• Jordan Lund@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s pretty clear you have no concept of how our system of government works.

    The Supreme Court is the top tier of the Judicial Branch, the 3rd “Separate but Equal” part of our government.

    You can’t just decide “Well, I don’t like you, I don’t have to do what you say.” Doing so cracks the very foundation of what our government is built on.

    Same if someone decided to ignore the President (Executive Branch) or a ruling coming from the House and Senate (Legislative Branch).

    The only difference is the President has the ability to sign or veto laws passed by Congress, and Congress can over-ride a veto.

    There is no similar constraint on Supreme Court rulings. They are the arbiter of what is or is not Constitutional. That’s their job. If you disagree with that, your options are 1) pass a new amendment or 2) a Constitutional convention.

    Whether I like or dislike their definition of the 2nd amendment is irrelevant. It’s THEIR definition. It’s settled law. My liking it or disliking it doesn’t change that.

    Want to change it? Make sure we have Democratic Presidents exclusively for, oh, the next 20 to 25 years or so. Hope we don’t have another block like they did with Merrick Garland.

    Thomas (75) and Alito (73) are the next likely two to age out. If that happens under a Democratic President, it could shift the balance from 6-3 to 4-5. Given ages of court deaths and retirees that’s probably 10-15 years from now.

    The next three though are Sotomayor (69), Roberts (68) and Kagan (63). Say what you want about Roberts, but he has served as a key swing vote, siding with the “liberal” judges on multiple occasions. Losing any or all of them under a Republican President would lock in a conservative court long past my lifetime.

    Kavanaugh (58), Gorsuch (56), Jackson (53) and Barrett (51) could all be with us for 30 years or more. So that’s a baked in 3:1 disadvantage until maybe 2053? I’m 54 myself, so it’s unlikely I’ll live to see this.

    • Zaktor
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I can’t believe when confronted with deep theory of government from the Federalist papers you forged on to repeat a grade school description of government. Go read the Federalist papers.

      So that’s a baked in 3:1 disadvantage until maybe 2053? I’m 54 myself, so it’s unlikely I’ll live to see this.

      And when confronted with the realization that politely waiting for deaths under an unbroken reign of Democratic regimes means you will literally live the rest of your life under a corrupt and illegitimately stacked conservative court, you dutifully knuckled under. My god.