a good god damn thing if the corporations who have their fists up his ass don't force him to, and they don't give a shit about any of this because when it all turns red come inauguration day, regulations and protections will be stripped away and they'll have no restriction on how they can abuse us and our planet for their own gain.
he has this new power, and just like with the power he holds now, he won't do anything with it that will actually move the needle and improve quality of life for anyone unless it serves his interest. the next guy will use it though. bend over, y'all.
Big tough guy on the internet, but let's see how you feel when Trump's brown shirts are knocking on doors to check if you're harboring any trans people...
I wish I was joking, but be prepared because this shit can happen fast. Then maybe you'll think back on this election and wonder what could have happened if all you stupid motherfuckers would just shut the fuck up and vote for Biden.
"Wahhh we had four years to choose a better candidate and we did FUCKING NOTHING. Now we're looking literal fascism in the face and we're suddenly all concerned about who our presidential candidates are." You know we have a whole process for this, right? It doesn't start 5 months before the election.
It's so fucking juvenile. We get it, you're not going to vote. Stop spreading your cancer.
Jesus dude at that point just vote for someone else 💀
Okay I say we get behind AOC. This is important. WTF!
Here me out: Supreme Court justices, Seal Team 6, official act. You don't even have to pack the Court any more.
Yeah but the immunity ruling could be overturned by a future Supreme Co.. Oh, I see now.
Bro Biden is almost 90. Order it, kill himself and go out as a goat.
The one remaining Supreme Court justice: Justice AOC
Insurrection is fine when your team does it
The supreme court just ruled it's okay if the president does it, no?
Better than what will actually happen- fail to use powerful new tool for presidential oppression, watch the other side use it, surprise pikachu, hand wringing, impotent mewling, get sent to death camps for failing to salute your neighborhood God emperor proxy fast enough.
It's never fine, but at this point we're just arguing over which direction the national corpse collapses. Insurrection is more what happened before this point.
Its okay to advocate for violence when it benefits the people you like.
that would take a congress not filled with cotton-headed ninny muggins
It might be July, but it's still a great time to make Elf references.
Articles of impeachment is fine as this process stinks and I think this court failed, but we really, long-term, we need a constitutional amendment to make it clear that this is not okay.
I love the constitution, wonderful framework, but it needs the following amendments:
While I know there are other ways to approach a lot of these and those ways are easier is not the point of my post. These are things that the constitution is currently WRONG about and it should just be fixed.
If we're asking for things that will never happen I would like a unicorn that shits Lucky Charms
This is a "should happen" list not a "will happen" or "could happen" list. No delusions here, just felt good to say it out loud, given today's news. I'd also take that unicorn. My kids would go bananas.
General Mills added unicorn marbits in 2018, so this sounds appropriate!
Fuck yes.
Lol we are so fucked.
Can you.... Can you do that?
Maybe...Congress has impeached one Supreme Court Justice in history, Constitution Article 2, Section 4..
The Article itself stays within the scope of the Executive Branch but the Section itself just says:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Likely, if Congress tried, it would be argued that the scope is only the Executive Branch.
Article 3's scope is the Judicial branch but says in Section 1:
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
However, Samuel Chase who was appointed as a Supreme Court Justice by George Washington and confirmed by the Senate was impeached by Congress in 1804, and other federal judges (some having life-time appointments apparently) were dissolved.
Samuel Chase ultimately was acquitted by the Senate in 1805 however.
Who would decide tho who can impeach Supreme Court Justice? Because it can't be SCOTUS as that would be deciding in your own case and you guys also don't have a separate constitutional tribunal
Article 2, section 4 clear says "and all civil officers." It specifies president and vice president likely because they were getting away from a monarchy and wanted to specify they aren't above the law, but it clearly should apply to any federal civil officers.
Does this actually matter if the Supreme Court is ruling in the constitutionality of how accountable they are to other's power? Probably not. This supreme court at least will always argue in favor of serving themselves. I don't know how that plays out at that point.
So when you say "dissolved", would that be a particular type of acid or the stomach juices of nocturnal carrion eaters?
With this Congress? No.
Not unless Biden uses his new powers to execute all his political enemies.
Hell, people in the military just need to go on and execute the offending members of the supreme court, the house, etc., then just say "the president told us to do so".
'Primaries and midterms don't matter'. Lol.
Get out and vote, people.
Voting gives us no control with the current party system. We need ranked choice voting, end campaigns and advertising. Only 1 website will have the candidates and their platforms, tax funded only, anyone who wants to run can run and ranked choice voting will make the actual most popular acceptable candidate win.
Yes, but until we have rcv, we make do with the system we have, flaws and all. Unless you're suggesting we don't vote at all because we are unhappy with the system...?
People have been saying that for years. Why not make voting something we don't need to get out to do though? I think it's ridiculous and frankly anti-democratic to only count votes from people that travel to a polling station in the 21st century.
A lot of states have mail in voting
the democrats literally cancelled their effective primary and selected Biden. Remember Tulsi Gabbard? They won't let her run cause she'd fucking win, same as Sanders. It's a one party state, and it's not subtle
That's simply not true, Tulsi Gabbard had the opportunity to submit her name to the primary election after getting enough signatures just like Dean Phillips and Marriane Williamson did.
She didn't even do that, the most basic step of trying to become president, I wouldn't blame the DNC for her not bothering with the basics.
The president should just get rid of the supreme court justices he doesn't want. He can legally do that now bc of the supreme court
As long as you say "I declare official act!" before you do it, you're good.
"Sorry, Mrs. Thomas, but your trip on the billionaire's super yacht has been cancelled and you and your husband are coming with us--by official act and order of King Joe."
You go get 'em, AOC. Personally, I'd like to see the Declaration of Independence rewritten so that it doesn't give this false impression about our form of government and kings.
They should not only be impeached, but charged with 340 million counts of violating the civil rights of the American people (multiplied by dozens of rulings). Life in prison for those criminals.
She wont be able to do anything. The reason supreme court decided to move forward with this decision is because they are 100% confident that Trump will win presidency and republicans will control both the house and the Senate. After seeing Biden in the last debate, I believe they are right.
Maybe instead of using your energy to attack Biden you use it to support your local democrat in their senate run
Unless you actually just want Trump
Or — just maybe — the guy is able to judge reality for what it is. We’re getting trump unless there’s some black swan. I’m voting Brandon, but he’s a fucking disaster right now and the swing state polls are grim as fuck. Best case scenario he fucks off to the next life and we get a new nominee.
Before you accuse me of wanting trump, check my fucking comment history.
Ohhhh fuck this shit...
Biden has dementia! I have seen it with my two eyes. My father was diagnosed with dementia 3-4 years ago and my father is Albert Einstein compared to Biden right now. DNC and establishment Dems have been lying to us! All in order to push a corporate backed establishment president down our throats. We could have younger and more able presidential candidate if DNC acted accordingly 2 years ago. I'm too fucking pissed off to bite your "calling DNC on their bullshit will turn you to a trump supporter" line!
I am aggressively attacking DNC and all of their astroturfing on Reddit and here because I am 100% confident that we lost the election already.
Maybe the Supreme Court knows something we dont.... for example some folks on the electoral college having been promised bribes... I mean "gratuities" for voting Trump in no matter what the popular vote is.
I'm not saying that's definitely happened, but at this rate the corruption in our government has gone so far it wouldn't surprise me in the least. Especially with the absolute crock of shit that's been pouring out of the Supreme Courts rulings and how it's conveniently setting them up for this, or something similar.
The Supreme Court must be impartial regardless of legislative and executive political mudslinging of the time. That's the whole point of different branches of government.
If SCOTUS made the decision after seeing Trump and Biden debate, or knowing Republicans will control both houses, then they aren't doing their job as they should. There's a reason why juries are encouraged not to watch TV or media that would cloud their decision, and the same should apply to judges.
People forget the bloody whole point of checks and balance!
The Supreme Court must be impartial regardless of legislative and executive political mudslinging of the time.
Yeah sure, except that they clearly aren't. So the question is what do we do now?
Cool story. Now figure out how to stop them other than 'vote'. Cause we know that's just kicking the can down the road.
They didn't forget: they explictly and knowingly realized they could abuse the checks and balances and there would be no consequences. And they have so far been right.
The Supreme Court must be impartial regardless of legislative and executive political mudslinging of the time.
then they aren’t doing their job as they should.
There were times in my life when I was pretty much a functioning alcoholic. If you think that the supreme court has even a shred of decency left, then I want to drink what you are drinking. I don't think I ever got that drunk it my life.
After seeing Biden in the last debate, I believe they are right
Yes lets judge a mans entire career based on one off night.
It breaks my heart to say this but my father was diagnosed with dementia few years ago and he has been battling dementia ever since then. Before we insisted on taking him to the doctor, we could see a lot of signs that made us think "can it be that?". My father is Albert Einstein compared to Biden at the debate.
If you think "Biden just had a bad night" or "He just had a cold" then I regret to inform you that is copium and you are coping. There is no fucking way in hell that was just one bad night or cold. There is no fucking way in hell his cabinet or DNC has not been aware of these issues for at least couple years.
It’s not just one off night
- From 10am to 4pm, Biden is dependably engaged — and many of his public events in front of cameras are held within those hours.
It has become a necessity at this point. That is, if anyone wants to maintain any semblance of sanity
They won't do shiiiiiiiit.
I love her so much.
Her views on economics (MMT) are like RFK junior's views on vaccines, but they are both infinitely better than the two cripples competing.
(Just my two cents from Moscow.)
Man, this country has turned into a fat joke. I'm just done
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The Democrat from New York wrote that the court has become "consumed by a corruption crisis beyond its control" and that it's "up to Congress to defend our nation from this authoritarian capture."
The Supreme Court has become consumed by a corruption crisis beyond its control.Today’s ruling represents an assault on American democracy.
It is up to Congress to defend our nation from this authoritarian capture.I intend on filing articles of impeachment upon our return.
In a statement after the ruling, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said that Democrats would "engage in aggressive oversight and legislative activity with respect to the Supreme Court to ensure that the extreme, far-right justices in the majority are brought into compliance with the Constitution."
But the act of filing impeachment articles represents a significant escalation in Democrats' efforts to exercise greater oversight over the high court, which has faced numerous ethics scandals in recent years while issuing a spate of conservative opinions that have upended decades of precedent, including the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022.
The last (and only) time a Supreme Court Justice has been impeached was 220 years ago, when Samuel Chase survived an effort to remove him in 1804 over his handling of two politically sensitive trials.
The original article contains 357 words, the summary contains 208 words. Saved 42%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Yes pls
FUCK YES
While it’s great in concept, and some awesome posturing- this will fall flat before it ever sees the light of day.
Let it.
If they tank biden she should run heh
Somebody needs to fucking do more than say "hey this should happen! "
I think... Legally, when SCOTUS is involved. By law, it should have an even number of dems and Republicans at all tumes
Man America is awesome. They keep doing crazy shit for the sake of it.
The supreme court ruling is pretty benign, the crazy thing is call to destroy the system because they ruled differently than they wanted.
Too late. The damage is done. It will take years to reverse this decision.
She's made this claim already, so far nothing
She's just grandstanding.
Impeachment starts in the House of Representatives, which is controlled by Republicans.
It goes to the Senate for conviction and removal, which, thanks to the Republican minority, requires a 60 vote majority to move anything forward.
This is why I've been saying since the Trump impeachments, we have to control the House and the Senate first, then we can talk impeachment.
House - 219 Republicans, 213 Democrats, 3 vacancies.
https://pressgallery.house.gov/member-data/party-breakdown
*Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) resigned effective 3/22/2024.
*Rep. Donald Payne Jr. (D-NJ) died 4/24/2024.
*Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-WI) resigned effective 4/25/2024.
Senate - 49 Republicans, 47 Democrats, 4 Independents that caucus with Democrats.
https://www.senate.gov/senators/SenatorsRepresentingThirdorMinorParties.htm
Joe Manchin III (WV)
Kyrsten Sinema (AZ)
Angus S. King, Jr. (ME)
Bernard Sanders (VT)
She could accomplish more than you think if she has some help from King Joe.
"Hey everyone, things are NOT going our way in the Supreme Court, and we need to change everything about our judicial, political, and constitutional system!" - Sincerely, Democrats.
Okay, let's suppose this plan succeeds... Then what? Are we going to replace the court? Who said the new judges are going to be more or less the same regardless of political affiliation? And what exactly is there to stop the opposition from doing the same thing?
There seems to be more systematic issues involved.
replace the corrupt court and amend the constitution so this doesnt happen again. thats what it was made for, to be malleable to change as progress sees fit
the constitution isnt some holy book of rules never to be touched, yet it is treated as such. its too bad the county may be uninhabitable for people like me before we can get our shit together
And what exactly is there to stop the opposition from doing the same thing?
Process. The same that that puts barriers on this discussion from AOC. The entire impeachment process is the understanding of the people who created this country, to have a political process that is departed from the legal process. That's why being impeached doesn't also mean criminally convicted and vice versa. Historically, if you were a vassal of the lord and had your fief removed, you couldn't hold court with your lord AND you basically were penniless with the potential to end up in jail. The entire impeachment process is to separate those two things. That's why the process is spelled out fully in the Constitution and the execution solely left to Congress to implement.
There entire point of an impeachment is to execute some political justice without having legal justice married to it. What stops anyone from just abusing the process is the process itself and what it indicates for functioning government. If the goal is have no functioning government, then there isn't anything that stops anyone from abuse. But no functioning government means that those in Congress would lose power, and a loss of power means they become less enticing for lobbyist to enact agendas, for people to seek recourse, and for States to enhance power within the vacuum.
So an abuse of that power would end with them loosing more and more power. This is the same reason why Congress has had a hard time really pinning impeachment and contempt charges and have talked about inherent contempt for Garland (which inherent contempt is basically using Congress to enforce a contempt charge via the Sergeant-at-arms doing the arresting and Congress inventing a "trail" system all of their own outside of the Judicial system... which by the way SCOTUS way back in the 1930s, the last time this was used, indicated that THAT specific instance was not a violation of habeas corpus, but trying to ring Garland up on inherent contempt and trying to put him in Congress jail, would be such a complex process and likely wouldn't survive a habeas corpus challenge, but who knows at this point? For all we know SCOTUS may be completely cool with Congress tossing people into Congress jail without a proper trail. But of course that brings with it ALL KINDS of ramifications about our Federal government jailing people in a a jail completely ran by Congress and outside the entire legal system, but I digress).
Long story short, all of this stuff is political process. And you do all of this to further a political agenda to the public. But if the public isn't backing that action, it has the ability to backfire in that entire you don't get to come back to Congress or you weaken the overall power of the Federal government. So you have to look at the long term goal of anything you want to do with this process. Like the inherent contempt vote got delayed after the first Presidential debate. Biden's performance was so bad that Republicans feel that they got what they wanted. The whole Garland audio tapes, the GOP wanted them so that they could play back the tapes to the public and show that Biden was losing his marbles. But now since the debate, there's little reasons for the GOP to go down the tossing Garland into Congress jail and going down a path that's likely to not play well for anyone except their most harden supporters.
The process limits the process. That's what prevent the whole "same thing".
Are we going to replace the court?
I mean, yeah, that's the goal. SCOTUS has had about a dozen cases that they've overturned decades long, and in some cases century long, established rule. One or two per lifetime of a justice is a lot to completely overturn. This court has overturned nearly a dozen long established rulings. The entire point of a justice system is to bring about stability to the political process. Congress answers to the public, and the public can change their mind often, so random laws flying over the place isn't unusual. SCOTUS is not elected and thus they faintly answer to the public. So they need to have some stability to maintain legitimacy. Even Robert's talked about this in the ruling that overturned Roe and felt the majority was going too far.
So I think if the court itself is saying that it is ruining their own legitimacy, bringing them up into the political process to answer to these statements the court itself is making is fair game. And I don't think that's unfair to mention in that whole process. Judges don't answer to the public, so justices that massively change the landscape in short orders of time, are shaking the stability they're supposed to be building. If SCOTUS wants to rewrite the law of the land, it needs to be gradual not as fast as possible.
This is a pretty thoughtful response, I appreciate you taking the time write it. I agree in spirit with what AOC wants to accomplish. Some of those judges (Clarence Thomas) shouldn't be anywhere near the Supreme Court. My fear is that this plan only works if the impeachments proceeding are successful, they manage to successfully replace the current justices with new ones, AND enact meaningful change in a short period of time to make that a situation like this doesn't happen again. If they fail at any of these things, then the Republicans, who don't respect precedent, process, or the rule of law, would just weaponize the impeachments to remove the justices and replace them with their own whenever they get a majority in government.
Well congresswoman, there still is a republican majority so you're going to have to wait for your chance. In addition, balance of powers and all that.
If you don't try, you'll never succeed.
There's no such thing as wasted political capital these days, shit like this energizes the base, and this is probably the biggest thing to help Biden (or whoever the candidate is) all year.
trumpers are already jacked up on Mountain Dew, they can't vote any harder then they already are and they're not gonna vote any less. We need the focus on motivating Dem voters.
And win or lose, this does that.
Show voters that with X amount more votes. We can actually fix something. It's a few months before the election, this is literally perfect timing.
Sorry, but she can't try. The floor is controlled by Republicans and they will not let her proceed.
Sounds like something that would be a popular thing to campaign on.
and too bad supreme court doesn't think that exists anymore
So many things to campaign on....
Politician attacks establishment when the establishment doesn't prosecute her political opposition to the extent she wants.
What a dumb fucking comment.
Local man shocked that when criminals are politicians, their political opponents want them prosecuted for their crimes, especially when the crime involves overthrowing democracy.
Attacking the legitimacy of the supreme court is overthrowing democracy.
Lol. Your ability to use words has not been a benefit to you has it?
It's AOC. She is literally Marjorie Taylor Green, but on blue team. Asking her opinion on something like this, you are going to get a very predictable answer. She is a political zealot.
I'd like AOC to resign for voting to stop the rail union from striking.
Found the single issue voter