President Joe Biden promised Black voters Wednesday that he would appoint progressives to the US Supreme Court if elected to a second term, suggesting he expects vacancies on the high court over the next four years.
“The next president, they’re going to be able to appoint a couple justices, and I’ll be damned — if in fact we’re able to change some of the justices when they retire and put in really progressive judges like we’ve always had, tell me that won’t change your life,” he said during a campaign rally in Philadelphia.
It was as explicit a warning as Biden could offer about the stakes of the upcoming election, and a clear reminder that some of the nine justices have entered their seventies.
Clarence Thomas is 75 and Samuel Alito is 74; both are conservative and appointed by Republican presidents. Sonia Sotomayor, a liberal who was nominated by President Barack Obama, turns 70 next month.
Even if you hate Biden because of Israeli support,
Trump said that "he (Trump) fully support's Israel's Gaza genocide."
Anything Biden can do, Trump can (and would) do worse.
Having been around awhile, it's so weird that people are trying to make the case that a republican presidency could be a good thing for... just about any country in the middle east. Not saying that any party is going to spend much time on it, but it's just a weird stretch.
Because people are that fucking gullible.
It's irrelevant what's happened or is happening unless it comes from timtok/Facebook/lemmy/reddit post.
Not voting for Biden is exactly what they want to achieve and people who haven't read past titles are their target.
Nobody thinks Trump will be good for the Middle East. They are just trying to pressure Biden to actually change his policy. The idea is he'll change course if he sees it's not popular and could threaten his election. I say publically it'll make a difference because I don't want Biden to support a genocide and it's the only tool I have, but I doubt it will. I'm sure they're all like me and live in a blue state, which means we're useless for the electoral college. He needs to try to get purple states.
I'm sure they're all like me and live in a blue state
And I'm sure that 70% of them are shills paid by the Kremlin to take down Biden so they can get Trump elected again.
I don't think it's even just the red/blue state issue. I haven't seen many in a prime voting demographic who care about this issue and the ones that do care are concerned in terms of wasting taxpayer money. The overlap between demographics who aren't statistically likely to vote anyways and people who are concerned about this issue is looking like it may be pretty damning.
The craziest thing to me are those further leftists threatening to abandon Biden and let Trump walk in.
I mean, they can complain and oppose the democrats all they want but they should also never ever forget that today’s GOP is just the latest incarnation of the leftist’s longtime fascist enemy. Keeping them from power is and always has been a top priority.
I think that the majority of those are either accelerationists and/or state/political actors. Accelerationists soundly believe that the ends justify the means and think, despite a clear lack of solid evidence (and contrary evidence ex. Spain), that making things worse will force people to act to make things better. Mass repression and genocide of LGBTQ+ and POC are acceptable losses to reach Utopia... despite that literally never being the outcome at any point in recorded human history.
I hate that this sounds so dumb but we now live in a world where the truth sounds stupid
Again, a vote for a giant douche or a turd sandwich.
People keep claiming this, but never actually specify how Trump could possibly be worse than full-on support for genocide. Biden is 100% for the genocide, he has proved this and has put zero restrictions or conditions on Israel's far-right regime.
What we're seeing in Gaza under Biden will be the exact same thing we see under Trump.
This is not the argument neolibs want to be making at this time.
No, you're just illustrating what I'm talking about. How, specifically, do you envision Donald Trump being worse on this genocide than no strings attached support that Biden has given?
This lesser of two evils shit isn't working because Biden is showing himself to just be literally out and out evil. You guys need to come to terms with what you're supporting here, it's time to acknowledge how far to the right you've had to go to be trying to scare people into voting for your candidate with "nuances of genocide".
I'm a single issue voter and my single issue is proportional representation - I'll be voting for Biden but if a major party candidate did genuinely advocate for voting reform they'd probably have me.
That would be a decent protest. Have all the frustrated D voters wear a clothespin on their nose when they go to vote for the lesser evil.
Could actually get more people off the couch. Frustrated progressive voters would want to increase the ratio of "nose plug voters" to more effectively send their message to Biden while also helping kick out the Republicans.
I really like this idea! If enough people did it the media would absolutely pick up on it and amplify it.
Of course that does put people in red states in danger as they're announcing to everyone who can see them who they're voting for. :(
Things can always be changed.
On the other hand, challenging worse hasn't gone well lately..
Spoken as a defeated Canadian who watched any hope of home ownership evaporate in the last 4 years.
I just want the GOP to get absolutely pummeled for once so we can move the overton window back in the right direction. No I don't like the dems. Yes I will vote for them every time as they represent the closest to what I want.
Not going to happen while they're still taking AIPAC money, that shit is toxic to actual turn-out for Dems at this point.
Voting dem still moves the overton window right. "Vote blue no matter who" rewards them time after time for sprinting right chasing voters that were never going to vote for him while becoming too right even for centrists
And theres only one party that has outlawed RCV in certain areas. We aren't getting RCV without 2 things:
-Primary moderates and elect progressive Democrats at every level we can -A Democratic supermajority in Congress
S Dakota, Idaho, Montana, Tennessee, and Florida have all banned RCV. Bunch of other GOP controlled statehouses have proposed bills to do the same.
I'm sure there are individual legislators in the Democratic party that have shot down RCV but its opposition is nowhere near that of the GOP.
BillyWitchDoctor.com more comfortable... with chicken
ARISE! ARISE CHICKEN!
Shh... He is legend...
RCV, Approval, and STAR my beloved
STAR, score, or approval! Not sure why people are obsessed with ranked, they must love curing ballots and being prevented from tallying districts individually?
100% would rather have ranked over FPTP, just to be clear. FPTP is toxic garbage.
Not sure why people are obsessed with ranked, they must love curing ballots and being prevented from tallying districts individually?
No need to be hostile to them. RCV is pedalled very hard, so naturally people who've heard about alternative voting systems will know it first.
Is there good videos on STAR or score like there is ranked or approval? I first heard about alternative voting systems from that one stick figure YouTube guy. Not sure if he's made any other election based videos I've missed or if other people have made equally good ones about other voting systems.
Yea, if RCV is all we can get I'm not going to let the perfect be the enemy of the good... and hopefully with RCV we could get better leadership... but it'd be wonderful if we could get off direct executive elections.
Because that's been going so great for the UK...
The UK has shitty FPTP like we have here but their government never deadlocks. The US government can fail in a very special way where the president can be reduced to only being able to veto legislation while trying not to be impeached and it's fucking dumb.
We need a government that's both representative and functional and there's a reason why modern nations have looked at directly elected executives and parliamentary system and vastly preferred the latter.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/...
In terms of which progressive candidates are running to beat incumbents that varies from state to state.
Fetterman kinda sucks now lol. But I don't know anything about if he's up for reelection or if someone worse is running, so I shouldn't comment 😅
If he promises to let Bernie Sanders pick them then I bet he'd gain whole percentage points in polls.
Can Bernie be president on Wednesdays and Thursdays?
he has pickle ball on Thursdays
Wednesdays and Fridays then.
I'll take anyone who isn't a corporate careerist at this point. The people sitting on the supreme court shouldn't be expecting to leverage it to make an exhorbitant amount of money.
Yes, but he's also shown himself willing to say anything to get support and votes. He had a lot of big progressive talk during his campaign when he was against Sanders, but then dropped that facade pretty much within the first few months and started giving out corporate handjobs.
Actually progressive or “biden is the most progressive president in recent US history” progressive?
He's going to appoint Merrick Garland again.
"Just as soon as the court decides that the President is immune from prosecution, I expect there will be six vacancies soon after." wink
TBH, I think that's an excellent threat to get them off their asses on the Trump decision pending. Even if he doesn't mean to kill them, it would be a no-brainer for congress to impeach them given the lack of republican party cohesion over Trump candidacy.
I read this in the voice of the alien from omicron persei 8 on Futurama
It’s actually Lrrrr and his lovely wife Ndnd
The fact that Alito lives in a suburb near some random out of work actress and the worst his wife has experienced is unpleasant signs shows we are the most peaceful human beings as citizens regarding their politicians.
we are the most peaceful human beings as citizens regarding their politicians
And yet we have some of the most sadistically violent police. Curious.
He should pull an FDR and try to get the court expanded to 12.
13 makes the most sense. There are 13 circuits, why not 13 Supreme Court justices?
…and the district judges themselves elect/appoint their representatives to SCotUS. Get political appointees out of the top bench, I’ll take an unelected meritocracy over cronyism and patronage any day.
I like that Idea. It doesn't entirely solve the problem of political appointees since the lower court judges are themselves appointed, but it does provide a layer of abstraction to where the judge isn't directly beholden to a party, in theory.
Yeah agreed. I never quite understood FDRs thinking on putting an even number of people in the court. We have so many 5-4 decisions now an even court would be chaos.
Can’t they recuse or abstain from voting though?
They can, but as we can see from Thomas and Alito, they don't.
Yes. But that rarely happens (usually just because of health issues). There are very few decisions that have been made where all the members didn't weigh in. When even votes have happened the lower court ruling will stand as is. Which is particularly bad when you have places like the 5th circuit trying their best to fascism.
13 is a better number, it matches the number of Federal Appelate Courts.
If Democrats manage to take both houses of Congress and the Presidency, I would advocate for immediately passing a law to increase the size of the SC to 13, effective for the start of the SC's 2026 term.
Then, Democrats and Republicans should go to work to enact a Constitutional Amendment for term limits on the SC. Republicans would finally have incentive to do it quickly, or else Biden would name 4 young Liberals to the SC who will be there 40+ years without term limits.
Hey, some of us smart people can't do that basic math either 😭
(In my case, calculus and ADHD combined powers to make me useless with actual numbers, real and imaginary, lol)
Yes, that is better, but would require a Constitutional Amendment to formalize, otherwise a future Congress can just change it. Which is why you start with expansion, then force the Republicans to the table to discuss the amendment under a time limit.
If I'm not mistaken, Biden could add seats if he wanted to, so could any president. I think no one wants to do it because then the other party would add more as well.
The size of the SC is set through legislation, so a law would need to pass Congress, and the President would need to sign it. So one party can't do it unilaterally unless they control both houses of Congress and the Presidency.
I wish he would. The only thing stopping him, ironically, is his fear of appearing partisan (and angering “moderate” republicans, if they even exist anymore), despite the fact that that’s exactly what this would be attempting to remedy.
I’d love to be wrong, but he’ll never do it. He’s barely even willing to talk about the supreme court’s corruption and blatant bias. I think he’s allergic to that much institutional change.
He called Trump semi-fascist in 2022 and backed off since. Biden does not push the limits of any power he wields.
You'll note there has been an endless amount of arguments about Biden's limitations to his ability and power to effect change, but never that he is pushed up against those limits.
Biden was most popular when he was fighting for Green New Deal and BBB. But his inability to whip his party into voting for the platform the Democratic party ran on was disappointing and he has never recovered.
I hate that his pledge to be a one-term president was the deciding factor for me in 2020. I was so frustrated with the Clyburn maneuver to neutralize Bernie's momentum that I needed something that made me believe the goddamn reality of this 2024 ticket wouldn't come to be.
McConnell has already said he would step down from Senate leadership, so some other guy would get the task of impeding everything Biden does.
However, things are looking better than they used to that Democrats will at least be able to hold the Senate to a 50/50 split, and possibly also pick off Ted Cruz in Texas. Democrats who are not fond of Biden don't seem to be taking it out on their Senate candidates. There are several states where Biden is trailing, yet the incumbant Democratic Senator still has a good lead.
Democrats already have 51 seats (counting the independants). WV is a lost cause, but if they keep the seats they currently hold (including Arizona), that's how they get to the tie at 50.
You point out Ohio and Montana where holding that seat will be hard, but signs are pointing up.
Biden not causing many stiffies will have a negative impact on the number of those actually going to the polls though
Ted Cruz losing his senate seat would unironically be celebrated by every single person there. Republicans hate that guy. They appreciate his vote, but he is absolutely despised.
“Will no one rid me of these turbulent judges?”
While it's POSSIBLE there will be vacancies in the next presidential term, the two oldest, Thomas and Alito, will still be younger in 2028 than Biden is now.
So I wouldn't exactly hold my breath on Biden getting the picks.
Whoever serves from '28 to '32 will likely get to replace both Thomas and Alito, then the next two oldest are Roberts and Sotomayor.
According to Trump's lawyers, Biden could use Seal Team Six to ... create some vacancies.
Clearly never going to happen, but it's too silly of an actual legal argument to ignore.
This had better not be a “well, we waited to fill these until the election year so that we can use it to mobilize the base”.
One, because it’s terribly cynical and self serving.
Two, because it doesn’t work on progressives nearly as well as they think. It runs the risk of alienating voters because they don’t feel respected for 3.5 years out of 4.
I don't think it is (though Dems seem to pull that often). Supreme Court Justices seem to have a very hard time letting go of the power, even on the more progressive side (Notorious R.B.G. being the most recent example). There's basically no way to remove a supreme court justice, impeachment will pretty much never happen. I think it's more recognizing that multiple who are 75 years old in a stressful job and being targeted by the public more and more is likely to lead to at least one of them leaving, be it death or retirement.
Herod's Law
so now on top of not being that other he is saying he will be a better president in the next four years because he thinks people might die
he is really grasping at straws at this point
executive order abortion rights in, legalize cannabis, and raise the minimum wage a lot
that alone would guarantee him this next election no debates or speeches or anything else would be needed
Is executive order enough to raise the minimum wage?
I guess he could order all federal agencies will only work with companies that pay some new minimum.
Feels like abortion would get destroyed by the 5th circuit and the supreme court just like many of the other things they've tried to do
Unlike what most people think, executive orders aren't magic documents that lets the President legislate whatever they want on a whim. There are limits. They've grown a lot in scope over the decades, and if anything they need to be pulled back, but there are still limits.
I agree, and on paper you are correct. But also I have moved to the "it's the thought that counts" side of things. It seems to be more effective politicking these days to try and ram through something like an abortion EO and use the inevitable opposition (and legal?) pushback to say "see I'm fuckin trying over here" rather than to just stand there idly brandishing "plans" this is something the left needs to learn from the right. See the senate: Chuck Schumer should have started impeachment inquiries into Alito and Thomas yesterday, knowing full well they aren't actually going anywhere. It puts the issue in front of people.
I see what you're saying, but I'm also already foreseeing the next set of whiners saying "Biden knew it would fail, and he only did it to pretend to do something". Which I've seen with student loan forgiveness.
no he did some less than quarter ass measure for student loan forgiveness, asked for more votes/ funding, and then that was it same as with women's rights
and acted like he almost did as much as his god could do
atrophied is the same as actively supporting fascism with speeches, policies, and laws
It suggests that Republican SCOTUS judges might want to retire but they aren't under any obligation to do so in the next 4 years. Unless he's ready to pull the trigger on court reforms or he's got an assassin lined up this is just another empty promise.
"Whelp, I tried but we can't get the votes to confirm them"
Term limits please!
Actually vacancies are not required. There is no set limit.
On average since Washington, each Presidential term has had 2.1 SCOTUS appointments. It's not a bad expectation, statistically speaking. But it's just an average, since Biden only has one so far, and Trump got three.
averages, am I right (wheres my FUCKING .1?)
Progressives, conservatives. Whatever. Just give me someone with a moral compass and a spine.
So, progressives?
Always add more cooks to kitchen for better food, no that's not the saying...
Obviously, the problem with the SCOTUS is that there's too many of them. If we were to make John Roberts the singular all-powerful Supreme-ist justice, that would fix everything.
@lemmy.world
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
go to feed...
@lemmy.world
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
go to feed...
Biden's going to need everyone's help. Turn the Senate and the House super Blue. Even if you hate Biden because of Israeli support, vote for your Rep and Senator that can deal with this corruption. Add to the bench until the traitors Thomas and Alito become irrelevant. Revise the number of Senate and House seats.
save