Zone1 SCOTUS Is Broken; Can It Be Fixed?

[skews13]

The Supreme Court is a supreme threat to American democracy. That was Abraham Lincoln’s view in light of the Dred Scott decision, expressed in his First Inaugural Address. And it was vividly illustrated after Lincoln's assassination, when the Civil War amendments and civil rights legislation passed by Congress were effectively nullified by the Supreme Court, enabling former Confederates and other white supremacists to destroy the possibility of multiracial democracy for almost a century. “Our democracy suffers when an unelected group of lawyers take away our ability to govern ourselves,” as Harvard Law professor Nikolas Bowie wrote in 2021, based on his testimony before the do-nothing Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States.

That's why the new online lecture and discussion course, “What to Do About the Courts,” feels so important: It's an effort to begin laying the groundwork for fundamental court reform.

SCOTUS is a threat to democracy — but activists plan to fight back

After Dobbs, many Americans woke up to the Roberts court's dangerous power. But history offers lessons — and hope

www.salon.com

 

[Lisa558]

Your source is far to the left, and explains your “thinking” if this is representative of your reading material.

The SCOTUS is fine as it is. I didn’t hear any complaints from you when it leaned left.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Yes, as usual the left complains when it doesn't get its way and claims the world is ending.

 

[rampart]

The Supreme Court is a supreme threat to American democracy. That was Abraham Lincoln’s view in light of the Dred Scott decision, expressed in his First Inaugural Address. And it was vividly illustrated after Lincoln's assassination, when the Civil War amendments and civil rights legislation passed by Congress were effectively nullified by the Supreme Court, enabling former Confederates and other white supremacists to destroy the possibility of multiracial democracy for almost a century. “Our democracy suffers when an unelected group of lawyers take away our ability to govern ourselves,” as Harvard Law professor Nikolas Bowie wrote in 2021, based on his testimony before the do-nothing Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States.

That's why the new online lecture and discussion course, “What to Do About the Courts,” feels so important: It's an effort to begin laying the groundwork for fundamental court reform.

SCOTUS is a threat to democracy — but activists plan to fight back

After Dobbs, many Americans woke up to the Roberts court's dangerous power. But history offers lessons — and hope

www.salon.com

the obvious second ammendment solution is simple once the supreme court rules that biden has immunity,

 

[skews13]

Your source is far to the left, and explains your “thinking” if this is representative of your reading material.

The SCOTUS is fine as it is. I didn’t hear any complaints from you when it leaned left.

The court has never leaned left in it's entire history.

The article is very well written, in both it's content, and historical citation.

Anyone who believes the current make up of the court is fine, isn't an honest broker by ant measure.

Anyone who believes the court has any degree of popular support with the majority of the American people, or is representative of the leanings of the majority of he American people, isn't paying attention.

The court is in dire need of reform, and that reform will happen. It's a matter of when. not if.

 

[Oddball]

The Supreme Court is a supreme threat to American democracy. That was Abraham Lincoln’s view in light of the Dred Scott decision, expressed in his First Inaugural Address. And it was vividly illustrated after Lincoln's assassination, when the Civil War amendments and civil rights legislation passed by Congress were effectively nullified by the Supreme Court, enabling former Confederates and other white supremacists to destroy the possibility of multiracial democracy for almost a century. “Our democracy suffers when an unelected group of lawyers take away our ability to govern ourselves,” as Harvard Law professor Nikolas Bowie wrote in 2021, based on his testimony before the do-nothing Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States.

That's why the new online lecture and discussion course, “What to Do About the Courts,” feels so important: It's an effort to begin laying the groundwork for fundamental court reform.

SCOTUS is a threat to democracy — but activists plan to fight back

After Dobbs, many Americans woke up to the Roberts court's dangerous power. But history offers lessons — and hope

www.salon.com

USSC is only "broken" because it's not a rubber stamp for and creator of moonbat politics.

 

[Auld Phart]

the Biden administration is broken.

can it be fixed?

 

[Oddball]

The court has never leaned left in it's entire history.

Liar.

The article is very well written, in both it's content, and historical citation.

No, it's shitlb propaganda.

Anyone who believes the current make up of the court is fine, isn't an honest broker by ant measure.

As though you are?

Anyone who believes the court has any degree of popular support with the majority of the American people, or is representative of the leanings of the majority of he American people, isn't paying attention.

The court is in dire need of reform, and that reform will happen. It's a matter of when. not if.

 

[Auld Phart]

The court has never leaned left in it's entire history.

The article is very well written, in both it's content, and historical citation.

Anyone who believes the current make up of the court is fine, isn't an honest broker by ant measure.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideological_leanings_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_justicespeople, isn't paying attention.

The court is in dire need of reform, and that reform will happen. It's a matter of when. not if.

Ideological leanings of United States Supreme Court justices - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Lisa558]

The court has never leaned left in it's entire history.

The article is very well written, in both it's content, and historical citation.

Anyone who believes the current make up of the court is fine, isn't an honest broker by ant measure.

Anyone who believes the court has any degree of popular support with the majority of the American people, or is representative of the leanings of the majority of he American people, isn't paying attention.

The court is in dire need of reform, and that reform will happen. It's a matter of when. not if.

The court was quite liberal in the 1960s and 1970s.

 

[1srelluc]

OP needs more REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE-ing.

 

[Oddball]

OP needs more REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE-ing.

 

[JoeB131]

I think it's a little disingenuous for people on the left to complain about SCOTUS making laws when they were perfectly happy with them doing it when it had a liberal majority.

What liberals need to do is learn how to legislate effectively.

If you want abortion to be legal, then go to the state legislatures and make that case! Pro-choice people had 50 years to codify Roe into law, and refused to do it.

 

[Natural Citizen]

The Supreme Court is a supreme threat to American democracy. That was Abraham Lincoln’s view in light of the Dred Scott decision, expressed in his First Inaugural Address. And it was vividly illustrated after Lincoln's assassination, when the Civil War amendments and civil rights legislation passed by Congress were effectively nullified by the Supreme Court, enabling former Confederates and other white supremacists to destroy the possibility of multiracial democracy for almost a century. “Our democracy suffers when an unelected group of lawyers take away our ability to govern ourselves,” as Harvard Law professor Nikolas Bowie wrote in 2021, based on his testimony before the do-nothing Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States.

That's why the new online lecture and discussion course, “What to Do About the Courts,” feels so important: It's an effort to begin laying the groundwork for fundamental court reform.

SCOTUS is a threat to democracy — but activists plan to fight back

After Dobbs, many Americans woke up to the Roberts court's dangerous power. But history offers lessons — and hope

www.salon.com

Hey, how come a lot of you lefties don't have to add user content to the OPs but the rest of us do?

Seems like a trend lately in terms of arbitrary concessions to the rules. I even see maudes posting in those threads, so I know they see it.

I usually don't report em, but I reported this one.

This two-tiered rule enforcement system needs to be nipped in the bud.

Whenever these so-called right wingers don't add user content that stuff gets shut down quicker than a feller can blink, observably.

 

[1srelluc]

Hey, how come a lot of you lefties don't have to add user content to the OPs but the rest of us do?

Seems like a trend lately in terms of arbotrary concessions to the rules. I even see maudes posting in those threads, so I know they see it.

I usually don't report em, but I reported this one.

This two-tiered rule enforcement system needs to be nipped in the bud.

Whenever these so-called right wingers don't add user content that stuff gets shut down quicker than a feller can blink, observably.

 

[Oddball]

Hey, how come a lot of you lefties don't have to add user content to the OPs but the rest of us do?

Seems like a trend lately in terms of arbotrary concessions to the rules. I even see maudes posting in those threads, so I know they see it.

I usually don't report em, but I reported this one.

This two-tiered rule enforcement system needs to be nipped in the bud.

Whenever these so-called right wingers don't add user content that stuff gets shut down quicker than a feller can blink, observably.

The object is to get you to click on the links to check, which you obviously had to do in order to ascertain that there's zero original content.

The OP is a paid spammer.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The Supreme Court is a supreme threat to American democracy. That was Abraham Lincoln’s view in light of the Dred Scott decision, expressed in his First Inaugural Address. And it was vividly illustrated after Lincoln's assassination, when the Civil War amendments and civil rights legislation passed by Congress were effectively nullified by the Supreme Court, enabling former Confederates and other white supremacists to destroy the possibility of multiracial democracy for almost a century. “Our democracy suffers when an unelected group of lawyers take away our ability to govern ourselves,” as Harvard Law professor Nikolas Bowie wrote in 2021, based on his testimony before the do-nothing Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States.

That's why the new online lecture and discussion course, “What to Do About the Courts,” feels so important: It's an effort to begin laying the groundwork for fundamental court reform.

SCOTUS is a threat to democracy — but activists plan to fight back

After Dobbs, many Americans woke up to the Roberts court's dangerous power. But history offers lessons — and hope

www.salon.com

SCOTUS threatens the glorious 1,000 Year Progressive Reich!

 

[Natural Citizen]

The object is to get you to click on the links to check, which you obviously had to do in order to ascertain that there's zero original content.

The OP is a paid spammer.

Yeah, probably, but that wasn't my point.

This happens all the time lately. If it didn't, I likely wouldn't even say anything about it.

Somebody needs to take charge around here so that this two-tiered rule enforcement model gets under control.

Either that or just ditch the rule completely.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Yeah, probably, but that wasn't my point.

This happens all the time lately.

I reported it to we taking bets the mods do nothing?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I think it's a little disingenuous for people on the left to complain about SCOTUS making laws when they were perfectly happy with them doing it when it had a liberal majority.

What liberals need to do is learn how to legislate effectively.

If you want abortion to be legal, then go to the state legislatures and make that case! Pro-choice people had 50 years to codify Roe into law, and refused to do it.

Who are you? How did you get control of Joe's account?