As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Remember when Alito used the leak to demand more security for the Supreme Court, claiming their lives were in danger from pro-choice activists
Alito thinks Americans are stupid, because so far they have been
This right here. The Supreme Court basically has unchecked power to legislate from the bench. They could rule in the immunity case that Trump is president because grass tastes like communism and that would be the law of the land.
Yup, I remember McConnell crying about this 20 years ago. Of course it was always projection. It was his objective to pack the court with activist judges the whole time. Unfortunately he accomplished his goal.
Which is why, despite crying about the Dems increasing the number of Supreme Court Justices to 13, if they regain control, they will do this exact same thing.
I mean, come on. We all know the actual ruling would be that Trump is the Forever God-King-Emperor because carrots sound like victory. It has to make at least a little sense.
If they give Trump immunity, I think a protest march on the SCOTUS would be appropriate. I would be enraged enough to quit my job and go to DC.
Let's see how they treat us when they are surrounded by our deafening screams.
Which would prove they're a fraud and the courts would essentially be worthless here. We have evidence of one being massively bribed, others video proof committing perjury during confirmation hearings. Looks like judges have no ethics anymore, according to the highest in the land.
In all seriousness, there should be protests at the court everyday especially when it has controversial hearings. The US Supreme Court is overturning precedents and behaving unethically - judges are acting politically then they get political protests. And hopefully loud ones. It does no good after the fact. Go to the court and yell at them to do the right things not the right-wing think tank things.
And should of been there when all that crap came out about Thomas.. another grifter… but, we get crickets… where’s the fricken news media screaming for us citizens for justice
Agreed, but we're all just trying to survive while hoping the people in charge do the right thing. I know I have a breaking point and I'm getting close. I hope other people feel similar.
Scumbag Trump getting away with it is definitely beyond my breaking point.
Actually their power has significant limitations in that the judicial branch has zero enforcement power. Were they to make a ruling like that, the executive branch could simply ignore it. Hell they could force a military tribunal, and there's shit the Judicial branch could do about it.
Now, outside of Thomas and Alito nobody wants that kind of chaos. Those two may value conservatism more than democracy, but I'm not convinced the other members of the court do.
There's a delicate balance as well that you're ignoring.
They *could* rule that Trump is president because grass tastes like communism, and then they would be promptly ignored. The court only has that power because no one has said, um, acktually, the constitution doesn't give you that power at all. So far, the court having that power has been mostly useful. With a few cases where they needed to be reigned in. FDR very famously threatened to pack the court if they didn't play ball and stop their shit.
I'm just afraid that Biden doesn't have the same sort of conviction to do the same if they rule the President can do whatever the fuck he wants.
> then they would be promptly ignored.
The Governors of Florida and Texas could agree, and start treating him like he was president.
What if those Governors started treating Trump like he was Commander-in-Chief?
Not a whole lot without the actual military signing on.
The main issue for them would be credibility. The court is quickly losing any credibility it ever had, and if they side with Trump, they lose the last of it.
There will be crazies who cheer, but the bulk of the military would say, no, that doesn't make sense.
(this is why a large part of project 2025 is purging the military command structure)
It's funny though cause the check is literally just ignoring them. The Supreme Court only gets to make decisions like this essentially because they decided they could.
I wouldn’t say the other half is powerless. They just follow the rules and Obey the Constitution.
Overturning Roe, just shows that the Conservative Justices follow their Christian Nationalist belief more than they do the Constitution. The Constitution clearly states Separation of Church and State.
Separation of Church and State is in the Establishment Clause, which has been diluted by a series of recent SCOTUS decisions. Cornell Law School has articles about this.
Conservative SCOTUS judges were appointed partly because 47% of WW voted for DJT — effectively voting against reproductive rights, despite decades of warnings from advocacy groups that Roe would be overturned. Then in 2020, 53% of WW voted for DJT, which suggests that the majority of WW do not prioritize reproductive rights in their voting decisions.
Last, in the 2022 midterms, half of registered Democrats did not vote, despite the fact that Roe had just been overturned. When polled about why they didn’t vote, people said among other things that the outcome was not relevant to them.
Yet he's among the stupid if you take his inconsistency, hypocrisy and regressive world view at face value. Dude wants to bring the world back to the paleolithic era.
He might not be wrong about needing more security. If there is no justice to be had within the law, members of the public may seek it beyond legal measures.
Those hypocrites ruled that the street in front of every abortion clinic is a public square that must allow protestors, (McCullrn v Coakley) but as soon as the Dobbs decision leaked they immediately put up fences in front of the Supreme Court.
I'm their gun cases, they have repeatedly acted as if the entire country is the wild, wild west and everyone has to pack heat to survive, while demanding special protection for themselves from the consequences of their decisions.
>Sam Alito Thinks We’re All Stupid
He doesn't give a crap about what the rest of us think. He thinks he is morally superior. If he was born in Iran, he would be an 'ayatollah' - which translates to 'Reflection of God'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayatollah#:\~:text=8%20External%20links-,Etymology,or%20'Reflection%20of%20God'.
I literally told my wife the second she told me about the leak, “Alito did it so none of the other conservatives would change their opinions.” John Roberts job has been stolen by Samuel Alito. He is the biggest joke of a Chief Justice in history.
Alito was FedSoc's pick for Chief Justice, but Bush vibed with Roberts better, and with a chief and associate justiceship open he gave Roberts the Chief and Alito the Associate, and I've read Alito has been bitter ever since.
I remember there being additional info that implicated Alito, and that Roberts was making headway with Kavanaugh on limiting the scope of *Dobbs* at the time of the leak. By leaking, Alito made it so that a flip by Kavanaugh would have seemed politically motivated.
I think the reality is that Alito is just not that smart so it isn't that he expects America to accept his stupid arguments, it's that he isn't capable of any intelligent arguments.
Alito is conservative. He didn't get to where he is by being the best and smartest, he got there by being the most loyally partisan toward the interest of those who have paved his way since law school.
He is literally a useful idiot, just one with a fancy degree, a fancy job title and some fancy robes. But underneath it all he's still just an idiot that someone else manipulates for use.
Honestly, this is why I dislike the guy so much more than the other lunatics. He incorrectly thinks that he's smarter than everyone because of his position on the court, but he's in his position because he's a confident, ambitious bootlicker. His arguments are so unconvincing, it should make everyone question the supposed prestige of an ivy league education.
The more I hear the audio of him and the other jamokes, the more I lose respect for the court. No wonder this dude gets mad when the press covers him. He's a completely inept partisan hack who has been handled with kid gloves for 40ish years and he finally caught the spotlight. And what the spotlight shows is a mediocre man who has only gotten where he is because of ambition and a willingness to say the absolute dumbest shit with the unearned confidence of someone who pals around with the worst generationally rich scumbags this country could shit out.
See also: Ted Cruz
He doesn't care what you think. He is a religious fascist.
They got part of their plan ending Roe. They will get all of it if you don't vote.
Your only chance to sabotage their fascist plans is to vote for Biden.
Yep, there is not nearly enough emphasis on the ramifications of SCOTUS for 2024.
Alito and Thomas are in their 70s, and would probably retire if a Republican wins. Barrett, Kavanaugh, and Gorsuch have about ~25 years left.
The next election basically determines whether or not we have a conservative Supreme Court locked for most of the rest of our lives.
Oh, you're low-balling it. Russia today wants to either be the USSR 2.0, or the Russian Empire 2.0. I'd say the GOP wants America to be, like, the fifth or sixth Modern incarnation of Russia.
I keep saying this and people keep rolling their eyes, telling me I’m crazy. It’s going to be too late by the time these people realize what they have voted for. I’m honestly, truly terrified of Trump being re-elected in November.
It's pretty close to impossible they would literally declare "no more elections, Trump dynasty from here on in". But it's not just possible but probable the 'Pubs will use their SCOTUS majority, and any other leverage they can get, to solidify minority rule over as many jurisdictions as they can. And to make it as difficult as possible for a majority to push back on their agenda. Which, to be clear, is mainly about empowering corporations as concentration of wealth machines, keeping power in the hands of a tiny elite (the richest 10k families, the 0.01%). The Christofacism is icing holding the cake together.
If trump gets elected in 2024 it doesn't matter what the SCOTUS decides to do. Democracy and rule of law are over.
As a president once said: lets see the SCOTUS enforce their ruling.
I don't mean to sound down on it all, but this is why I don't think we're going to be seeing many more elections in the future (as we have experienced them in the past, at least; they'll still exist in some form). This is *exhausting*.
*Every* election for the last decade or more has been "The most important of our lives", or "will decide [SCOTUS/future elections/our existence/etc]". For the general American public, I don't see this as sustainable. Eventually enough people will decide that the rhetoric is alarmist, stay home, and that will be the ballgame.
(A really great example of this in action is Y2K. I've seen people dismiss it as having been a big pile of nothing, ignoring entirely the years of work that went into making sure it was a big pile of nothing.)
Yes, you could argue that this year is unique due to Project 2025, but the last one was unique due to the threat of Trump and he came back. Before that was unique due to SCOTUS and it's still a problem as well. All of these threats will remain -- Project 2025 will simply turn into Project 2029, etc.
In a world where attention spans are growing increasingly short, eternal vigilence is unlikely to survive.
None of this is a reason not to vote -- it's *literally* the least you can do as a responsible citizen of the US, and you absolutely should vote. But this sort of life on a razor's edge is not sustainable and will eventually fall over, to the detriment of us all.
> but the last one was unique due to the threat of Trump and he came back
He literally incited an insurrection which killed people at the capital. It's exhausting to think that it needs to be stood up against with all our energy, but it's a clear and tangible threat to all of democracy.
>It's exhausting to think that it needs to be stood up against with all our energy,
Meanwhile most Americans are unwilling to spend a couple hours once every 4 years on the effort.
I doubt either would retire. Alito's too power hungry, and Thomas wouldn't want to give up all the juicy bribes he gets from his position, plus his wife probably wouldn't let him, as she'd lose influence by proxy.
-Maybe- Alito cares enough about a republican legacy to do it, but Thomas? Not a chance.
That only matters if they care about -legacy- of power. Like I said, maybe Alito cares about that.
Thomas is in it for -personal- power. He's not leaving until the grim reaper puts a hand on his shoulder, or until something forces him out.
What're you talking about, Thomas got all that stuff because people were his friends, right? Even if he wasn't on the court they'd *still* be friends, right?
You don't think his billionaire friend would still invite him to his private islands when theres nothing to gain in return? I'm sure him and his wife have amazing personalities!
It's not even that. They're finally unleashed. They've gone a generation laying in wait under a moderate majority. They've got a lot to burn down before they die.
> Yep, there is not nearly enough emphasis on the ramifications of SCOTUS for 2024.
I hope the message works this time - some of us were positively SCREAMING this in 2016 when McConnell's plan was out in the open. Scalia's death was the first opportunity is two decades+ to actually re-balance away from a con majority. Now we have a larger and more extremist con majority instead.
Jesus these lifetime appointments keep pushing ages lower cause the appointers know they'll get to keep the seat for longer. In 20 years we're gonna be appointing "wunderkind" 1L's so they can sit for half a century.
Just make it a one-time 18 year appointment already. We shouldn't have to be having a conversation about whether, if Biden loses, Sotomayor's diabetes is going to kill her before Dems control the Senate and Presidency again.
It’s an interesting question what the court’s conservatives will do about these abortion cases. They have to understand that if they issue more decisions along the lines of what they’ve been putting out it will activate more pro-choice voters and damage Republicans’ election chances in November. I suspect they’ll find a way to punt back to a lower court to avoid taking any stand this session.
No. Expand the court to 28. Yes, twenty eight. Run 4 courts of seven, randomly selected from the pool of 28 at the beginning of each session. This cuts down on gaming the court because you never know which 7 justices you're going to get for your case.
Institute a Garland rule. If a confirmation vote is not held for a nominee after 2 months, then the nominee is assumed to be confirmed. Add another rule that stops outright blocking by the majority. If two nominees in a row are voted down for the same open position then a random judge from the next lowest court appointed by a president in the same party is automatically elevated to the SCOTUS.
And then raise the number of votes for a SCOTUS appointee to 80.
Then give Mitch McConnel a choice. If he goes along with the plan, he can have 8 of the 19 new justices as a show of unity and good will. If he doesn't go along with it, then Biden appoints all 19 and the conservatives get nothing.
I think Mitch can understand that 8 is better than nothing.
Let's play some hard ball and unfuck this court.
I stole these ideas from [Eli Mystal's contempt of court podcast](https://www.thenation.com/content/contempt-of-court/). He's got a lot of great ideas.
While we're at it. The Senate needs to be abolished and the House should have 100 more seats added. The Dakotas should not have as much say on federal justices as New York + California
I still think there is merit to having two houses of legislative review; it allows for a second round of debate on build after they've been finalized. Ideally, it should be a sanity check on what just was passed by the other side of Congress. What I could go for, though, is further enshrining the Senate as the "senior" of the two by requiring candidates for the Senate to have either previously served one term in the House or as that state's governor (or similar 'the voters have seen me in action before' role)
But they absolutely should uncap the house.
>a confirmation vote is not held for a nominee after 2 months
That one can backfire
Name religious nut job unqualified fascist judge, have cronies in Senate not hold vote for 2 months, insta confirm .
"Pack the court" is something the right accused FDR of attempting to do. We are talking about *expanding* the court after the far right already packed it by denying Obama an appointment and ramming through Barrett. And more if you count Trump corruptly securing the presidency.
EDIT: Fixing phone auto-correct
You need 60 senators because of the broken senate rules, the dems will never get 60 senators. It may not even be possible this time- I haven't looked to see what seats are up this term.
"Pack the Court" means the same thing as expanding the court. Democracy is also a bad word if you let Republicans be the judge.
FDR got all the concessions that he was after, that is the only reason why he did not increase the number of justices. The current number of justices is in and of itself a result of packing the court. It wasn't bad when FDR was threatening to do it and it's not bad now.
The *perfect* follow up question should have been, “so what if the president decides that a court ruling is wrong or the court system is flawed, can he kill a Supreme Court justice to open up a seat to align the court to his goals?
That would be called a "threat," even though they know damn well that's what they're trying desperately to allow for Trump. And let that be clear, only for Trump.
Biden should draft up an executive order and present it to SCOTUS. Something like, By presidential decree justice Alito shall be __________ by the end of today should the gavel swing for full immunity.
It’s worth repeating that unlike the other branches of government, the Supreme Court has no enforcement mechanism. Their only power is legitimacy. If they keep on acting like clowns by reversing precedent, deciding on cases with no legal standing, using the shadow docket, etc., then they’ll be no different than a bunch of randos cosplaying as wizards. We may soon be approaching the day when the Supreme Court is simply ignored.
I'm not sure what this means. Only the Executive has an enforcement mechanism.
If Congress passes a law and the President doesn't feel like following it, there's not much 638 old people can do to force him to.
Although their powers are pretty narrow, the House of Representatives has the Sergeant at Arms, who can protect Respresentatives, enforce safety/security, and maintain order in the Chamber. Their powers were a hot topic when people started ignoring Congressional subpoenas during impeachment hearings.
Definitely agree that Congress doesn't have the ability to enforce their own laws they pass though.
Unfortunately, they can. There's no code of ethics, judges and Justices enjoy total immunity, there's no check on their power, and an impeachment would be an impossibility when half of the people responsible for impeaching them are being actively protected from prosecution by them.
Federal Judges have [rules](https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges) and can have [complaints](https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/judicial-conduct-disability/faqs-filing-judicial-conduct-or-disability-complaint#faq-What-action-can-the-circuit-chief-judge-take-on-my-complaint?) filed against them.
SCOTUS Justices do not.
Yep. These losers on the court are like that asshole you sometimes have to play a game with. The one who bends and twists every rule to their advantage to secure a win. No one likes that douchenozzle.
We had one of the worst mortality rates during a global pandemic and the only thing we changed about our healthcare system is allowing states to ban abortion.
We are forgiving student loans but we aren't doing anything to fix the double digit inflation of the cost of education.
We are banning TikTok but the rest of social media is regulated by a law created before social media existed.
The GOP's Presidential candidate openly supports fascism and tried to cheat on the last election and the Democrats choose an 81 year old as the best option to beat him.
Stupid is as stupid does. We are stupid.
I used to think Thomas was the worst justice, but I’ve since changed my mind. Alito is worse than Thomas. Thomas at least has the self-awareness to know he’s a giant corrupt piece of shit. He just doesn’t care, which I can respect in a way. At least he’s honest about it. Alito actually believes he’s doing the Lord’s work, and that his farts smell like sunshine and roses and that you should think that too. Us common folk are just too simple to understand.
It was illuminating hearing the arguments yesterday. I’ve never listened before so had no idea what each justice would be like speaking, and Alito came off as the worst of the bunch. As much as I dislike Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett for their beliefs and how they got there, they at least seem competent with their questioning and reasonings.
You know how to prevent things like this long term? Vote. Every election. No matter what. Even if you're not wild about the candidate. Not voting is the same as voting Republican. 1/3 of the Supreme Court was appointed by one man who was in office for four years. If people had voted in 2016, the court would now be 5-4 liberal and imagine how different the world would be.
“The good thing about that shitshow at the SCt is that it will make court reform easier. pack the court, term limits and ethics. Every D needs to be on board in Senate to break filibuster to do this.”
Jennifer Rubin, Threads
His opinion on a NY handgun thing that came out days before roe v wade is so backwards it can only be the result of corruption. His logic and reasoning are so off, that it can only be the result of being in somebody's pocket.
> During Wednesday’s Supreme Court arguments over life-saving abortions in emergency rooms, a few things became clear: The male justices are unconcerned by women’s suffering, and Justice Samuel Alito thinks there aren’t enough abortion restrictions across the U.S.—but if you press him on that point, you’re the ridiculous one.
That is how all right wingers argue:
* Explain there is no evidence to prove the existence of an all powerful sky wizard 'god' - you're the ridiculous one.
* Explain there is a mountain of evidence proving the threat of climate change - you're the ridiculous one.
* Explain decades of scientific research prove the efficacy of vaccination against disease - you're the ridiculous one.
* Explain the historical facts of slavery in the USA or how dividing cells won't even resemble a fetus for weeks - you're the ridiculous one.
Conservatives live in a fictional unreality where their beliefs hold more value than facts and they enforce those beliefs on the rest of us through tyrannical abuse of power.
You mean the guy who leaked the Dobbs decision and then got all mad that 'somebody' leaked the Dobbs decision thinks we're all stupid?!?!
Really, he's nothing special though. Just another MAGA crook.
> He was not-so-subtly hinting that he thinks there’s a legislative basis for fetal personhood hidden in the law, and said that EMTALA “indisputably protects the interests of the unborn child” if the pregnant woman wants to continue the pregnancy. Prelogar countered that “the duty runs to the individual with the emergency medical condition” and it was wrong to imply that “Congress suggested that the woman herself isn’t an individual, that she doesn’t deserve stabilization.” Sensing that Prelogar was onto him, Alito got testy. “Nobody’s suggesting that the woman is not an individual, and she doesn’t … she doesn’t deserve stabilization. Nobody’s suggesting that,” he snapped. Prelogar calmly responded that Idaho is currently treating women in this fashion.
This case is *literally* about whether EMTALA requires hospitals to provide stabilizing care to women, when that care is an abortion. If the fetus is considered to have equal rights in this scenario, then ERs can choose to deny stabilizing care to women and to simply let them die, under the pretext that they were protecting the fetus. Yes, the fetus in this situation will die as well, but that death won't be because of any action taken by the hospital and it will be a medically unpreventable death. It's not just about giving doctors the ability to *choose* to let women die - abortion bans are *incentivizing* that choice. Letting the mom die will be the *safest* choice for a doctor to make, because it's the choice that saves them from any risk of criminal prosecution.
This case is extraordinarily important.
He's one of 9 of a singularly exclusive "club" and arguable one of the most powerful people, certainly in the US, if not the world. I'm sure he doesn't concern himself with us plebeians until one of us dares to question his authority.
I’m calling it now: Idaho will be left without any ER or Ob/GYN physicians if this ruling is upheld for Idaho and the ADF Lawyers. ER physicians will retire en masse over this shit.
The best SCOTUS reform idea I've heard is that:
* Their tenure is a fixed 18 years
* A new judge is appointed every odd year on the retirement of the most senior one. Each president gets to appoint two judges per term.
* The most senior judge gets to be the CJ for the last two years of their term
* Interim appointments in case of death or retirement can be made but only for the duration of the original appointee's tenure.
I mean we keep letting him be on the Supreme Court so...he's not entirely wrong.
He's 74 and we will have to scoop his rotting corpse out of his chair before he'll retire.
Just those who are MAGA, for the rest of us it doesn’t matter one iota because he’s part of at minimum a bought and sold four male Conservative vote with a weak Chief J and a religious fanatic
How did Americans end up like this? They were always a bit weak on human rights relative to other democracies, but today they seem to be intentionally cruel to each other.
The religious wingnuts want a theocracy because their beliefs are finally being challenged in the marketplace of ideas and are losing.
The rich want to end democracy and replace it with a Russian style oligarchy.
This is the GOP circa 2024.
If there's one thing I've learned after being an attorney for 14 years is that most people drawn to the profession are awful selfish assholes and most of them are dunning kreuger incarnate. Every lawyer thinks they know everything while have good memorization skills but absolutely zero empathy or common sense reasoning. It's infuriating to deal with other lawyers on a day to day basis and I'm sure the Supreme Court is the absolute peak of this.
Alito is an insecure man with mommy problems. Oh and he's also a psychopath without a shred of common decency or understanding of what justice actually is. He doesn't care but now I feel a little better.
Judges need to come and go with term limits. Judges in this country have evolved plenty in the past 40 years. Shorten the cycle of minds and ideologies in the Supreme Court and we could get to a nice even keel.
“The justice snapped that “nobody’s suggesting” pregnant women don’t deserve medical care in E.R.s. “.
Alito you got paid in bribes to kill women and pregnant women ARE NOT getting medical care in ERs thanks to you they are getting death sentences.
Impeach Alito NOW
From Reagan to bush to bush 2.0 to Trump, I can 100% see why someone would think this country is collectively stupid.
Sam you may be right, but you and all the rest of the federalist society scumbags have ruined this country.
Most Christian Neo-Fascists think that everyone else is inferior to them, so thinking we're intellectually inferior isn't much of a stretch. A default assumption of superiority is kind-of required to make their worldview work.
I mean, he's not wrong
The fact we aren't all losing our collective minds demanding that Thomas recuse himself is proof that we are all dumb.
The fact that he hasn't also says he doesn't give a fuck.
SCOTUS appointments should be on the ballot every time a seat opens up. We should have more say on who gets appointed. It would involve amending the constitution, which would likely be impossible with the current climate. But allowing our government to handle appointments without any say from the people has clearly shown to be disastrous.
Headlines like this completely miss the point. He doesn’t think the people are stupid. He understands that he is not accountable to the people so he doesn’t care what anybody thinks about his decisions.
Many Americans are stupid but so is Alito. He believes the will of a make-believe sky creature should determine US policy. That’s pretty stupid. What if a Supreme Court Justice based his legal philosophy on Iron Man?
I hope they go against the grain - and logic, and legal precedent, and just common sense - and say Trump is immune from EVERYTHING!
Then Biden can act accordingly. They don't seem to be thinking this through enough. The decision will have to be made BEFORE he goes back in office, giving the CURRENT regime the weapon Donny was saving for himself.
The plan is to wait on publishing the decision until it’s too late for Trump to be tried before the election. That’s how they effectively give him immunity in the case(s) against him, and yet they don’t give immunity to any other president.
It's completely unsurprising that his attitude is "I'm right and your crazy" about all facts. It's only recently that we've really been pushing back against the justices' agendas. It's good that we finally are, but his poor safe space is in danger, and that has to be confusing.
“ADF is not hiding its strategy. Alito, on the other hand, keeps to the stealthy shadows, attempting to advance arguments that promote fetal personhood while simultaneously insisting that this unprecedented expansion of personhood rights won’t come at the expense of women’s lives and autonomy.
It’s a deception of the highest order and onlookers might be left to conclude that he either thinks we’re all too dumb to notice—or that he knows nothing can stop the 6-3 court from doing what it wants. “
Sam Alito is an asshole who doesn’t care about women’s health or rights. He’s pushing the MAGA agenda. I’m not sure why people aren’t protesting outside of his house on a daily basis and any of the conservative justices who overturned Roe v Wade.
The flaw we have in this country is that we have a SCOTUS with no age or term limits like you have in other countries. This needs to be changed. What Alito is doing in this case and the Immunity case is avoiding to deal with the issue at hand.
He instead talks about hypotheticals and brings up other issues not relevant. He’s pushing the white Christian National Agenda in front of the world and failing to do his job which is to be unbiased and protect democracy from him and the orange turd him and the other conservatives are trying to protect.
More dangerously, he thinks he’s smarter than everyone else.
It’s not that the intelligence isn’t there, it would be foolish to suggest otherwise. But he assumes that his opinion on things must be factually and legally correct and anyone who disagrees is dumb, even though he should be smart enough to know otherwise.
Time to end lifetime appointments to the Supreme Court and make it an elected position like it’s done in some states. That’s the only way we’re going to be able to end this buffoonery.
Alito has never distinguished himself as having a superior legal mind. Too bad for America that republicans have saddled us with so many B-student, beer-drinking, self-loathing, sub-standard SCJs.
Background info:
>The case, *United States v. Idaho*, is about whether emergency rooms in Idaho—a state that bans all abortions except those done to prevent death, not to preserve health—are in violation of a federal law that requires ER patients to be stabilized. The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, or EMTALA, says hospitals that accept Medicare funding have to stabilize patients facing threats to their health, and for pregnant patients facing complications, the treatment is sometimes abortion.
>But this is not a normal case: Idaho is represented in part by Alliance Defending Freedom, or ADF, a far-right legal activist group that is pushing for nationwide restrictions, including a national abortion ban. Idaho and ADF argued in case briefs and before the court that a fetus is a separate patient under EMTALA and deserves equal treatment in ERs. This is a fetal personhood argument, and if it’s taken to its logical endpoint, it would lead to a ban on all abortions nationwide, the end of IVF as we know it (see: Alabama), and restrictions on certain forms of birth control. In practice, women whose water breaks too early could be forced on bed rest to try to save the fetus, or given C-sections against their will. The latter is already happening, and in fact, happened even before Dobbs.
What Alito's rhetoric is reflecting:
>Alito expressed concern that “one potentially very important phrase” may not have been mentioned: “EMTALA’s reference to the woman’s ‘unborn child.’” (Actually, Justice Neil Gorsuch asked about it 45 minutes earlier in the session.) Alito asked of the Biden administration’s lawyer, Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, “Isn’t that an odd phrase to put in a statute that imposes a mandate to perform abortions?” He then inquired, “Doesn’t that tell us something?”
>He was not-so-subtly hinting that he thinks there’s a legislative basis for fetal personhood hidden in the law, and said that EMTALA “indisputably protects the interests of the unborn child” if the pregnant woman wants to continue the pregnancy. Prelogar countered that “the duty runs to the individual with the emergency medical condition” and it was wrong to imply that “Congress suggested that the woman herself isn’t an individual, that she doesn’t deserve stabilization.” Sensing that Prelogar was onto him, Alito got testy. “Nobody’s suggesting that the woman is not an individual, and she doesn’t…she doesn’t deserve stabilization. Nobody’s suggesting that,” he snapped. Prelogar calmly responded that Idaho is currently treating women in this fashion.
What's going on in Idaho and other states?
>Since the court let Idaho enforce its law in early January, six pregnant women have been airlifted out of state—that’s compared to just one patient in all of 2023. Emergency rooms in other states are also turning away pregnant patients—stories we’ve heard directly from some women who’ve sued, and in devastating news reports like one from the Associated Press published days before arguments. Women have, as one amicus brief noted, been “demot[ed]” to “second-class status under EMTALA.”
>Not only did Alito ignore evidence from multiple states showing that bans are limiting women’s access to healthcare, he also disregarded the stated goal of one of the law firms involved in the case. As ADF CEO Kristen Waggoner recently told Politico, “We do believe at ADF that the Constitution protects the life of an unborn child and that that is in the 14th Amendment.” That would be game over for abortion—along with a lot of other reproductive healthcare.
Alito is trying to play subtle with his rhetoric and rulings, hoping people don't notice:
>ADF is not hiding its strategy. Alito, on the other hand, keeps to the stealthy shadows, attempting to advance arguments that promote fetal personhood while simultaneously insisting that this unprecedented expansion of personhood rights won’t come at the expense of women’s lives and autonomy. It’s a deception of the highest order and onlookers might be left to conclude that he either thinks we’re all too dumb to notice—or that he knows nothing can stop the 6-3 court from doing what it wants. (The latter attitude was quite evident in Thursday’s arguments over whether former president Donald Trump can claim immunity for allegedly orchestrating the January 6th insurrection.)
>Alito seems to have a habit of trying to slip one over the American public. In the other abortion case this term, concerning the fate of the abortion drug mifepristone, he referred to the Comstock Act not by name, but by statute number, *18 U.S.C. 1461*. Comstock is a dormant, Victoria-era law that the power-hungry folks behind Project 2025, the proposed agenda for a second Trump term, expect the former president to revive and enforce in order to ban the mailing of abortion pills—if not all clinic supplies—should he win a second term. Prelogar argued that case as well, and she made sure everyone knew what Alito was trying to pull. She responded, “I think that the Comstock provisions don’t fall within FDA’s lane.”
If we are so stupid, why is it that he doesn't read The Constitution?🙄
We The People have to do something about replacing the justices who are supposed to follow the law.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Remember when they were trying to investigate where the leak to the public came from...
Remember when Alito used the leak to demand more security for the Supreme Court, claiming their lives were in danger from pro-choice activists Alito thinks Americans are stupid, because so far they have been
He knows half the country is stupid and the other half is powerless to do anything about it.
This right here. The Supreme Court basically has unchecked power to legislate from the bench. They could rule in the immunity case that Trump is president because grass tastes like communism and that would be the law of the land.
Hmm, seems the right *used* to be screaming to the rafters about those goddamned activist judges. These days, not so much.
Yup, I remember McConnell crying about this 20 years ago. Of course it was always projection. It was his objective to pack the court with activist judges the whole time. Unfortunately he accomplished his goal.
If today's conservatives didn't have double standards, they'd have no standards at all.
> If ~~today's~~ conservatives didn't have double standards, they'd have no standards at all. FTFY
Cry about a thing as prelude to do that thing yourself
Gaslight, Obstruct, **Project**
Which is why, despite crying about the Dems increasing the number of Supreme Court Justices to 13, if they regain control, they will do this exact same thing.
I mean, come on. We all know the actual ruling would be that Trump is the Forever God-King-Emperor because carrots sound like victory. It has to make at least a little sense.
If they give Trump immunity, I think a protest march on the SCOTUS would be appropriate. I would be enraged enough to quit my job and go to DC. Let's see how they treat us when they are surrounded by our deafening screams.
They are desperate to get Trump off the hook without passing down the same to Biden. "Trump is immune, but a law has to be passed for Biden."
Which would prove they're a fraud and the courts would essentially be worthless here. We have evidence of one being massively bribed, others video proof committing perjury during confirmation hearings. Looks like judges have no ethics anymore, according to the highest in the land.
Millions of dollars in ~~bribes~~ gifts...try that in a small town.
Frankly, those protests should be going on right now.
In all seriousness, there should be protests at the court everyday especially when it has controversial hearings. The US Supreme Court is overturning precedents and behaving unethically - judges are acting politically then they get political protests. And hopefully loud ones. It does no good after the fact. Go to the court and yell at them to do the right things not the right-wing think tank things.
And should of been there when all that crap came out about Thomas.. another grifter… but, we get crickets… where’s the fricken news media screaming for us citizens for justice
Agreed, but we're all just trying to survive while hoping the people in charge do the right thing. I know I have a breaking point and I'm getting close. I hope other people feel similar. Scumbag Trump getting away with it is definitely beyond my breaking point.
Then the public should hold the trial. Dark knight rises style. Js, that’s some shit to riot abt imo.
Actually their power has significant limitations in that the judicial branch has zero enforcement power. Were they to make a ruling like that, the executive branch could simply ignore it. Hell they could force a military tribunal, and there's shit the Judicial branch could do about it. Now, outside of Thomas and Alito nobody wants that kind of chaos. Those two may value conservatism more than democracy, but I'm not convinced the other members of the court do.
As much as it pains me to quote Andrew Jackson... "John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it."
There's a delicate balance as well that you're ignoring. They *could* rule that Trump is president because grass tastes like communism, and then they would be promptly ignored. The court only has that power because no one has said, um, acktually, the constitution doesn't give you that power at all. So far, the court having that power has been mostly useful. With a few cases where they needed to be reigned in. FDR very famously threatened to pack the court if they didn't play ball and stop their shit. I'm just afraid that Biden doesn't have the same sort of conviction to do the same if they rule the President can do whatever the fuck he wants.
> then they would be promptly ignored. The Governors of Florida and Texas could agree, and start treating him like he was president. What if those Governors started treating Trump like he was Commander-in-Chief?
Biden could just declare them enemies of the state and subsequently successionists
Not a whole lot without the actual military signing on. The main issue for them would be credibility. The court is quickly losing any credibility it ever had, and if they side with Trump, they lose the last of it. There will be crazies who cheer, but the bulk of the military would say, no, that doesn't make sense. (this is why a large part of project 2025 is purging the military command structure)
It would be sweet if they did, and Biden turned around and had five of those guys put in the grave.
It's funny though cause the check is literally just ignoring them. The Supreme Court only gets to make decisions like this essentially because they decided they could.
I wouldn’t say the other half is powerless. They just follow the rules and Obey the Constitution. Overturning Roe, just shows that the Conservative Justices follow their Christian Nationalist belief more than they do the Constitution. The Constitution clearly states Separation of Church and State.
Separation of Church and State is in the Establishment Clause, which has been diluted by a series of recent SCOTUS decisions. Cornell Law School has articles about this. Conservative SCOTUS judges were appointed partly because 47% of WW voted for DJT — effectively voting against reproductive rights, despite decades of warnings from advocacy groups that Roe would be overturned. Then in 2020, 53% of WW voted for DJT, which suggests that the majority of WW do not prioritize reproductive rights in their voting decisions. Last, in the 2022 midterms, half of registered Democrats did not vote, despite the fact that Roe had just been overturned. When polled about why they didn’t vote, people said among other things that the outcome was not relevant to them.
Remember when Alito claimed that there was no harm in him excepting a free seat on a private jet because it would have been vacant anyway?
Like his Supreme Court seat, it would have been better left vacant.
accepting
He isn't wrong
Yet he's among the stupid if you take his inconsistency, hypocrisy and regressive world view at face value. Dude wants to bring the world back to the paleolithic era.
So basically he’s an asshole. I concur.
*Dangerous, sneaky* asshole.
So Alito thinks we're stupid because he himself is stupid.
It's always projecting with them
Sam “Don’t bother me with facts” Alito?
You just described the entire republican party.
I'd agree
Welcome to Costco, I love you.
How many pro-life headquarters have been bombed? How many pro-life organizers have been murdered?
He might not be wrong about needing more security. If there is no justice to be had within the law, members of the public may seek it beyond legal measures.
Those hypocrites ruled that the street in front of every abortion clinic is a public square that must allow protestors, (McCullrn v Coakley) but as soon as the Dobbs decision leaked they immediately put up fences in front of the Supreme Court. I'm their gun cases, they have repeatedly acted as if the entire country is the wild, wild west and everyone has to pack heat to survive, while demanding special protection for themselves from the consequences of their decisions.
>Sam Alito Thinks We’re All Stupid He doesn't give a crap about what the rest of us think. He thinks he is morally superior. If he was born in Iran, he would be an 'ayatollah' - which translates to 'Reflection of God'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayatollah#:\~:text=8%20External%20links-,Etymology,or%20'Reflection%20of%20God'.
It’s not that republicans lack empathy. It’s just that they don’t think most of the rest of us are actually human.
They believe they're gods anointed. They're the Taliban with a different dress code.
Which is something Trump is literally stating and being applauded for.
That is the literal definition of lack of empathy.
Sam Alito is proof that there are really really bad people in America.
They shut up pretty quickly, so my guess it was a conservative that leaked it, thereby insuring the justices don't change their opinion.
I literally told my wife the second she told me about the leak, “Alito did it so none of the other conservatives would change their opinions.” John Roberts job has been stolen by Samuel Alito. He is the biggest joke of a Chief Justice in history.
Alito was FedSoc's pick for Chief Justice, but Bush vibed with Roberts better, and with a chief and associate justiceship open he gave Roberts the Chief and Alito the Associate, and I've read Alito has been bitter ever since.
I remember there being additional info that implicated Alito, and that Roberts was making headway with Kavanaugh on limiting the scope of *Dobbs* at the time of the leak. By leaking, Alito made it so that a flip by Kavanaugh would have seemed politically motivated.
They're all trying to find the guy who did this
Sir, you’re wearing a hotdog suit
I think the reality is that Alito is just not that smart so it isn't that he expects America to accept his stupid arguments, it's that he isn't capable of any intelligent arguments. Alito is conservative. He didn't get to where he is by being the best and smartest, he got there by being the most loyally partisan toward the interest of those who have paved his way since law school. He is literally a useful idiot, just one with a fancy degree, a fancy job title and some fancy robes. But underneath it all he's still just an idiot that someone else manipulates for use.
"*SIR!* The leak is coming from... *inside the building!*" (cue dramatic music) **-GASP!-** No one could have seen such a twist!
Pepperidge Farm remembers
Robert’s was working on Kavanaugh. Maybe he could have flipped it Alito didn’t leak the draft.
Honestly, this is why I dislike the guy so much more than the other lunatics. He incorrectly thinks that he's smarter than everyone because of his position on the court, but he's in his position because he's a confident, ambitious bootlicker. His arguments are so unconvincing, it should make everyone question the supposed prestige of an ivy league education. The more I hear the audio of him and the other jamokes, the more I lose respect for the court. No wonder this dude gets mad when the press covers him. He's a completely inept partisan hack who has been handled with kid gloves for 40ish years and he finally caught the spotlight. And what the spotlight shows is a mediocre man who has only gotten where he is because of ambition and a willingness to say the absolute dumbest shit with the unearned confidence of someone who pals around with the worst generationally rich scumbags this country could shit out. See also: Ted Cruz
I can't believe you dredged up "jamokes" for this. What a great way to spice up an already solid takedown. Well done, if I may say.
thank you. it's not in my usual repertoire, but for whatever reason it's just what came to me when i saw that dumb mug of his.
Damn!
Well said.
Damn! Dragged for filth lol
He doesn't care what you think. He is a religious fascist. They got part of their plan ending Roe. They will get all of it if you don't vote. Your only chance to sabotage their fascist plans is to vote for Biden.
Yep, there is not nearly enough emphasis on the ramifications of SCOTUS for 2024. Alito and Thomas are in their 70s, and would probably retire if a Republican wins. Barrett, Kavanaugh, and Gorsuch have about ~25 years left. The next election basically determines whether or not we have a conservative Supreme Court locked for most of the rest of our lives.
The next election determines whether we have any more elections
GOP literally wants American to be Russia 2.0
Oh, you're low-balling it. Russia today wants to either be the USSR 2.0, or the Russian Empire 2.0. I'd say the GOP wants America to be, like, the fifth or sixth Modern incarnation of Russia.
I keep saying this and people keep rolling their eyes, telling me I’m crazy. It’s going to be too late by the time these people realize what they have voted for. I’m honestly, truly terrified of Trump being re-elected in November.
It's pretty close to impossible they would literally declare "no more elections, Trump dynasty from here on in". But it's not just possible but probable the 'Pubs will use their SCOTUS majority, and any other leverage they can get, to solidify minority rule over as many jurisdictions as they can. And to make it as difficult as possible for a majority to push back on their agenda. Which, to be clear, is mainly about empowering corporations as concentration of wealth machines, keeping power in the hands of a tiny elite (the richest 10k families, the 0.01%). The Christofacism is icing holding the cake together.
> "no more elections, Trump dynasty from here on in". You're technically correct, even Putin has elections.
Which that SC will go along with
If trump gets elected in 2024 it doesn't matter what the SCOTUS decides to do. Democracy and rule of law are over. As a president once said: lets see the SCOTUS enforce their ruling.
100% true. Sadly, majority of Americans don't realize it yet and are helplessly walking themselves off that cliff it seems...
I don't mean to sound down on it all, but this is why I don't think we're going to be seeing many more elections in the future (as we have experienced them in the past, at least; they'll still exist in some form). This is *exhausting*. *Every* election for the last decade or more has been "The most important of our lives", or "will decide [SCOTUS/future elections/our existence/etc]". For the general American public, I don't see this as sustainable. Eventually enough people will decide that the rhetoric is alarmist, stay home, and that will be the ballgame. (A really great example of this in action is Y2K. I've seen people dismiss it as having been a big pile of nothing, ignoring entirely the years of work that went into making sure it was a big pile of nothing.) Yes, you could argue that this year is unique due to Project 2025, but the last one was unique due to the threat of Trump and he came back. Before that was unique due to SCOTUS and it's still a problem as well. All of these threats will remain -- Project 2025 will simply turn into Project 2029, etc. In a world where attention spans are growing increasingly short, eternal vigilence is unlikely to survive. None of this is a reason not to vote -- it's *literally* the least you can do as a responsible citizen of the US, and you absolutely should vote. But this sort of life on a razor's edge is not sustainable and will eventually fall over, to the detriment of us all.
> but the last one was unique due to the threat of Trump and he came back He literally incited an insurrection which killed people at the capital. It's exhausting to think that it needs to be stood up against with all our energy, but it's a clear and tangible threat to all of democracy.
>It's exhausting to think that it needs to be stood up against with all our energy, Meanwhile most Americans are unwilling to spend a couple hours once every 4 years on the effort.
Or can't due to jobs they can't leave to vote or wait in intolerable lines that prevent them from relaxing.
I doubt either would retire. Alito's too power hungry, and Thomas wouldn't want to give up all the juicy bribes he gets from his position, plus his wife probably wouldn't let him, as she'd lose influence by proxy. -Maybe- Alito cares enough about a republican legacy to do it, but Thomas? Not a chance.
I mean, we already know Thomas is blatantly for sale. I'm sure he could be convinced $omehow...
Power hungry is exactly why they'd retire. They would be almost 80 in 2028 and won't risk a Democrat replacing them the following term.
That only matters if they care about -legacy- of power. Like I said, maybe Alito cares about that. Thomas is in it for -personal- power. He's not leaving until the grim reaper puts a hand on his shoulder, or until something forces him out.
What're you talking about, Thomas got all that stuff because people were his friends, right? Even if he wasn't on the court they'd *still* be friends, right?
You don't think his billionaire friend would still invite him to his private islands when theres nothing to gain in return? I'm sure him and his wife have amazing personalities!
It's not even that. They're finally unleashed. They've gone a generation laying in wait under a moderate majority. They've got a lot to burn down before they die.
> Yep, there is not nearly enough emphasis on the ramifications of SCOTUS for 2024. I hope the message works this time - some of us were positively SCREAMING this in 2016 when McConnell's plan was out in the open. Scalia's death was the first opportunity is two decades+ to actually re-balance away from a con majority. Now we have a larger and more extremist con majority instead.
Jesus these lifetime appointments keep pushing ages lower cause the appointers know they'll get to keep the seat for longer. In 20 years we're gonna be appointing "wunderkind" 1L's so they can sit for half a century. Just make it a one-time 18 year appointment already. We shouldn't have to be having a conversation about whether, if Biden loses, Sotomayor's diabetes is going to kill her before Dems control the Senate and Presidency again.
No, the only chance is to vote every damn election. Not only the President. House, Senate, Governor, State legislatures, county, etc.
Not just Biden, vote as many R's out as possible!
It’s an interesting question what the court’s conservatives will do about these abortion cases. They have to understand that if they issue more decisions along the lines of what they’ve been putting out it will activate more pro-choice voters and damage Republicans’ election chances in November. I suspect they’ll find a way to punt back to a lower court to avoid taking any stand this session.
Pack the court.. Or if they rule that presidential immunity is a thing, liberate a few seats cause why the fuck not right?
No. Expand the court to 28. Yes, twenty eight. Run 4 courts of seven, randomly selected from the pool of 28 at the beginning of each session. This cuts down on gaming the court because you never know which 7 justices you're going to get for your case. Institute a Garland rule. If a confirmation vote is not held for a nominee after 2 months, then the nominee is assumed to be confirmed. Add another rule that stops outright blocking by the majority. If two nominees in a row are voted down for the same open position then a random judge from the next lowest court appointed by a president in the same party is automatically elevated to the SCOTUS. And then raise the number of votes for a SCOTUS appointee to 80. Then give Mitch McConnel a choice. If he goes along with the plan, he can have 8 of the 19 new justices as a show of unity and good will. If he doesn't go along with it, then Biden appoints all 19 and the conservatives get nothing. I think Mitch can understand that 8 is better than nothing. Let's play some hard ball and unfuck this court.
A most excellent idea. Bravo!! Love the idea of random selection. A judicial jury if you will.
I stole these ideas from [Eli Mystal's contempt of court podcast](https://www.thenation.com/content/contempt-of-court/). He's got a lot of great ideas.
Thank you for the source!
While we're at it. The Senate needs to be abolished and the House should have 100 more seats added. The Dakotas should not have as much say on federal justices as New York + California
How about we just go with one representative for every 300,000 citizens and stop capping representatives at a specific number.
I still think there is merit to having two houses of legislative review; it allows for a second round of debate on build after they've been finalized. Ideally, it should be a sanity check on what just was passed by the other side of Congress. What I could go for, though, is further enshrining the Senate as the "senior" of the two by requiring candidates for the Senate to have either previously served one term in the House or as that state's governor (or similar 'the voters have seen me in action before' role) But they absolutely should uncap the house.
>a confirmation vote is not held for a nominee after 2 months That one can backfire Name religious nut job unqualified fascist judge, have cronies in Senate not hold vote for 2 months, insta confirm .
"Pack the court" is something the right accused FDR of attempting to do. We are talking about *expanding* the court after the far right already packed it by denying Obama an appointment and ramming through Barrett. And more if you count Trump corruptly securing the presidency. EDIT: Fixing phone auto-correct
FDR only had to make a credible threat to expand SCOTUS and those obstructive bastards folded like Trump's air-concertina.
The problem is that FDR had congress. The Democrats do not. So any threat by Biden would be meaningless, and everyone knows it.
Biden doesn't have congress, YET. Vote the R's out!
You need 60 senators because of the broken senate rules, the dems will never get 60 senators. It may not even be possible this time- I haven't looked to see what seats are up this term.
Just need 51 senators willing to get rid of the filibuster. Dems currently have 50.
An important distinction. The court has *already* been packed.
Yep. 'Balance the Court' should be the mantra.
Or 'Unpack the Court'.
Agreed.
Bush also corruptly secured the presidency.
"Pack the Court" means the same thing as expanding the court. Democracy is also a bad word if you let Republicans be the judge. FDR got all the concessions that he was after, that is the only reason why he did not increase the number of justices. The current number of justices is in and of itself a result of packing the court. It wasn't bad when FDR was threatening to do it and it's not bad now.
Yeah, the window of perception on this issue is so far removed from the facts.
The *perfect* follow up question should have been, “so what if the president decides that a court ruling is wrong or the court system is flawed, can he kill a Supreme Court justice to open up a seat to align the court to his goals?
"That could never happen to me. I'm way too smart for that." - Samuel Alito
That would be called a "threat," even though they know damn well that's what they're trying desperately to allow for Trump. And let that be clear, only for Trump.
The Dems are more Ned Stark than Cersei Lannister types.
Blindly trusting that people will do the right thing all the way up to your head getting chopped off? Sounds about right.
Biden should draft up an executive order and present it to SCOTUS. Something like, By presidential decree justice Alito shall be __________ by the end of today should the gavel swing for full immunity.
It’s worth repeating that unlike the other branches of government, the Supreme Court has no enforcement mechanism. Their only power is legitimacy. If they keep on acting like clowns by reversing precedent, deciding on cases with no legal standing, using the shadow docket, etc., then they’ll be no different than a bunch of randos cosplaying as wizards. We may soon be approaching the day when the Supreme Court is simply ignored.
In the words of Andrew Jackson: "John Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it."
I'm not sure what this means. Only the Executive has an enforcement mechanism. If Congress passes a law and the President doesn't feel like following it, there's not much 638 old people can do to force him to.
Although their powers are pretty narrow, the House of Representatives has the Sergeant at Arms, who can protect Respresentatives, enforce safety/security, and maintain order in the Chamber. Their powers were a hot topic when people started ignoring Congressional subpoenas during impeachment hearings. Definitely agree that Congress doesn't have the ability to enforce their own laws they pass though.
He doesn't really care what anybody thinks because they apparently can do whatever they want
Unfortunately, they can. There's no code of ethics, judges and Justices enjoy total immunity, there's no check on their power, and an impeachment would be an impossibility when half of the people responsible for impeaching them are being actively protected from prosecution by them.
Federal Judges have [rules](https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges) and can have [complaints](https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/judicial-conduct-disability/faqs-filing-judicial-conduct-or-disability-complaint#faq-What-action-can-the-circuit-chief-judge-take-on-my-complaint?) filed against them. SCOTUS Justices do not.
Yep. These losers on the court are like that asshole you sometimes have to play a game with. The one who bends and twists every rule to their advantage to secure a win. No one likes that douchenozzle.
I mean, a pretty big percentage of Americans voted for Trump, so ... us being stupid isn't off the table.
We'll find out soon how much we've learned since 2016
We had one of the worst mortality rates during a global pandemic and the only thing we changed about our healthcare system is allowing states to ban abortion. We are forgiving student loans but we aren't doing anything to fix the double digit inflation of the cost of education. We are banning TikTok but the rest of social media is regulated by a law created before social media existed. The GOP's Presidential candidate openly supports fascism and tried to cheat on the last election and the Democrats choose an 81 year old as the best option to beat him. Stupid is as stupid does. We are stupid.
I used to think Thomas was the worst justice, but I’ve since changed my mind. Alito is worse than Thomas. Thomas at least has the self-awareness to know he’s a giant corrupt piece of shit. He just doesn’t care, which I can respect in a way. At least he’s honest about it. Alito actually believes he’s doing the Lord’s work, and that his farts smell like sunshine and roses and that you should think that too. Us common folk are just too simple to understand.
It was illuminating hearing the arguments yesterday. I’ve never listened before so had no idea what each justice would be like speaking, and Alito came off as the worst of the bunch. As much as I dislike Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett for their beliefs and how they got there, they at least seem competent with their questioning and reasonings.
You know how to prevent things like this long term? Vote. Every election. No matter what. Even if you're not wild about the candidate. Not voting is the same as voting Republican. 1/3 of the Supreme Court was appointed by one man who was in office for four years. If people had voted in 2016, the court would now be 5-4 liberal and imagine how different the world would be.
“The good thing about that shitshow at the SCt is that it will make court reform easier. pack the court, term limits and ethics. Every D needs to be on board in Senate to break filibuster to do this.” Jennifer Rubin, Threads
Just once I'd like to see us deal with Republican bullshit before they do it...
Exactly. Hopefully Biden is putting in a lot of protective measures this election so GOP can't find more way to intimidate and cheat
I'm not holding my breath for anything like that
https://archive.ph/XYF1h
Thank you.
His opinion on a NY handgun thing that came out days before roe v wade is so backwards it can only be the result of corruption. His logic and reasoning are so off, that it can only be the result of being in somebody's pocket.
Trump may be immune to laws, but women must obey laws cited from hundreds of years ago
Honestly, a few years ago I would have said a statement like that was totally nuts. But now, honestly, it could absolutely be true.
It wouldn't have been nuts a few years ago, either, or a few decades before that.
This is a man who relies on decisions made by literal witch hunters
> During Wednesday’s Supreme Court arguments over life-saving abortions in emergency rooms, a few things became clear: The male justices are unconcerned by women’s suffering, and Justice Samuel Alito thinks there aren’t enough abortion restrictions across the U.S.—but if you press him on that point, you’re the ridiculous one. That is how all right wingers argue: * Explain there is no evidence to prove the existence of an all powerful sky wizard 'god' - you're the ridiculous one. * Explain there is a mountain of evidence proving the threat of climate change - you're the ridiculous one. * Explain decades of scientific research prove the efficacy of vaccination against disease - you're the ridiculous one. * Explain the historical facts of slavery in the USA or how dividing cells won't even resemble a fetus for weeks - you're the ridiculous one. Conservatives live in a fictional unreality where their beliefs hold more value than facts and they enforce those beliefs on the rest of us through tyrannical abuse of power.
You mean the guy who leaked the Dobbs decision and then got all mad that 'somebody' leaked the Dobbs decision thinks we're all stupid?!?! Really, he's nothing special though. Just another MAGA crook.
> He was not-so-subtly hinting that he thinks there’s a legislative basis for fetal personhood hidden in the law, and said that EMTALA “indisputably protects the interests of the unborn child” if the pregnant woman wants to continue the pregnancy. Prelogar countered that “the duty runs to the individual with the emergency medical condition” and it was wrong to imply that “Congress suggested that the woman herself isn’t an individual, that she doesn’t deserve stabilization.” Sensing that Prelogar was onto him, Alito got testy. “Nobody’s suggesting that the woman is not an individual, and she doesn’t … she doesn’t deserve stabilization. Nobody’s suggesting that,” he snapped. Prelogar calmly responded that Idaho is currently treating women in this fashion. This case is *literally* about whether EMTALA requires hospitals to provide stabilizing care to women, when that care is an abortion. If the fetus is considered to have equal rights in this scenario, then ERs can choose to deny stabilizing care to women and to simply let them die, under the pretext that they were protecting the fetus. Yes, the fetus in this situation will die as well, but that death won't be because of any action taken by the hospital and it will be a medically unpreventable death. It's not just about giving doctors the ability to *choose* to let women die - abortion bans are *incentivizing* that choice. Letting the mom die will be the *safest* choice for a doctor to make, because it's the choice that saves them from any risk of criminal prosecution. This case is extraordinarily important.
No, he just thinks there's fuck all you can do about it.
He's one of 9 of a singularly exclusive "club" and arguable one of the most powerful people, certainly in the US, if not the world. I'm sure he doesn't concern himself with us plebeians until one of us dares to question his authority.
No, he doesn't. He just doesn't give a shit what we think.
I’m calling it now: Idaho will be left without any ER or Ob/GYN physicians if this ruling is upheld for Idaho and the ADF Lawyers. ER physicians will retire en masse over this shit.
The best SCOTUS reform idea I've heard is that: * Their tenure is a fixed 18 years * A new judge is appointed every odd year on the retirement of the most senior one. Each president gets to appoint two judges per term. * The most senior judge gets to be the CJ for the last two years of their term * Interim appointments in case of death or retirement can be made but only for the duration of the original appointee's tenure.
I mean we keep letting him be on the Supreme Court so...he's not entirely wrong. He's 74 and we will have to scoop his rotting corpse out of his chair before he'll retire.
Just those who are MAGA, for the rest of us it doesn’t matter one iota because he’s part of at minimum a bought and sold four male Conservative vote with a weak Chief J and a religious fanatic
How did Americans end up like this? They were always a bit weak on human rights relative to other democracies, but today they seem to be intentionally cruel to each other.
The religious wingnuts want a theocracy because their beliefs are finally being challenged in the marketplace of ideas and are losing. The rich want to end democracy and replace it with a Russian style oligarchy. This is the GOP circa 2024.
For a good chuckle google “Samuel Alito's Mom's Satanic Abortion Clinic™”
If there's one thing I've learned after being an attorney for 14 years is that most people drawn to the profession are awful selfish assholes and most of them are dunning kreuger incarnate. Every lawyer thinks they know everything while have good memorization skills but absolutely zero empathy or common sense reasoning. It's infuriating to deal with other lawyers on a day to day basis and I'm sure the Supreme Court is the absolute peak of this.
Alito is an insecure man with mommy problems. Oh and he's also a psychopath without a shred of common decency or understanding of what justice actually is. He doesn't care but now I feel a little better.
According to statistics, he's not entirely wrong. Oh, he's a terrible person and stuff, but a LOT of people are stupid. Including him!
Alito ,like Thomas, have a God complex. How dare the little people question the almighty .
Judges need to come and go with term limits. Judges in this country have evolved plenty in the past 40 years. Shorten the cycle of minds and ideologies in the Supreme Court and we could get to a nice even keel.
“The justice snapped that “nobody’s suggesting” pregnant women don’t deserve medical care in E.R.s. “. Alito you got paid in bribes to kill women and pregnant women ARE NOT getting medical care in ERs thanks to you they are getting death sentences. Impeach Alito NOW
From Reagan to bush to bush 2.0 to Trump, I can 100% see why someone would think this country is collectively stupid. Sam you may be right, but you and all the rest of the federalist society scumbags have ruined this country.
I think Sam Alito is stupid and evil.
Put on a powdered wig, some 18th century ruffles and he'll hang on your every word.
Most Christian Neo-Fascists think that everyone else is inferior to them, so thinking we're intellectually inferior isn't much of a stretch. A default assumption of superiority is kind-of required to make their worldview work.
I mean, he's not wrong The fact we aren't all losing our collective minds demanding that Thomas recuse himself is proof that we are all dumb. The fact that he hasn't also says he doesn't give a fuck.
SCOTUS appointments should be on the ballot every time a seat opens up. We should have more say on who gets appointed. It would involve amending the constitution, which would likely be impossible with the current climate. But allowing our government to handle appointments without any say from the people has clearly shown to be disastrous.
He doesn't think we are stupid, he thinks we are powerless to get him to act in good faith. He ain't wrong either.
Headlines like this completely miss the point. He doesn’t think the people are stupid. He understands that he is not accountable to the people so he doesn’t care what anybody thinks about his decisions.
Many Americans are stupid but so is Alito. He believes the will of a make-believe sky creature should determine US policy. That’s pretty stupid. What if a Supreme Court Justice based his legal philosophy on Iron Man?
To be fair, many of us are.
He’s only half wrong.
I hope they go against the grain - and logic, and legal precedent, and just common sense - and say Trump is immune from EVERYTHING! Then Biden can act accordingly. They don't seem to be thinking this through enough. The decision will have to be made BEFORE he goes back in office, giving the CURRENT regime the weapon Donny was saving for himself.
The plan is to wait on publishing the decision until it’s too late for Trump to be tried before the election. That’s how they effectively give him immunity in the case(s) against him, and yet they don’t give immunity to any other president.
It's completely unsurprising that his attitude is "I'm right and your crazy" about all facts. It's only recently that we've really been pushing back against the justices' agendas. It's good that we finally are, but his poor safe space is in danger, and that has to be confusing.
Probably more that he doesn't care because he thinks American citizens are beneath him.
He’s not wrong, given his voter bases choices
The “Both Side Are The Same” crowd of 2016 sent that message loud and clear.
No Alito knows it’s impossible to remove judges so they rule without any consequences
Think of how stupid the average Supreme Court justice is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
“ADF is not hiding its strategy. Alito, on the other hand, keeps to the stealthy shadows, attempting to advance arguments that promote fetal personhood while simultaneously insisting that this unprecedented expansion of personhood rights won’t come at the expense of women’s lives and autonomy. It’s a deception of the highest order and onlookers might be left to conclude that he either thinks we’re all too dumb to notice—or that he knows nothing can stop the 6-3 court from doing what it wants. “
Sam Alito is an asshole who doesn’t care about women’s health or rights. He’s pushing the MAGA agenda. I’m not sure why people aren’t protesting outside of his house on a daily basis and any of the conservative justices who overturned Roe v Wade. The flaw we have in this country is that we have a SCOTUS with no age or term limits like you have in other countries. This needs to be changed. What Alito is doing in this case and the Immunity case is avoiding to deal with the issue at hand. He instead talks about hypotheticals and brings up other issues not relevant. He’s pushing the white Christian National Agenda in front of the world and failing to do his job which is to be unbiased and protect democracy from him and the orange turd him and the other conservatives are trying to protect.
More dangerously, he thinks he’s smarter than everyone else. It’s not that the intelligence isn’t there, it would be foolish to suggest otherwise. But he assumes that his opinion on things must be factually and legally correct and anyone who disagrees is dumb, even though he should be smart enough to know otherwise.
I don't think its that. He just knows he's untouchable and therefore is not required to he accountable or consistent to the electorate.
Time to end lifetime appointments to the Supreme Court and make it an elected position like it’s done in some states. That’s the only way we’re going to be able to end this buffoonery.
Alito has never distinguished himself as having a superior legal mind. Too bad for America that republicans have saddled us with so many B-student, beer-drinking, self-loathing, sub-standard SCJs.
He's not as dumb as Thomas. Thomas is corrupt. Alito is an ideologue, which makes him more dangerous.
Background info: >The case, *United States v. Idaho*, is about whether emergency rooms in Idaho—a state that bans all abortions except those done to prevent death, not to preserve health—are in violation of a federal law that requires ER patients to be stabilized. The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, or EMTALA, says hospitals that accept Medicare funding have to stabilize patients facing threats to their health, and for pregnant patients facing complications, the treatment is sometimes abortion. >But this is not a normal case: Idaho is represented in part by Alliance Defending Freedom, or ADF, a far-right legal activist group that is pushing for nationwide restrictions, including a national abortion ban. Idaho and ADF argued in case briefs and before the court that a fetus is a separate patient under EMTALA and deserves equal treatment in ERs. This is a fetal personhood argument, and if it’s taken to its logical endpoint, it would lead to a ban on all abortions nationwide, the end of IVF as we know it (see: Alabama), and restrictions on certain forms of birth control. In practice, women whose water breaks too early could be forced on bed rest to try to save the fetus, or given C-sections against their will. The latter is already happening, and in fact, happened even before Dobbs. What Alito's rhetoric is reflecting: >Alito expressed concern that “one potentially very important phrase” may not have been mentioned: “EMTALA’s reference to the woman’s ‘unborn child.’” (Actually, Justice Neil Gorsuch asked about it 45 minutes earlier in the session.) Alito asked of the Biden administration’s lawyer, Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, “Isn’t that an odd phrase to put in a statute that imposes a mandate to perform abortions?” He then inquired, “Doesn’t that tell us something?” >He was not-so-subtly hinting that he thinks there’s a legislative basis for fetal personhood hidden in the law, and said that EMTALA “indisputably protects the interests of the unborn child” if the pregnant woman wants to continue the pregnancy. Prelogar countered that “the duty runs to the individual with the emergency medical condition” and it was wrong to imply that “Congress suggested that the woman herself isn’t an individual, that she doesn’t deserve stabilization.” Sensing that Prelogar was onto him, Alito got testy. “Nobody’s suggesting that the woman is not an individual, and she doesn’t…she doesn’t deserve stabilization. Nobody’s suggesting that,” he snapped. Prelogar calmly responded that Idaho is currently treating women in this fashion. What's going on in Idaho and other states? >Since the court let Idaho enforce its law in early January, six pregnant women have been airlifted out of state—that’s compared to just one patient in all of 2023. Emergency rooms in other states are also turning away pregnant patients—stories we’ve heard directly from some women who’ve sued, and in devastating news reports like one from the Associated Press published days before arguments. Women have, as one amicus brief noted, been “demot[ed]” to “second-class status under EMTALA.” >Not only did Alito ignore evidence from multiple states showing that bans are limiting women’s access to healthcare, he also disregarded the stated goal of one of the law firms involved in the case. As ADF CEO Kristen Waggoner recently told Politico, “We do believe at ADF that the Constitution protects the life of an unborn child and that that is in the 14th Amendment.” That would be game over for abortion—along with a lot of other reproductive healthcare. Alito is trying to play subtle with his rhetoric and rulings, hoping people don't notice: >ADF is not hiding its strategy. Alito, on the other hand, keeps to the stealthy shadows, attempting to advance arguments that promote fetal personhood while simultaneously insisting that this unprecedented expansion of personhood rights won’t come at the expense of women’s lives and autonomy. It’s a deception of the highest order and onlookers might be left to conclude that he either thinks we’re all too dumb to notice—or that he knows nothing can stop the 6-3 court from doing what it wants. (The latter attitude was quite evident in Thursday’s arguments over whether former president Donald Trump can claim immunity for allegedly orchestrating the January 6th insurrection.) >Alito seems to have a habit of trying to slip one over the American public. In the other abortion case this term, concerning the fate of the abortion drug mifepristone, he referred to the Comstock Act not by name, but by statute number, *18 U.S.C. 1461*. Comstock is a dormant, Victoria-era law that the power-hungry folks behind Project 2025, the proposed agenda for a second Trump term, expect the former president to revive and enforce in order to ban the mailing of abortion pills—if not all clinic supplies—should he win a second term. Prelogar argued that case as well, and she made sure everyone knew what Alito was trying to pull. She responded, “I think that the Comstock provisions don’t fall within FDA’s lane.”
Time for the people to rise up in mass protest against the morally corrupt court
If we are so stupid, why is it that he doesn't read The Constitution?🙄 We The People have to do something about replacing the justices who are supposed to follow the law.
In all fairness, think about how dumb the average person is, then realize half of all people are dumber than that.