seriously even at the time we knew this, right? there were all sorts of news stories about how the “investigation” took like 3 hours.
2 Likes
We knew it had been done not that the Whitehouse hadn’t given them permission to do any actual investigating.
I for sure remember some kind of statement they put out that the investigation would be limited to some bullshit that obviously wasn’t going to turn anything up.
Edit: yeah it was always bullshit
1 Like
If the parties were reversed, the past four years would have yielded nonstop congressional investigations into Wray
1 Like
So now the calls for Sotomayor to retire begin.
Would the current Senate even confirm a liberal justice? We would need 2/3 of King, Manchin, and Sinema right?
Can she do a resign pending confirmation of my successor and then rescind it if none is named before Trump comes in?
1 Like
Her resigning would be so bad. Zero chance they confirm a new justice before trump takes over. Literally zero.
Nope
Of course not, Trump is already telling them to block all of Biden’s remaining appointments
“Can’t do a replacement during election year”
We had all three branches and did shit
There should be 19 SC justices right now
1 Like
Won’t go anywhere but it’s a good start
https://x.com/gavinbena/status/1865507590249054405?t=zEQyW7dWgEic-hNNxd7isg&s=19
5 Likes
Pure virtue signalling as you noted.
Manchin GOAT
1 Like
Senate will never confirm a liberal justice again.
1 Like
Needs a provision that all appointments require a 2/3 vote in the senate to reject and if the nominee doesn’t get a hearing within some amount of days (30/60/90?) of appointment then they’re automatically confirmed. I think all positions should have this provision IMO. I’m all for there being some checks on the presidents power of appointment but it needs more protections against partisan fuckery. I realize this would make it easier for a madman like Trump to put through bonkers ass picks but fuck it, if that’s what people voted for, they should get it.
Any SC that isn’t 13 is a joke. This is more wimpy nothing.
3 Likes
It’s also an extention of this
A judge on the conservative U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit harshly criticized a prominent legal scholar and law professor during a recent panel discussion hosted by the Federalist Society.
…
Then the Reagan-appointed judge got to the heart of her critique.
“I hope to respond here today in defense of my colleagues — Fifth Circuit district judges — who came under relentless attacks during the last several years by certain professors,” she continued. “Including notably, Professor Vladeck, for what he considers close to unethical situations in litigation which have existed since the dawn of judging.”
Jones described this behavior as nothing nefarious — insisting litigants have aimed to choose one judge over another since the period described in the Bible’s book of Genesis.
“Something’s going on here, and it’s very unsavory,” the judge said. “Attacks on the judiciary, I fully agree with the others, are ultimately attacks on the rule of law.”
Jones, for her part, was unmoved by the argument — or the alcohol-themed entreaty.
“I have studied Professor Vladeck,” the judge said in response — and then theatrically raised a manilla folder with documents askew and poking out. “And this is a file of his articles, amicus briefs, and tweets regarding the process of judge-picking that he criticizes so heavily.”
As she opened the file to rifle through its contents in front of the audience, Jones went on to read several tweets of Vladeck’s, along with the title of one legal article, which she said evidence a series of “attacks” on “the character” of various Republican-appointed judges.
[Jones said] The consequence of all this is that Judge [Mattthew] Kacsmaryk is under 24-hour per day protection,” Jones said — referring to a Trump-appointed judge who hears every case filed in the Northern District of Texas’ Amarillo division. “And he has five kids.”
The implication was clear enough. And the panel grew increasingly tense as the barbs flowed from one to another.
Jones stuck to her guns.
“The point of attacking these judges is to diminish their reputations, to suggest that the state of Texas and other state attorneys general who filed in these jurisdictions are doing something improper,” she said.
The judge ended her comments where they began: saying she looked forward to Vladeck focusing on California the next four years — an allusion to what will likely be efforts to find sympathetic courts who might pause Trump administration policies disfavored by Democrats.