Joe Biden worries that the “extreme” US supreme court, dominated by rightwing justices, cannot be relied upon to uphold the rule of law.

“I worry,” the president told ProPublica in interview published on Sunday. “Because I know that if the other team, the Maga Republicans, win, they don’t want to uphold the rule of law.”

“Maga” is shorthand for “Make America great again”, Donald Trump’s campaign slogan. Trump faces 91 criminal charges and assorted civil threats but nonetheless dominates Republican polling for the nomination to face Biden in a presidential rematch next year.

In four years in the White House, Trump nominated and saw installed three conservative justices, tilting the court 6-3 to the right. That court has delivered significant victories for conservatives, including the removal of the right to abortion and major rulings on gun control, affirmative action and other issues.

The new court term, which starts on Tuesday, could see further such rulings on matters including government environmental and financial regulation.

  • @dezmd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    161 year ago

    To correct for the explicitly political gain one team is solely interested in for their own authoritarian redefinition of established precedent that also had their nominees lie their way into their SC positions at the expense of the Constitution and our freedoms. That’s the argument.

    • @FontMasterFlex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      -11 year ago

      you don’t think by expanding the court the “other side” isn’t just doing the same exact thing you just described? so where does it stop?

      • @Goo_bubbs
        link
        141 year ago

        The problem is that we’re at a point where Republicans are not hesitating to lie, cheat, and steal their way to power. They have demonstrated quite clearly that they no longer have an interest in playing fair.

        We need Democrats who aren’t afraid to fight back or we’ll lose our Democracy in America and eventually fall to fascism.

        There may not be a good ending here, but it’s time to draw a line in the sand.

        • @SpezBroughtMeHere@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          -191 year ago

          It’s a sad state when people actually believe one party has a better moral compass than the other. The reality is one party lies better than the other, but it’s two sides of the same coin. I blame gullible people that can’t do anything but parrot what the media tells them to. Sadly, that’s the majority of society.

          • @Goo_bubbs
            link
            9
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Dude… both sides are absolutely not the same. Just look at the policies each side is trying to implement. On one hand, you’ve got Democrats trying to do things like forgive student debt and raise the minimum wage. On the other, you’ve got Republicans focusing almost solely on a culture war they’ve started just because they hate people who are different than they are.

            I could go on and on with examples here. While it’s true that people parrot things they’re told to believe by the media (like pretty much everyone who watches Fox and actually believes it’s real news).

            Our current Republican party has zero plans to actually help anyone they supposedly represent. It’s insane to me that anyone could look at what they’re doing and think it’s somehow beneficial to society…but I guess that’s because I don’t think of hurting people as a way to make my own life better.

          • Cosmic Cleric
            link
            fedilink
            English
            51 year ago

            If you look at the history of people who were put up for nomination as a Supreme Court member, you’ll see that what you said is not true.

            The persons being submitted have a distinct qualification for fairness that one side puts up, versus the other.

            • There’s the problem. You think one party is inherently bad and one is inherently good. That’s completely an idiotic take. But you’re too stupid to see that.

              • @dezmd@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                2
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                The problem is you see this is a party issue rather than an American issue. Seems more like the only idiotic take here is your own.

                • That’s my entire point. It isn’t a party issue. The whole system needs flipped on its head. You’ve formed a rebuttal without even understanding the argument. Why?

                  • @dezmd@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    01 year ago

                    One party is objectively and cumulatively ‘bad’ in almost any comparative context by a reasonable observer, and you projected your own views onto others by making assumptions about how they define one party bad on party good. Your point was to dilute the issue so you can prop up the ‘both sides’ delusion while hurling personal insults at the op. Yeah, the whole system could use a reboot, but playing to that point as gotcha drive-by comments without solutions is just spewing word salad for the sake of typing more words. You are trolling.

                    The argument seems entirely ost on you in the first place. You don’t understand how your assumptions and insults are the problem rather than ‘the point’. Why?

              • @utopianfiat@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 year ago

                You don’t have to believe that to believe that the parties are not the same. “Inherent good” is a philosophical construct that isn’t present in the real world- adopting a fatal nihilism in the face of that is the true idiocy.

      • @dezmd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        01 year ago

        What options are there to fix this active extremist right wing slow motion coup that is trying to overthrow our Constitution by destroying established legal precedent?

        This is not a one side versus the other political sport contest, this is far beyond any such sophomoric simpleton bullshit.