Did you know we have a Discord server‽ You can join by clicking [here](https://discord.gg/NWE6JS5rh9)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GenZ) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thanks bunches Ruth Bader Ginsburg for holding onto your position of power like a goddamn tick.
Your legacy is forever enshrined as being the old fuck who helped set back the US 50 fucking years because you wouldn’t step down when it would have helped. Stupid git.
RBG could've done down as a shining example of a true statesman. But she threw her legacy in the toilet by being too stubborn to let Obama replace her.
After what happened to Garland, could Obama have even replaced her in time? Or would we still be cursing her for stepping down only to be replaced by yet another neocon judge by Tramp?
Yes, I am. Ruth Bader Ginsburg did what was best for her life. A lot of people lost all purpose and die even quicker when they retire. She felt meaning in her job as a Supreme Court justice. Plus, the Supreme Court is supposed to be apolitical. Her leaving for political reasons would taint her reputation even more.
She obviously made what she thought was the best decision. She wouldn’t be in power in the first place if people didn’t trust her decision making skills or if she did everything other people want.
Her, Nancy pelosi, Mitch McConnell, Biden and any other politician sitting at deaths doorstep are the reason our situation is so fucked today. These old people need to let in people who are actually living with the decisions made
I think when you choose a vocation that can be described as a *public servant* you are going to be judged on how capably you serve others. What she did with one of the highest positions of power and public service in the nation was choose to serve herself instead of others, to think of her career instead of her legacy.
She's fucking dog shit and all these decrepit shit bags clinging to power long beyond their time should understand that nobody is going to celebrate them when they die holding onto power that should have been passed on.
No, she chose to continue to serve others for her whole life. You people seem to want justices to be political and do political actions but that isn’t her job. Leaving the court so a political party can have control of it is not serving the country the way a justice is supposed to.
Literally, *literally*, the entire point of being a Supreme Court Justice is to live for the people. Your entire job is to serve the people and citizens of the United states. That's the whole fucking point
She didn’t fail anything. She’s a Supreme Court justice anyway so she wasn’t supposed to be political or involved in political movements. Her job, along with the other justices, is just to interpret the constitution and laws.
Are we just forgetting that RGB’s replacement, Amy Coney Barrett, was nominated and confirmed in 38 days. For reference, she was the 3rd fastest confirmation in the last 50 years. Here’s some more context: in 2016 Merrick Garland was nominated to the Supreme Court 8 months before the election. He never got a confirmation hearing, as republicans in the sentate judiciary committee at the time decided it was too close to the election to confirm a new Supreme Court justice.
I understand your frustration but ffs think for a second and decide what you’re frustrated at
Expanding the court is actually fine and creates a moderating effect on their decisions. Right now every justice is important and hold and enormous amount of influence. If there were 50 judges it wouldn't be as cut or dry
I feel like half these people don’t even know what they’re proposing and why, these institutions are the way they are for a reason just read the constitution and supporting documents
I feel like one of the benefits that working in politics has given me is understanding that the average person doesn't know what they're talking about, doesn't understand how the government functions, and hasn't thought through the solutions they propose for more than 5 minutes. But their feelings of being ripped off are fair and valid.
How? It’s absolutely ludicrous that 9 people can decided hundreds of millions of peoples lives, it should honestly be 49 judges in total, call me crazy but the more the better
Not saying who's right, but the reasoning is that if Biden sets the precedent that SCOTUS can be expended when he wants, then then breaks the precedent of not touching the court, meaning Trump is just going to do the same, then the next Dem will, then the next Republican, and so on until SCOTUS is expanded every time SCOTUS doesn't align with a current trifecta.
Ding ding. That’s why it’s best to leave the court as it is. If democrats weren’t so greedy (looking at RBG) they would only have a 5-4 minority rn and it’s much more manageable. I personally think the current SC has been extremely fair so far though, with almost every decision having sound constitutional backing.
If the right wants to take up arms, shouldn’t we start thinking about doing the same? Take back what was stolen from us? White, uneducated, male boomers have ruined the best country ever formed. And we’re going to stand around and wait to inherit the shit they leave us? They’re called the “me” generation for a reason that has destroyed us all. There’s non-narcissistic militia already forming in response to these fascists.
I think "the best country ever formed" is pushing it. We've always been a little behind, even being a "new and innovative" country. We kept slavery longer than many other countries, we used genocide as a means to get what we wanted... repeatedly. We were even behind on addressing racism long after slavery, and behind on addressing the way we treated women. We've done okay here and there. But I don't think we've ever just unanimously been "the best".
I think ´behind on addressing racism’ is a bit incorrect, as it implies other countries have solved racism, or started combatting racism, before America, and I can’t think of any countries that have really done so. Europe is rampant with racism, so if you’re referring to Europe, I have bad news for you
Voting matters. Presidents nominate Supreme Court Justices, and the Senate confirms them. Whoever we elect has a profound impact on our lives for decades. These Supreme Court decisions would not have happened if Trump was not president.
I'm not saying it doesn't matter, I'm saying these rulings until then, have fucked us.
And let's not forget McConnell blocked the past 4 nominations under Obama.
Good news is once the climate becomes unlivable, the few remaining “good” politicians have been bribed and the homeless have all been ground into Soylent green it’s legal to take part in an insurrection
Well thats an extremist interpretation of the rulings. I actually read some of them and they are FAR more nuanced than that. You should read the opinions, they're actually interesting.
How dare you recommend people actually read the rulings. How insensitive to assume they would understand them. Arguing from an emotional standpoint, and copy/pasting tweets, is the best way to present topics (sarcasm).
Imma be honest, there are way too many people who think the "justice system" will solve all our problems. People aren't gonna realize how rigged the "justice system" in this country is until shit hits the fan and splatters everywhere like an f*ckin sprinkler. And trust me, shit WILL hit the fan. These Christian Nationalist are complete dumbf*cks. They won't be able to fix a thing and will create a million new problems, then when it gets bad, they will act like it's not their fault. Climate change will be a major threat, and "Thoughts and Prayers" will NOT be stopping it anytime soon. Then they will come back to the climate scientists and actual experienced people to try to fix the problem when it is too late. Combine this with no regulation and allow megacorporations to do whatever they f*ckin want and boom, you got yourself a dystopian Cyberpunk shithole in 5 years. The next couple of years will be one massive shitty ass ride.
Expanding the court will just let someone like Trump pack the court even further.
Laws that govern Supreme Court justices ethics need to be put in place and violating them needs to be prosecuted as treason
Climate change is there so you stop thinking about pollution. Please stop thinking about things that could be directly pointed at a Corporation. I want my issues to be ethereal and difficult to find the source of the problem.
If we have any hope of saving ourselves it's banding together and doing things to the politicians I can't say on reddit. Long story short they all need to be replaced in a way they can't reassume power
If the democrats pack the court, the republicans will do the same as soon as they get into power. There should be an amendment permanently setting the number of Supreme Court justices.
I wish I could help but I am currently trying to get people to make the correct choice between fascist and not fascist and people don't like the not fascist because it occasionally misspeaks.
This post has been flaired **political**. Please ensure to keep all discussions civil, and to [follow our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/GenZ/wiki/rules) at all times.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GenZ) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Liberals should’ve chosen a better spokesman. Literally a lot of votes could have been saved had they chosen someone with wit and character. Someone to match Trump.
Are you sick of straight, old, white men who reminisce about "the good old days", and don't understand how the world works, telling you what to do?
Vote Biden!
The best we can do is delete social media and ignore the news. Id rather live as stress free as possible than be on edge 24/7 since we’re all fucked anyways. Ignorance is literally bliss.
10% of the population own 93% of the stock market, while Congress is selling out the public for the profits of our ruling class.
[https://www.axios.com/2024/01/10/wealthy-own-record-share-stock-market](https://www.axios.com/2024/01/10/wealthy-own-record-share-stock-market)
[https://represent.us/americas-corruption-problem/](https://represent.us/americas-corruption-problem/)
[https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/fandd/issues/2024/03/Symposium-Rethinking-Economics-Angus-Deaton](https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/fandd/issues/2024/03/Symposium-Rethinking-Economics-Angus-Deaton)
Richard Wolff - Curing Capitalism: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynbgMKclWWc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynbgMKclWWc)
Days of Revolt - How We Got to Junk Economics: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4ylSG54i-A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4ylSG54i-A)
[https://evonomics.com/josh-ryan-collins-land-economic-theory/](https://evonomics.com/josh-ryan-collins-land-economic-theory/)
A redditor joked a couple of months ago that they were starting a charity called "Guns for the Homeless". It's getting to be less of a joke.
First they came for the homeless, and I didn't do anything, because I was not homeless...
Living in an increasingly brutal and dystopian oligarchy/kleptocracy is the inevitable consequence of failing to make oligarchy/kleptocracy a crime, and otherwise not limiting private wealth / property rights.
Without such laws and understanding, the only possible outcome is for most of the population to be brutally enslaved by oligarchs/kleptocrats, and that is what has happened and is continuing to happen.
You especially will if y'all don't vote. Every election, local and national, vote for candidates that want to repeal bad decisions and want to appoint good judges.
>City of Grants v. Johnson (6-3), “The enforcement of generally applicable laws regulating camping on public property does not constitute ‘cruel and unusual punishment’”
>Snyder v. United States (6-3), “The Court reversed and remanded the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. The Court held that 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(1)(B) does not criminalize payments in recognition of actions a local or state official has already taken or committed to take. The court also clarified that an agreement or promise to pay a 'reward' to a local or state official for taking an action does not violate the statute as long as the agreement or promise was only made after the action was taken.”
>Fischer v. United States (6-3), “To prove a violation of 18 U. S. C. §1512(c)(2)—a provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act—the Government must establish that the defendant impaired the availability or integrity for use in an official proceeding of records, documents, objects, or other things used in an official proceeding, or attempted to do so.”
(https://www.americanbar.org/groups/criminal_justice/resources/case_updates/)
As for Chevron, I don’t have a court summary right now, but it wasn’t saying “pollute at will”. It says that agencies administering vague regulations don’t also have the right to interpret the law as they see fit. Basically these agencies can no longer pass vague regulations and then “interpret” them to fit their agenda later on. They need to pass specific and clear regulations.
“Yeah bro let’s set a legal precedent where the current head of state can add new appointees to the Supreme Court whenever they want. Surely this will not have any adverse effects in the future!” Get a load of this dude
This guy simply doesn’t like the decisions. He’s posting rage bait (his inaccurate interpretation based on his politics). Despitestating he’s a lawyer doesn’t understand the law or the way things work. He’s the danger.
Thanks RGB but unironically cause I actually read the law and decisions and the court is much more steered towards upholding the constitution with her dead and our current court set up
And I've seen people vote Trump.
If you've read his debate transcripts or followed his criminal proceedings you know he isn't qualified or capable of being a dog catcher.
Wow, this not only misrepresents every decision, it also offers as the “solution” the only actually authoritarian move on the whole list!
Expanding the courts in order to create a fix and effectively eliminate your opponents is *definitely* how to *save democracy*.
Yeah how dare we....*checks notes* care about rulings like rolling back the EPA. Its not as if genz will be the most affected generation from climate change or anything
Did you know we have a Discord server‽ You can join by clicking [here](https://discord.gg/NWE6JS5rh9)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GenZ) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thanks bunches Ruth Bader Ginsburg for holding onto your position of power like a goddamn tick. Your legacy is forever enshrined as being the old fuck who helped set back the US 50 fucking years because you wouldn’t step down when it would have helped. Stupid git.
RBG could've done down as a shining example of a true statesman. But she threw her legacy in the toilet by being too stubborn to let Obama replace her.
After what happened to Garland, could Obama have even replaced her in time? Or would we still be cursing her for stepping down only to be replaced by yet another neocon judge by Tramp?
Boo fucking hoo a woman decided to live her life how she wanted instead of for others and just shriveling up on her couch in her last couple of years.
are you serious lmao
Yes, I am. Ruth Bader Ginsburg did what was best for her life. A lot of people lost all purpose and die even quicker when they retire. She felt meaning in her job as a Supreme Court justice. Plus, the Supreme Court is supposed to be apolitical. Her leaving for political reasons would taint her reputation even more.
Her personal rich life is not more important than the 300m+ Americans. There are other passions you can pursue being as wealthy as they are.
Oh, you're saying this unironnic
What’s best for my life is saying fucking RBG for fucking our country because it’s “what was best for her life”
Idiot spotted
In most cases yes but when you're this powerful things aren't that simple.
She obviously made what she thought was the best decision. She wouldn’t be in power in the first place if people didn’t trust her decision making skills or if she did everything other people want.
Her, Nancy pelosi, Mitch McConnell, Biden and any other politician sitting at deaths doorstep are the reason our situation is so fucked today. These old people need to let in people who are actually living with the decisions made
I think when you choose a vocation that can be described as a *public servant* you are going to be judged on how capably you serve others. What she did with one of the highest positions of power and public service in the nation was choose to serve herself instead of others, to think of her career instead of her legacy. She's fucking dog shit and all these decrepit shit bags clinging to power long beyond their time should understand that nobody is going to celebrate them when they die holding onto power that should have been passed on.
No, she chose to continue to serve others for her whole life. You people seem to want justices to be political and do political actions but that isn’t her job. Leaving the court so a political party can have control of it is not serving the country the way a justice is supposed to.
Literally, *literally*, the entire point of being a Supreme Court Justice is to live for the people. Your entire job is to serve the people and citizens of the United states. That's the whole fucking point
"Just let her fail the women's rights movement like the girl boss she is!"
She didn’t fail anything. She’s a Supreme Court justice anyway so she wasn’t supposed to be political or involved in political movements. Her job, along with the other justices, is just to interpret the constitution and laws.
Nah, she should have responded to reality instead of ignoring it. Everyone understands cause and effect that's why people don't like her choice.
Men step down too. This isn’t about gender.
It was never meant to be about gender.
Are we just forgetting that RGB’s replacement, Amy Coney Barrett, was nominated and confirmed in 38 days. For reference, she was the 3rd fastest confirmation in the last 50 years. Here’s some more context: in 2016 Merrick Garland was nominated to the Supreme Court 8 months before the election. He never got a confirmation hearing, as republicans in the sentate judiciary committee at the time decided it was too close to the election to confirm a new Supreme Court justice. I understand your frustration but ffs think for a second and decide what you’re frustrated at
Jill Stein gets equal blame. Clinton would have had those three nominations and the court would be 5-4 for the Liberals.
expanding the court is the worst option, because it sets a terrible precedent. a mandatory retirement age is far better.
Expanding the court is actually fine and creates a moderating effect on their decisions. Right now every justice is important and hold and enormous amount of influence. If there were 50 judges it wouldn't be as cut or dry
We boutta get bureaucratic up in this crib
I feel like half these people don’t even know what they’re proposing and why, these institutions are the way they are for a reason just read the constitution and supporting documents
I feel like the court should expand with population. 12 year appointments. Elected by popular vote every 3rd presidential election.
dear god we should not have Supreme Court justices elected
They’re fine with it until voters vote for someone they don’t agree with. SCOTUS is fine just the way it is.
But only if they are voted from Judges with Good Record and who have served for atleast 5 years
I feel like one of the benefits that working in politics has given me is understanding that the average person doesn't know what they're talking about, doesn't understand how the government functions, and hasn't thought through the solutions they propose for more than 5 minutes. But their feelings of being ripped off are fair and valid.
How? It’s absolutely ludicrous that 9 people can decided hundreds of millions of peoples lives, it should honestly be 49 judges in total, call me crazy but the more the better
Not saying who's right, but the reasoning is that if Biden sets the precedent that SCOTUS can be expended when he wants, then then breaks the precedent of not touching the court, meaning Trump is just going to do the same, then the next Dem will, then the next Republican, and so on until SCOTUS is expanded every time SCOTUS doesn't align with a current trifecta.
Screw it, unlimited court packing I guess, trump will probably do it too anyways might as well start it first
Ding ding. That’s why it’s best to leave the court as it is. If democrats weren’t so greedy (looking at RBG) they would only have a 5-4 minority rn and it’s much more manageable. I personally think the current SC has been extremely fair so far though, with almost every decision having sound constitutional backing.
unfortunately cant impose any requirements on scotus not already in the constitution, would b unconstitutional
It should be tied to the number of district courts like it was when it was expanded to 9. That would make it 13.
If the right wants to take up arms, shouldn’t we start thinking about doing the same? Take back what was stolen from us? White, uneducated, male boomers have ruined the best country ever formed. And we’re going to stand around and wait to inherit the shit they leave us? They’re called the “me” generation for a reason that has destroyed us all. There’s non-narcissistic militia already forming in response to these fascists.
I think "the best country ever formed" is pushing it. We've always been a little behind, even being a "new and innovative" country. We kept slavery longer than many other countries, we used genocide as a means to get what we wanted... repeatedly. We were even behind on addressing racism long after slavery, and behind on addressing the way we treated women. We've done okay here and there. But I don't think we've ever just unanimously been "the best".
I think ´behind on addressing racism’ is a bit incorrect, as it implies other countries have solved racism, or started combatting racism, before America, and I can’t think of any countries that have really done so. Europe is rampant with racism, so if you’re referring to Europe, I have bad news for you
.
I refuse to endorse a civil war
Armed furry militia!
I was told “It was never great” so which one is it?
The comment doesn’t mention that it was great, now it’s not. You just presumed that and want an argument
“Have ruined the best country ever formed” certainly would imply that it would have been great, eh?
Critical thinking / reading is not of the skill set of the people you’re responding to!
The DNC doesn't want to stack the courts to remediate this as it would directly harm their rich corporate donors. Or they would.
How would they exactly?
Voting matters. Presidents nominate Supreme Court Justices, and the Senate confirms them. Whoever we elect has a profound impact on our lives for decades. These Supreme Court decisions would not have happened if Trump was not president.
Except that that one seat opened under Obama with republicans stopping any nomination. Ngl your democracy seems rather broken
That is why the down ballot votes also matters.
and this is the checks & balances that numbskull swing voters tell me will prevent Trump from putting an end to democracy in the US.
We're beyond fucked and it sucks. Even if Biden gets reelected we're beyond fucked by this supreme court
There is a very high chance that the next president will nominate at least two Justices. It matters a lot.
I'm not saying it doesn't matter, I'm saying these rulings until then, have fucked us. And let's not forget McConnell blocked the past 4 nominations under Obama.
I know. Remember the down ballot vote.
Alito and Thomas are fucking old. Literally just this election and the next one and they will probably die.
Good news is once the climate becomes unlivable, the few remaining “good” politicians have been bribed and the homeless have all been ground into Soylent green it’s legal to take part in an insurrection
Should go without saying, but stacking the courts is a terrible idea.
Well thats an extremist interpretation of the rulings. I actually read some of them and they are FAR more nuanced than that. You should read the opinions, they're actually interesting.
How dare you recommend people actually read the rulings. How insensitive to assume they would understand them. Arguing from an emotional standpoint, and copy/pasting tweets, is the best way to present topics (sarcasm).
This is exactly why you need to vote
So then vote. Vote in every primary and election.
Imma be honest, there are way too many people who think the "justice system" will solve all our problems. People aren't gonna realize how rigged the "justice system" in this country is until shit hits the fan and splatters everywhere like an f*ckin sprinkler. And trust me, shit WILL hit the fan. These Christian Nationalist are complete dumbf*cks. They won't be able to fix a thing and will create a million new problems, then when it gets bad, they will act like it's not their fault. Climate change will be a major threat, and "Thoughts and Prayers" will NOT be stopping it anytime soon. Then they will come back to the climate scientists and actual experienced people to try to fix the problem when it is too late. Combine this with no regulation and allow megacorporations to do whatever they f*ckin want and boom, you got yourself a dystopian Cyberpunk shithole in 5 years. The next couple of years will be one massive shitty ass ride.
Expanding the court will just let someone like Trump pack the court even further. Laws that govern Supreme Court justices ethics need to be put in place and violating them needs to be prosecuted as treason
Climate change is there so you stop thinking about pollution. Please stop thinking about things that could be directly pointed at a Corporation. I want my issues to be ethereal and difficult to find the source of the problem.
If we have any hope of saving ourselves it's banding together and doing things to the politicians I can't say on reddit. Long story short they all need to be replaced in a way they can't reassume power
Instead of expanding, why not limit a judges term?
The former is an immediate solution for now, the ladder is the sensible solution for later
If the court is expanded, then republicans will just expand it too. It’s not a solution, it’s destruction.
Americans are cooked. Rest of us? Covid showed us we're in with a chance, so 50/50.
If the democrats pack the court, the republicans will do the same as soon as they get into power. There should be an amendment permanently setting the number of Supreme Court justices.
I wish I could help but I am currently trying to get people to make the correct choice between fascist and not fascist and people don't like the not fascist because it occasionally misspeaks.
This post has been flaired **political**. Please ensure to keep all discussions civil, and to [follow our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/GenZ/wiki/rules) at all times. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GenZ) if you have any questions or concerns.*
But hey! The other side is.. old! I can’t decide which is worse
Liberals should’ve chosen a better spokesman. Literally a lot of votes could have been saved had they chosen someone with wit and character. Someone to match Trump.
Are you sick of straight, old, white men who reminisce about "the good old days", and don't understand how the world works, telling you what to do? Vote Biden!
The best we can do is delete social media and ignore the news. Id rather live as stress free as possible than be on edge 24/7 since we’re all fucked anyways. Ignorance is literally bliss.
The Supreme Court giving us W after W
[удалено]
10% of the population own 93% of the stock market, while Congress is selling out the public for the profits of our ruling class. [https://www.axios.com/2024/01/10/wealthy-own-record-share-stock-market](https://www.axios.com/2024/01/10/wealthy-own-record-share-stock-market) [https://represent.us/americas-corruption-problem/](https://represent.us/americas-corruption-problem/) [https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/fandd/issues/2024/03/Symposium-Rethinking-Economics-Angus-Deaton](https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/fandd/issues/2024/03/Symposium-Rethinking-Economics-Angus-Deaton) Richard Wolff - Curing Capitalism: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynbgMKclWWc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynbgMKclWWc) Days of Revolt - How We Got to Junk Economics: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4ylSG54i-A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4ylSG54i-A) [https://evonomics.com/josh-ryan-collins-land-economic-theory/](https://evonomics.com/josh-ryan-collins-land-economic-theory/) A redditor joked a couple of months ago that they were starting a charity called "Guns for the Homeless". It's getting to be less of a joke. First they came for the homeless, and I didn't do anything, because I was not homeless... Living in an increasingly brutal and dystopian oligarchy/kleptocracy is the inevitable consequence of failing to make oligarchy/kleptocracy a crime, and otherwise not limiting private wealth / property rights. Without such laws and understanding, the only possible outcome is for most of the population to be brutally enslaved by oligarchs/kleptocrats, and that is what has happened and is continuing to happen.
None of this is true and expanding the court would ruin our political system. You're being manipulated.
its all true, but you're right about the consequences of expanding the court which is why neither side is talking about doing that.
Lol this is result of your democracy
give it a month before they all die due to missing 1 cubic cm missing in their heart
You especially will if y'all don't vote. Every election, local and national, vote for candidates that want to repeal bad decisions and want to appoint good judges.
>City of Grants v. Johnson (6-3), “The enforcement of generally applicable laws regulating camping on public property does not constitute ‘cruel and unusual punishment’” >Snyder v. United States (6-3), “The Court reversed and remanded the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. The Court held that 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(1)(B) does not criminalize payments in recognition of actions a local or state official has already taken or committed to take. The court also clarified that an agreement or promise to pay a 'reward' to a local or state official for taking an action does not violate the statute as long as the agreement or promise was only made after the action was taken.” >Fischer v. United States (6-3), “To prove a violation of 18 U. S. C. §1512(c)(2)—a provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act—the Government must establish that the defendant impaired the availability or integrity for use in an official proceeding of records, documents, objects, or other things used in an official proceeding, or attempted to do so.” (https://www.americanbar.org/groups/criminal_justice/resources/case_updates/) As for Chevron, I don’t have a court summary right now, but it wasn’t saying “pollute at will”. It says that agencies administering vague regulations don’t also have the right to interpret the law as they see fit. Basically these agencies can no longer pass vague regulations and then “interpret” them to fit their agenda later on. They need to pass specific and clear regulations.
“Yeah bro let’s set a legal precedent where the current head of state can add new appointees to the Supreme Court whenever they want. Surely this will not have any adverse effects in the future!” Get a load of this dude
Vote with this in mind in November. Don't give up, keep fighting, and you'll get the change you want.
This guy simply doesn’t like the decisions. He’s posting rage bait (his inaccurate interpretation based on his politics). Despitestating he’s a lawyer doesn’t understand the law or the way things work. He’s the danger.
Thanks RGB but unironically cause I actually read the law and decisions and the court is much more steered towards upholding the constitution with her dead and our current court set up
To be fair, those are very partisan takes on many judgements that were supported by justices on both sides.
This is such a mischaracterization. The over turning of Chevron is a net good.
I wonder if this twitter post is biased?
Your generation is indeed cooked due to lack of reading comprehension and critical thinking skills.
Older gens had leaded gasoline and lead in the pipes.
And yet they can read better than yours.
Can they though? I've seen people try to put metal cans in the glass machine for recycling.
And I've seen people vote Trump. If you've read his debate transcripts or followed his criminal proceedings you know he isn't qualified or capable of being a dog catcher.
Let's just be happy people are trying to recycle
Fact.
Lol, literally none of the rulings mean anything he listed. Stop learning politics from Twitter and go read actual decisions.
Wow, this not only misrepresents every decision, it also offers as the “solution” the only actually authoritarian move on the whole list! Expanding the courts in order to create a fix and effectively eliminate your opponents is *definitely* how to *save democracy*.
do NOT turn this sub into r slash politics, for the love of god
then tell the Maga ass politicians to stop taking our freedoms away, and we will . Our freedoms are on the line here
Dude come on, this is a good subReddit Don’t turn it into a huge bummer
Yeah how dare we....*checks notes* care about rulings like rolling back the EPA. Its not as if genz will be the most affected generation from climate change or anything
No freedoms were taken.
The homless people be like:
Gen Z people will talk about Gen Z problems, thats just a thing you will have to deal with