a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment
am_Unition  ·  364 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Colorado Supreme Court bans trump from ballot under insurrection clause

    1)

At least we can agree that it's increasingly unclear what FS wants anymore. Do you really think that as this boils down to Trump vs. Biden that FS and SCOTUS will be able to resist the urge to assist Trump, "principles" be damned?

    2)

A "fig leaf" "states' rights" likening is hella appropriate here. Yes, I did love that the Colorado ruling invokes Gorsuch's own verbiage (potentially against him) in their decision, but we're past the point of expecting ideological consistency from SCOTUS, which of course brings us back to

    3) ...historic ebb in legitimacy... ...the Supreme Court better hope there's never another election because court packing becomes an inevitability...

Five justices have already behaved like they expect zero accountability for the GOP at the ballot box with the repeal of Roe. I think most people even dabbling in politics believe, on some level, that if Trump wins in 2024, that's probably the last legit election we'll ever have, at least for POTUS. And spencerflem is right; Joe Biden and establishment Dems are perpetually stuck in the 1980's or '90's, bound by relatively higher norms and decency. Biden won't even threaten to consider packing the court. Dems apparently still haven't figured out that it doesn't matter what they do or say, they'll be tarred and feathered in right-wing media regardless of reality. Like LOL, Schumer two days ago was like "Yes, Trump's 'poisoning the blood' rhetoric is troublesome, but we have plenty of problems on this side of the aisle, too", and it's just like... Haven't you run out of feet to shoot yourself in?? But I digress.

Can you imagine if SCOTUS reinstates Trump on the Colorado ballot under a ruling declaring that he did not commit insurrection, and then Jack Smith's case finds him guilty of insurrection shortly before the election? SCOTUS will probably go with the "he's not an officer of the U.S. as defined in the constitution" bullshit, as a cop-out, but, fuck, even then, we're really, really in for it this next election.

BTW, entirely predictable dumbfuck Dan Patrick has already threatened retaliation. As if we needed another reminder here that the TX Supremes are nine republicans. Obviously this is pure bluster on Patrick's part, but 40% of the country will be delighted at the idea. That 40% is the underlying problem fueling all of this nonsense. Thanks, Rupert.