this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2024
874 points (99.0% liked)

politics

19126 readers
2596 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 14 points 4 months ago (1 children)

For how long this took — for the mere fact they took this case — and given their previous rulings, I'm more stunned the experts are stunned.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

“I’m stunned!”

Reaches for Big Mac and Diet Coke.

“Did the Celtics win last night?”

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Remember that this whole time biden could have packed the SCOTUS and turned the Republican majority into a Democrat majority. Nothing in our Constitution says only 9 supreme court appointees. He's just not willing to do it because he is a liberal and doesn't want to use his power to crush the Republicans like they need to be.

If it was trump he would have (and did) wielded the knife of political power with no hesitation but the moment Democrats have the knife they hold it with fear the Republicans would accuse them of being partisan.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Didn't they and Manchin and Sinema promised to block it?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Well now Biden can kill them, officially

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (8 children)

And what would stop the next Republican president from packing the court further to have a conservative majority again?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago

And this goes back and forth until there are 100s on the Supreme Court

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Biden not doing something out of principle is not a guarantee Trump won't do it. The contrary is often true.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Packing the court solves nothing as it can be immediately reversed as soon as a Republican is in office.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 months ago (1 children)

He’s just not willing to do it because he is a liberal and doesn’t want to use his power to crush the Republicans like they need to be.

Liberals love to maintain the status quo with small, incremental changes.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Capitalism loves unfettered, infinite growth. This is such a small minded, short term mindset. I much prefer a "controlled and sustainable" growth approach. Liberals are trying to build an equitable country for all of us and our progeny, the other side is trying to cash out before it all comes crashing down. It's disgusting. But history repeats itself, because humans are the common factor and humans, broadly, suck.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 months ago

What a can of worms. If Texas can ignore SCOTUS then with this ruling what's to stop the president from ordering his staff to do the same?

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›