Mom Confessions

For simply not liking a vote, no. However, if it is found that the members have violated their oath of office then by all means.

No, what a moron. you dissolve that and you lose one of the checks and balances of our government. While I'm sure some wouldn't mind, that would accomplish nothing more than our downfall as a government.

Olbermann has always been a wealth of dramatic hyperbole, lol.

I do think supreme court justices should be held to the same ethics requirements of lower court justices and it's obvious that they can't just "self-police".

I think if they lie in their confirmation hearings it should be grounds for removal.

I also think that the SCOTUS ruling basically kicked the can to Congress and while Trump and Trump supporters may see this as a win (Trump can remain on the ballot), imagine if Trump wins and it's a democratic Congress in January. SCOTUS has just ruled that Congress, and Congress alone has the authority to determine Trump's eligibility. Is it so hard to imagine a democratic held congress refusing to certify a Trump election based on that? If Biden wins and it's a republican held congress, the reverse could happen. I'm concerned about the election but equally concerned about the certification of election results by Congress because let's face it, it didn't go well last time.

ETA: The above scenario is assuming that Mike Johnson seats newly elected democrats to the house which is not a given.

Regardless, this is going to be a shit show ride and a test of our democracy. I think the "balance of power" has been shown to not be so balanced.

Not just whenever “we” don’t agree with them, but there is a standard legal process under which congress and the senate elects and dissolves Supreme Court justices if they are deemed unfit.

Olbermann.

Say no more and simply laugh at the jester.

jas wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2024 5:10 pm No, what a moron. you dissolve that and you lose one of the checks and balances of our government. While I'm sure some wouldn't mind, that would accomplish nothing more than our downfall as a government.

If you dilute it, do you not also lose one of the checks and balances? Have you minded having the court tipped in your favor?

The Supreme Court has always been political. It's only when political beliefs are so divisive that that is seen as a problem.

WellPreserved wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2024 9:39 pm The Supreme Court has always been political. It's only when political beliefs are so divisive that that is seen as a problem.

It's divisive because it's so lopsided.

Della wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2024 9:52 pm

WellPreserved wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2024 9:39 pm The Supreme Court has always been political. It's only when political beliefs are so divisive that that is seen as a problem.

It's divisive because it's so lopsided.

I think it's because it's the most conservative. Historically, the supreme court has been generally liberal (it was a conservative supreme court that decided Dred Scott). For conservatives, that has always been seen as lopsided.

I think the problem with the current SCOTUS is not that they are political, but that they are actively revisiting previously decided law.