yeah but it doesn’t remove the justice. you can’t shame a card-carrying federalist out of power for life.
Simple majority in the House of Representatives, 2/3rds of Senate to remove.
Only one SC justice has been impeached in the history of the country. And it was back in 1805. And he was acquitted easily.
Something requiring 2/3rds of the Senate is how we know the founders weren’t geniuses.
4 Likes
Do SCOTUS judges ever peer-review each other’s work? I hope so.
Also I wonder how far in the bubble they are. Like will this reach Kavanaugh? I sure hope so.
We have at least 3 SC judges who have a terminal case of Fox News Brain and are likely completely impervious to shame.
3 Likes
Dems would pack in this scenario with very little hesitation I think.
Good news is if Dems sweep the supreme court will make super unpopular bad rulings that will give us the political capital to pack the court. They won’t be able to help themselves and Roberts won’t be able to talk them out of it.
2 Likes
I agree with this. I think it is very short-sighted of them to be so aggressive with the election when they are holding all the long term cards. Their being transparently political now to help a sinking ship seems like it can only hurt them.
Like why even signal your intentions? It’s not like anyone is going to buy your bullshit because you laid grounds for your argument
Just keep your mouth shut, hide your intentions, and then if the opportunity presents itself steal the election. It’s not like dems will be in any position to do anything about it. And if it is a landslide, you can act like you were just gonna let fair elections play out the whole time.
Bunch of baby brained morons.
2 Likes
Justice White Male Privilege is not exactly susceptible to valid criticism of his mediocrity. That’s how white male privilege works.
It really gives away the game to have this fucking moron broadcasting his stupidity so obviously, and in such a high profile case. This is best guy they could come up with.
2 Likes
Only round 1. If she actually has a chance to deliver the election they’ll tag her in for round 2.
Didn’t round 1 already happen?
It’s real, but not necessarily as significant as that wording makes it seem. The SCOTUS Public Information Office put out a statement basically saying that it was because she didn’t feel like she was up to speed and the case needed a quick resolution. So, reading between the lines, it’s not an indication that she would recuse herself if a similar case comes back around in a couple weeks.
1 Like
I agree but keep in mind they’ve been bitch slapping the Dems around the beltway for like 12 years with no ramifications and minimal pushback. So maybe they’re just getting lazy with the CYA.
1 Like