219

The major questions doctrine, explained.

all 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] cerevant@lemmy.world 27 points 2 years ago

...and the Senate put itself in charge of the Judicial branch. Anything the President could do to offset either power grab is checked by the Senate. We need to stop pretending that the Presidential election is the most important.

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 15 points 2 years ago

Local elections have a lot more impact on your quality of life, and there's usually at least one every year.

The key to voting, as shown by the Evangelicals managing to overturn Roe, is to do it consistently. Every primary, every election, for decades. Unfortunately that's what it takes to effect change in our system of government.

[-] snooggums@kbin.social 10 points 2 years ago

They do have more impact in general, but national allows malicious actors to overrule local laws and suppress votes.

Both are critical even though I agree people should increase their focus on local politics.

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago

Agreed, but state elections can also allow malicious actors to overrule federal mandates, like Medicaid. Besides, if you vote in every election you vote in the federal ones, too.

[-] tburkhol@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Getting good people elected to local offices also builds a pipeline of people qualified for higher office. (Although, here in Georgia, there's also a habit of running or appointing "outsiders" to high office whenever possible)

[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago

You mean you aren't supposed to just bitch about how your elected official didn't magically do everything you wanted and then stop voting?

[-] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

I'd be fine with a Presidential Review of the Supreme Court every four years offset by two years of the Presidential election. This would allow a President to replace members of the Supreme Court with a simple majority of the House and Senate as part of the conformation of a new judge. The President would have to justify the replacement for criminal or ethical reasons confirmed by both houses of Congress.

[-] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago

I’d be fine with a Presidential Review of the Supreme Court every four years offset by two years of the Presidential election. This would allow a President to replace members of the Supreme Court with a simple majority of the House and Senate as part of the conformation of a new judge. The President would have to justify the replacement for criminal or ethical reasons confirmed by both houses of Congress.

This would be great until Trump 2.0 comes along and throws out liberal judges he doesn't like or that he knows won't rule in his favor, backed by a complicit Congress. We just got finished with four years off watching one man almost singlehandedly corrupt every single branch of government with ease, so it's not like this idea is far fetched.

Rulings would no longer be about what is (supposed to be) best for the American people but instead would be about what rulings to give so they can keep their cushy jobs, especially when the White House and Congress are both controlled by the same party.

I understand the sentiment behind trying to get the corrupt judges off the bench, but this would likely just make the situation worse, not better.

[-] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

That is why there is still a check by Congress and it occurs at the Midterm.

this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2023
219 points (96.2% liked)

politics

24872 readers
717 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS