News

23287 readers

3661 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

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

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

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

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

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

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

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

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

7. No duplicate posts.

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

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

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

9. No link shorteners.

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

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

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

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

257

Are You Ready for Another Bush v. Gore? The Supreme Court Is. (www.motherjones.com)

submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

35 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The Supreme Court will begin a new term on Monday, in which it is set to hear pivotal cases for transgender and LGBTQ rights, for our environment, and gun violence. But the term’s biggest blockbuster could be a case that not only hasn’t yet been filed, but is still just a concept.

That’s because in the next three months, the justices may be asked to inject themselves into the late stages of the 2024 election. If presented with such an opportunity, this could be the term that the Supreme Court elects Donald Trump.

The high court has already been a player in this election. Last term, the justices ensured that Trump’s attempt to steal 2020’s election could not disqualify him from the presidency, issuing a decision assuring he would appear on every ballot. The court delayed Trump’s criminal trial over his attempted coup, then granted him broad immunity from criminal prosecution, preventing damaging courtroom revelations from emerging before voting. In August, the court used its shadow docket to allow Arizona, a key swing state, to require proof of citizenship with voter registration forms at the request of the Republican National Committee.

But perhaps least known—and yet, most important—was Moore v. Harper, a 2023 ruling in which the court set the stage for the next Bush v. Gore scenario by holding that the justices themselves would have the last say when it comes to questions over state-level election rules and disputes.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 month ago

Thomas, Roberts, Kavanagh, and Barrett all had involvement in supporting the Bush side of Bush vs Gore in 2000. It's more than a little likely that Kavanagh and Roberts owe their current positions for their roles in that case. Barrett seemed to have much less involvement, but likely still a plus for her in her nomination process.