• RubberDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      9 hours ago

      I’d suggest elevating more federal court justices for a period, durich which time they decide as a group what to take up and then randomly assign 5 or 7 to a case. After their stint they can either return to federal court or retire.

    • stoly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Annual reminder that the SCOTUS decided that the SCOTUS has the power of Constitutional review.

    • Fedizen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 hours ago

      they should just require a randomly selected jury for any ruling and the justices only job should be deciding what to present to jurors

      • shastaxc@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 hours ago

        I’m not sure I’d like to trust a random jury to determine the interpretation of laws

          • shastaxc@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 hours ago

            If we’re comparing with the current SC everything is an improvement. But if we’re going to change things, I would prefer a system that does not rely on easily manipulated, uneducated masses.

            • Fedizen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              8 hours ago

              I haven’t heard of a lot of jury tampering trials go well. And usually isnt it more of a mafia style “nice family you got there, would be a shame if something happened to it” situation?

    • otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      If memory serves, the French invented a huge apparatus for that, inspired by a bread slicer.

  • bradinutah@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Moscow Mitch has always given in to foreign pressure to help Weird 34. The Turtle’s hypocrisy isn’t much of a surprise. Shame on Kentucky voters that voted for McConnell and against America.

    Garland would have been a better SCOTUS Justice than the Attorney General. If only we had someone better ready to move faster. But even if he had, wouldn’t SCOTUS have still stopped him? Hard to know for sure.

    We now know that Chief Justice Roberts is pro autocracy. His actions speak louder than his words. He thinks and has ruled that the President should have more power in the USA than the old kings of England had over their people and parliament. A king who is immune. Charles I got hung for thinking he had less power than what Roberts has granted Weird 34.

    From the article: “There is a risk of authoritarianism down the line.”

    I disagree. A Dementia Don win is an inevitability that we’ll have an autocrat in charge. Roberts may want to reflect on the monster he’s created, especially if the autocrat gets his way and dismisses SCOTUS as easily as dismissing the Constitution.

  • eldavi@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    17 hours ago

    do strongly worded letters to the manager work in the supreme court?

  • jpreston2005@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Everytime I try to open the article the firefox tab crashes. what gives? I’ve been seeing this happen a lot recently