- Sep 13, 2002
- 99,305
- 208,508
- 113
Threatening to ignore judicial orders even from federal courts move the needle for you at all?
Team Trump threatens to ignore court orders - what happens next?
Trump: “I spoke to Governor Trudeau… they don’t have any military protection, their people are in danger, they need our protection”
- Thread starter Morrison71
- Start date
Team Trump threatens to ignore court orders - what happens next?
They are supposed to 3 equal branches of government. Congress has abdicated their part. Federal judges, minus SCOTUS, are doing their jobs for the most part.
Term limits would help get rid of the shitbags in Congress.
I honestly have no idea how some of them got elected.
Okay just so you know that changing your vote makes it unanimous…🙄
This thread has morphed into a really interesting study of Arendt's theory of the banality of evil.
Last edited:
hmmm...
AOC urges Biden to ignore Texas ruling suspending approval of abortion drug
AOC urges Biden to ignore Texas ruling suspending approval of abortion drug
Democratic New York congresswoman says there is ‘extraordinary precedent’ for Biden to decline to enforce ruling
How about calling the Supreme Court illegitimate?
Democrats fight to expand a ‘broken and illegitimate’ supreme court
As the US’s highest court is pummeled by divisive rulings and ethical scandals, Democrats think they have a solution: add four seats to counter a rightward tilt
Seems like you guys are pretty selective with your outrage.
If they ignore a federal ruling that moves the needle.
D politicians have been calling the supreme court illegitimate for quite a while now so it's a wash at the moment.
First of all, having a progressive representative urging the President to ignore a ruling is a little different from the VP saying the court doesn't have the authority to overrule the President.hmmm...
AOC urges Biden to ignore Texas ruling suspending approval of abortion drug
AOC urges Biden to ignore Texas ruling suspending approval of abortion drug
Democratic New York congresswoman says there is ‘extraordinary precedent’ for Biden to decline to enforce rulingwww.theguardian.com
How about calling the Supreme Court illegitimate?
Democrats fight to expand a ‘broken and illegitimate’ supreme court
As the US’s highest court is pummeled by divisive rulings and ethical scandals, Democrats think they have a solution: add four seats to counter a rightward tilt
Seems like you guys are pretty selective with your outrage.
Secondly seats have been added to the Supreme Court in the past.
Basically, the U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power to determine how many justices sit on SCOTUS. This number has ranged between 5 and 10, but since 1869 the number has been set at 9. And the number of justices on the Supreme Court has been politically manipulated over the years.
Take Congress’s beef with President Andrew Johnson. (He was Abraham Lincoln’s vice president and successor.) Congress wasn’t too fond of Johnson, since its members thought that he had abused his presidential power by removing the respected secretary of war, Edwin M. Stanton, from office. Congress wanted to limit Johnson’s power as much as it could. It passed legislation in 1866 decreasing the number of judges from 10 to 7 so that Johnson wouldn’t be able to appoint a new justice. Congress’s decision was short-lived, however; SCOTUS shrank only to eight justices before the 1869 decision to set the number to nine. Not coincidentally, this was the same year that Andrew Johnson ceased to be president.
Congress wasn’t the only branch of government to attempt to alter the power structure. President Franklin D. Roosevelt proposed a reorganization bill to Congress that would allow the president to appoint a new justice for each one who was at least 70 years old. Congress did not oblige, of course: this was seen as a court-packing scheme that would have given Roosevelt too much power. Roosevelt’s motives were to push through his New Deal, which SCOTUS had continually worked against during the president’s first term.
Why Are There Nine Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court? | Britannica
How did nine become the magic number for the U.S.’s most-powerful judicial body?
www.britannica.com
Actually, this is a very valid point. Reacting to every thing Trump says or does misses the forest for the trees.
The question is, where do we go from here?
It's not just D's. Our current VP made the same comparison.
well, it’s Valentine’s Day. The obvious answer is “butt stuff”
- Sep 13, 2002
- 99,305
- 208,508
- 113
AOC was wrong. So are Trump and Vance.hmmm...
AOC urges Biden to ignore Texas ruling suspending approval of abortion drug
AOC urges Biden to ignore Texas ruling suspending approval of abortion drug
Democratic New York congresswoman says there is ‘extraordinary precedent’ for Biden to decline to enforce ruling
How about calling the Supreme Court illegitimate?
Democrats fight to expand a ‘broken and illegitimate’ supreme court
As the US’s highest court is pummeled by divisive rulings and ethical scandals, Democrats think they have a solution: add four seats to counter a rightward tilt
Seems like you guys are pretty selective with your outrage.
Gee, that wasn't so hard.
There are three branches for a reason.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 99,305
- 208,508
- 113
I'll keep posting until a MAGA owns this:
Dude is a hard core racist
Dude is a hard core racist
hawkeyetraveler
HB Heisman
C’mon bins. I will give you Hitler is a step too far. But the man is a fascist. Look at the definition:
fas·cism
[ˈfaˌSHizəm]
noun
- an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.
Authoritarian: “I will be a dictator for 24 hours”. and that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
Nationalistic: Make America Great Again
Right Wing: just look at the policies.
He is absolutely a fascist, he just hasn’t gone as far as Hitler.
He will never admit he’s wrong. He’ll just move the argument further and further extreme. “White people still get to vote.” “Only a few thousand Americans were sent to Costa Rican prisons. Let me know when they are imprisoned on Mars.”
If they ignore a federal court order that’d obviously be a serious problem.First of all, having a progressive representative urging the President to ignore a ruling is a little different from the VP saying the court doesn't have the authority to overrule the President.
Secondly seats have been added to the Supreme Court in the past.
Basically, the U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power to determine how many justices sit on SCOTUS. This number has ranged between 5 and 10, but since 1869 the number has been set at 9. And the number of justices on the Supreme Court has been politically manipulated over the years.
Take Congress’s beef with President Andrew Johnson. (He was Abraham Lincoln’s vice president and successor.) Congress wasn’t too fond of Johnson, since its members thought that he had abused his presidential power by removing the respected secretary of war, Edwin M. Stanton, from office. Congress wanted to limit Johnson’s power as much as it could. It passed legislation in 1866 decreasing the number of judges from 10 to 7 so that Johnson wouldn’t be able to appoint a new justice. Congress’s decision was short-lived, however; SCOTUS shrank only to eight justices before the 1869 decision to set the number to nine. Not coincidentally, this was the same year that Andrew Johnson ceased to be president.
Congress wasn’t the only branch of government to attempt to alter the power structure. President Franklin D. Roosevelt proposed a reorganization bill to Congress that would allow the president to appoint a new justice for each one who was at least 70 years old. Congress did not oblige, of course: this was seen as a court-packing scheme that would have given Roosevelt too much power. Roosevelt’s motives were to push through his New Deal, which SCOTUS had continually worked against during the president’s first term.
Why Are There Nine Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court? | Britannica
How did nine become the magic number for the U.S.’s most-powerful judicial body?
Will you stop defending their actions if that happens?
You seem pleased by this. Can I ask why?
I’m not defending their actions. I’m saying they’re not Hitler and the Nazis.
I think they’re handling the preliminaries for Ukraine peace talks abysmally.
I think some of the tariff stuff is idiotic (not all)
I think the Canada goading is reprehensible and most importantly…idiotic.
Gulf of America…stupid
A person can disagree with some of the things they’re doing and not equate them to Hitler and the Nazis. I also think democracy didn’t end as some of board members do…
Elect a clown, expect a circus!
Personally, I doubt Trump finishes his term.
He's making too many enemies for someone not to take him out.
Personally, I doubt Trump finishes his term.
He's making too many enemies for someone not to take him out.
However, if Canada was part of the U.S. it would be an economic boon to all. Gotta think “outside the box”. 😉Oh cool, he's not one of the worst dictators in human recorded history, how reassuring
Let's focus on the REAL and PRESENT dangers he poses to the actual country we live in during the actual timeframe we live in, maybe?
Yes we need to liberate our dear friends to the north!!! Go Trump!! Be their savior like you’re saving us!!
Okay, not Nazis, but do you think they are leaning toward a more authoritarian US government?
Also you didn't comment on the administration telling the justice department to drop charges on Democratic Mayor Adams. How do you feel about that?
For f*ck’s sake…lighten up you f*cking clone fan. 🥴
Nazis by another name are still nazis. So keep your head in the sand or wherever it is.
