788

Alito wasn’t bluffing: He believes the Supreme Court is above the law (thehill.com)

submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

111 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito no doubt intended to shock the political world when he told interviewers for the Wall Street Journal that “No provision in the Constitution gives [Congress] the authority to regulate the Supreme Court — period.”

Many observers dismissed his comment out of hand, noting the express language in Article III, establishing the court’s jurisdiction under “such regulations as the Congress shall make.”

But Alito wasn’t bluffing. His recently issued statement, declining to recuse himself in a controversial case, was issued without a single citation or reference to the controlling federal statute. Nor did he mention or adhere to the test for recusal that other justices have acknowledged in similar circumstances. It was as though he declared himself above the law.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] chaogomu@kbin.social 34 points 1 year ago

The problem with requiring 60 plus votes is that it's would be open season for the GOP to prevent nominations, then the second they had the Senate again, they'd remove the rule. Just like they did the last time.

[-] dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Then add into the requirement that you need 75 votes to remove it.

[-] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Except that's not how it works. At some point there will be a rule that can be removed with a simple majority. Because that's all the constitution demands.

Also, these super majority rules are always abused by the rightwing to hinder actual progress.

No. The actual fix is restoring voting rights and making voting day a national holiday. Then we need to add jail time for voter suppression.

That's the basics of a start to fixing things. I can think of two or three more changes that we'd have to make before even beginning to talk about changes to the senate and supreme court.

But to get any of the changes to stick we'd have to pack the court with judges who are not partisan hacks.

this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2023

788 points (97.9% liked)

politics

19240 readers

1861 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

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:

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.
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.
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.
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.
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