630

Senator Chris Murphy has dismissed claims by the supreme court justice, Samuel Alito, that the Senate has “no authority” to create a code of conduct for the court as “stunningly wrong”.

The Connecticut Democrat made those remarks in an interview on CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday, adding that Alito “should know that more than anyone else because his seat on the supreme court exists only because of an act passed by Congress”.

“It is Congress that establishes the number of justices on the supreme court,” Murphy said. “It is Congress that has passed in the past requirements for justices to disclose certain information, and so it is just wrong on the facts to say that Congress doesn’t have anything to do with the rules guiding the supreme court.”

top 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Acronymesis@lemmy.world 170 points 1 year ago

A Supreme Court Justice saying/believing something this fundamentally incorrect about the expectations of their job should be disqualifying.

Alas…

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 69 points 1 year ago

It's been personal opinions for a while...

They're also not supposed to make laws either, but the whole "qualified immunity" thing where cops are allowed to do anything and not be held accountable was a court decision.

They only care about the rules when it agrees with what they want.

It's weird seeing the SC destroyed by SC judges in my lifetime. When I was a kid everyone had such a high opinion of them

[-] joe@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

When I was a kid everyone had such a high opinion of them

That depends on when you grew up. It seems from this data that the golden age of being a SCOTUS judge just was the late 80s, but any other time in recent history (prior or subsequently) the SCOTUS struggled to get even half the country to approve of them.

It's definitely way worse, now, though.

Edit: Bleh, typos.

[-] rev@ihax0r.com 11 points 1 year ago

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn

Insanity has been an ever present factor for the court.

Not engaging in interstate commerce effects interstate commerce. So everything effects interstate commerce, wow.

[-] neptune@dmv.social 52 points 1 year ago

I mean it's pretty clear to me. The constitution says that Congress writes all laws, and nothing about the courts is noted in powers congress does not have.

Then about the Supreme Court, it says that justices shall serve during "good behavior". Who could possibly define what that means legally besides congress?

Seems pretty clear that Congress could pass many different types of laws on SCOTUS that would be constitutional. Whether that is adding more justices, setting term limits, or creating and ethics standard.

Alito is a moron. The SC is to decide things between states and other high level topics. It's not an untouchable organization.

[-] motorheadkusanagi@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago

The power to determine what laws are or are not Constitutional, that the Supreme Court wields, is also not in the Constitution.

It comes from a precedent set by John Marshall.

We could show them what originalism really means by revoking that power and replacing it with the will of the people.

[-] reddig33@lemmy.world 44 points 1 year ago

Makes you wonder what else Alito is “stunningly wrong” about.

[-] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

nah it's everything

[-] thesprongler@lemmy.world 34 points 1 year ago

Each branch checks the other two and keeps them in balance. I thought we all learned this in high school? Or at the very least I'm sure Alito learned this, whether he cares to remember or not.

[-] saegiru@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago

Wait, the Supreme Court doesn't just have carte blanche to do whatever the hell they want with no oversight?

Surprised Pikachu

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

Oh they absolutely do. They're throwing a screaming fit because everyone else wants to change it.

[-] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago

Not that precedent has mattered to the Highlander quickening "Supreme Court Justice".

[-] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Exactly what will Congress do but jackshit. Supreme Court will continue to be corrupt.

[-] Roundcat@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago

Then prove him wrong.

The court is no longer fit for purpose. Where we go now is anyone’s guess.

[-] joe@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

I am pretty fascinated (read: terrified) about what happens if Congress makes a law giving ethics requirements for the SCOTUS and they strike it down as unconstitutional.

[-] SheeEttin@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Congress could amend the constitution. Hard to argue that that's unconstitutional.

[-] ivanafterall@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago

That's waaaay harder, not easier, particularly in this environment.

If that happened I’d expect to see Biden go all in on packing the court. The gloves would be well and truly off at that point.

[-] chaogomu@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago

Which is where we should already be. It's where the republicans are with it. They've been packing the court since Bork got Borked, and went full gloves off during Obama's last year in office.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

I propose a compromise nobody likes. The court gets ethics rules and Congress gets actual bribery and corruption investigations again.

[-] Hotzilla@sopuli.xyz 12 points 1 year ago

In proper democracy all parts of the government are hold accountable to some other part of the government. This makes no part of the government to be above everyone else.

The system was built on checks-and-balances. Because the country didn’t like being under an absolute monarchy. But like cockroaches, they keep coming back.

[-] Mikey_donuts@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Alito knows Congress isn't going to do shit.

[-] Yepthatsme@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

The Federalists should be kicked int he head for what they’re trying to do. What a bunch of evil degenerates. I bet their weirdo cult orgies are the talk of the town tho.

[-] kitonthenet@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

The Supreme Court wants us to overturn Marbury, which like we can do but I don’t think conservatives will be happy about it

[-] mwguy@infosec.pub -3 points 1 year ago

Senator Chris Murphy has dismissed claims by the supreme court justice, Samuel Alito, that the Senate has “no authority” to create a code of conduct for the court as “stunningly wrong”.

Murphy is wrong here though. Congress has no authority to regulate the conduct of SCOTUS. They only have the right to "yeet" a justice via impeachment. So they could pass one and then impeach for failure to follow, but they'd still have to follow the same procedure for impeachment that they nominally would have to do.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2023
630 points (97.7% liked)

politics

19072 readers
1888 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS