Hi, everyone. Passions and frustrations are running high. But please, no suggestions of violence, even if those suggestions are made in the course of legal arguments. We cannot normalize the notion that the president can assassinate an opponent. That would be wrong, and we would live to regret it if Trump is elected. Let's stop suggesting that it is something Biden can do. We need to honor the Constitution as written, not as it was violated yesterday by the Court.
I buried the lead: If you suggest violence, I will delete your comment.
Hi Robert, I hate that the trolls seem to have found you! if it gets burdensome please go back to limiting comments to paid subscribers. (Of course, I am saying this as a paid subscriber ;-)
It also might be helpful to pin a brief comment about how to report an inappropriate comment so that we can help with the policing - especially when you open up the comments to everyone. It took me the longest time to figure out the ellipsis allows you to edit (or delete) your own comment and report someone else's comment. :-)
I really enjoyed the Zoom meeting this afternoon and I hope you do it again on a regular or semi-regular basis.
This is not intended in any way as a criticism, but I suggest if you do it again, that you set the meeting up to mute people on entry since an awful lot of people are either oblivious when you ask them to mute themselves or unaware of how to do so. The host (and or co-host) can also pull up the participant list and mute anyone who unmutes themselves without raising their hand and getting called upon.
Seriously no violent comments people... Even the hypothetical calls of violence are being grabbed by right wing pundits and bad faith actors are are running with it. It doesn't matter that they are hypocritical and Trump has literally called for violence multiple times.
We' have the capacity to overwhelm them at the ballot box. Millions of unregistered folk trend heavily Democratic. Register them to save democracy. Gen Z can outnumber them.
Thanks, Daniel. I've seen how you faithfully post the Field Team 6 link. I've been in zooms where the organization is represented and am somewhat familiar with it's fine work. Though today, I shared the link with a couple of friends who checked them out and may well become a part of the effort. Me too. So thanks again. Your fidelity to the cause may be more fruitful than you may know.
I have long felt that our opposition has desired--and obtained-- a nation of serfs: people who have to scramble in 2 or more jobs, or work relentlessly long hours just to eat and (hopefully) have shelter. People without power, people who have no recourse except to keep slogging along with minimal or no benefits.
Daniel, I don't know you, but I've admired your constant reminders to work with fieldteam6 to get the vote out, with calm and rhythmic repetition day-after-day.
After the last few days, I didn't think anything could give an all out laugh but your answer to Stephen Berg's comment "True but we need to give them a viable reason to vote." Solomon: HOW ABOUT SO THEY WON'T BE SLAVES, cracked me up. Stephen Berg is one of my courage teachers as well. So I heard this exchange as too grizzled veterans reminding each other (and all of us) that we need to redouble our efforts and get to work.
Thank you both.
An old Three Stooge gag.
What comes after 75? .......76. That's the spirit!!! Let's cry and laugh and cheer on to victory for democracy. And tell those representatives of the "donor class" and others in the Beltway to shut up and get working. Biden's our guy!
When George Washington had the Declaration of Independence read to his troops, the odds of the colonials winning were probably a lot less than Biden's. And some of the smart money among Tory sympathizers were already bailing. We are made of stronger, smarter, and more resilient stuff the powerful who think they control our futures whether they be luke warm Democrats or dyed in the wool Trumpists or just rich cats who've been told all their lives they are better and smarter than the rest of us. Nothing, against smarts (I spent my life in higher education) and nothing against the rich. But brains and wealth does not absolutely and invariably make courage and virtue.
There are extremely qualified political strategists working to re-elect Joe Biden. Successful political strategists such as Simon Rosenberg and the Lincoln Project folks have been working for the past few years crafting that message.
I leave it up to them to hone this message and spread it outward.
Our role as voters is to do our part to re-elect Joe Biden. The rest is playing mind games.
I happen to be involved. Working with companies that do data mining. I took the DNC candidate course. They can identify those who are persuadable. The message varies to fit the audience.
I made some FT6 calls. People want to know how to register. A lot of them had been purged -- close to a million in Florida. https://voterizer.org/
You are right, the answer to defeating this nauseating wrench to fascism is so simple and easy to do. Vote blue. And by the next election, Trump will be too old if he hasn't had a heart attack by being shown to be a loser again and, as Joe Biden has pointed out, a one-man crime wave.
How about this Stephen: if they ever want to vote again, they’d better vote the Democratic ticket. Keep in mind there is NOTHING in the Constitution that grants citizens the right to vote so Trump and his Supreme Court asslickers and 2025 seditionists will gladly eliminate the right to vote, except for their wealthy friends and supporters.
What an awful no good week. I was thinking of the hundreds of thousands who took to the streets in Israel & other countries to protest those attempts to dismantle democracy, and wondered what it will take to see the same here?
Unfortunately, that doesn’t negate the truth of my post: Yes, many people posted flags upside down after the 2016 election. But *subsequently*, right-wingers adopted the upside-down flag as their own. Because right-wingers have had better press and propaganda sense than liberals/progressives, the right-wing usage seems to have (unfortunately) won the propaganda war.
"We owe a debt of gratitude to those who came before us and are charged with the sacred trust of delivering democracy to future generations. We can do that."
We MUST do that. We have no choice, as the overwhelmed RAF did in the Battle of Britain. It was Do Or Die. Perhaps do AND die. But nevertheless, DO!!
The biggest threat to democracy perhaps is a Democratic Party that doesn’t know how to play hard ball. We citizens can yell from the rooftops and they are unlikely to do it. Instead of hard ball, they’ll do what they do, intellectualize and make excuses for not playing hard ball. They lack imagination for just how bad this could get under Trump so they don’t take the steps necessary to prevent it. We didn’t imagine 9/11 would happen and we didn’t imagine 1/6 would happen now we’re not imagining what a global nightmare a second Trump term would be. We can encourage it, but it’s the Dems in power who need to act.
Biden was just given unimaginable presidential power - will he use it? Unlikely. Maybe we’ll be lucky and the Dems will succeed. We’re all working for that every day. But if the Dems don’t win, Trump will most assuredly not just use those powers but push them even further. This is being realistic not hyperbolic.
And former Republicans who could come together to stop Trump - like the unprecedented 20+ former Trump administration officials who have formally said that Trump is unfit and should never get close to the White House again… they also are unlikely to step up, due to fear, tribalism, etc. Where are the profiles in courage?
So we focus on voter turn out and voter registration as we must. But it’s hard to help a party that truly doesn’t know how to fight along with Republicans who know better but are unlikely to step up.
Just my opinion, but I think that the Dems are in the business of adhering to the Constitution. We have just found out that our supreme court (lower case on purpose) does not feel obligated to do the same.
Is there a way to play hard ball and still adhere to the rules? Asking, because I do not know the answer to that.
Can President Biden remove the six conservative justices and install six Democratic justices, or does this immunity apply to Republican presidents only?
I don't see how it avoids applying to Biden as well. I'm just doubtful he'll do something that goes against our constitution, even if the GOP scotus has made that possible. If I were in his place, and tempted, I'd consult with Luttig and Tribe.
Since it is the voters who make up the whole of the Democratic Party, I recommend each of us step up and refrain from slamming our own Party. Incessant whining and criticism are unnecessary and end up being defeatism. It weakens our efforts.
So let's focus on our own message we are sending out in support of the Democratic Party. We can't get out the vote if we are complaining about who we are recommending people vote for.
Thank you for this. It's been said that this is a fight to preserve democracy. You preserve strawberries. We need to make democracy an action verb by fighting back with all the inalienable rights we the people have been granted under the Constitution.
Yes,Heather Cox Richardson said yesterday in her Facebook live talk that it entirely up to us, to We The People, to stand strong against this affront by a severely damaged supreme court and to come out and behead this monster king that they have created.And so we shall.
Not sure who your "preserve strawberries" comment is directed to, but if it is directed to tens of millions of people who want to honor the Constitution AND elect Joe Biden, it feels a bit harsh. Did you mean to do that?
Not at all. But at present, justice processes are failing us. Didn’t Trump try to overthrown a free and fair election? Why is justice taking so long? It is very tricky for sure. But we have a forest fire on our hands and you don’t fight it with a garden hose or trying to change policies or encouraging citizens to get out their garden hoses. The preservation of US democracy is going to be a very long hard battle. Is Biden taking leadership and pulling together the forces needed to help that such as former Republicans? Is there a game plan for accountability for those who tried to overthrow the country? What about the Joint Chiefs who are very concerned about another Trump world and how that will affect US armed forces? And the list of key executive leadership questions goes on and on.
I think Joe Biden is not a corruptible man and that he would not use the power he has just been given in an unethical way...unless he was put into an unimaginable position where he had to make a binary choice. All hypothetical....but not too long ago it was hypothetical (and unimaginable)l that our highest court would create a kingship out of a presidency.
YES!!! The republicans have been planning this since Reagan! And the Dems??? “oh it would never get that bad…that’s not the American way”…. WHEN ARE WE GOING TO LEARN TO PLAN AHEAD FOR THE WORST? Where is our Project 2025 for defending and FIXING our democracy?? Is anyone out there figuring out what we do if we lose this election? Because, hard as we are all working to GOTV, there is a real possibility we will lose! And even if we win, trump and his backers will not accept it.
Yes we have to fight like hell to win the election, but win or lose, that is only the beginning. Can DP hold two ideas at once in their precious heads???
This is why I hold my nose while voting for democrats.
Here’s a thought: Biden should use these outrageous imperial powers immediately- see how fast the trumpers cry foul and change the rules.
Thank you for voting for Democrats. I know you understand that saying you will "Hold your nose" while doing so is off-putting to other Democrats. In this fragile moment for Democracy, is it helpful to slam the party that is trying to the right thing--poorly in your view--but trying nonetheless?
These are emotional moments, but I believe each of us has a "moral and patriotic" duty to be part of the solution. Again, glad to have your vote; wish we had your enthusiastic support.
What you are saying to the President of the United States and his supporters is that you suck and I am holding my nose at the thought of voting for you and who you support. A quick question here. Do you think this is offensive?
In this world of instant communication of every thought and feelings some things are better left unsaid. Stop knocking the Democrats. We are trying to win an election.
Sage advice: If you don't like someone at least have good manners.
I agree that Democrats should develop their answer to Project 2025. A vehicle is at hand — the Democratic Convention Platform – if only Democrats will make it focused, succinct, and hard-hitting.
You are speaking of a President and a Party that literally rebuilt a Nation after trump and the Republicans had trashed it. This President created an economy that is the envy of the world. He created an at home and abroad safety net for us.
People HAVE GOT to stop trashing the only Party and the President standing between us and a Dictatorship. It's become a bad habit that people need to break now. We are running out of time.
The good things in Congress’s record have resulted from unnecessarily huge amounts of Biden’s wheedling and negotiating with Democrats, many of whom have tended to put their personal/ideological agendas and interests ahead of Biden’s. They have not been good team members.
I've often thought it was McConnels genius not to let his nomination go through for supreme court --- in turn he succeeded in getting a milique toast AG for us
OK, but please, let's please stop with the sports analogy 'hard ball'. Most people have no experience whatsoever in seeing a fastball pitched toward them at 90mph, so the reference is mostly muted. I know your intention is good, born from frustration.
GET OUT THE VOTE!!!!! Redirect all this handwringing and such and work harder than ever before to GET OUT THE VOTE (GOTV). There are lots of ways to do this. Robert regularly posts in his daily newsletter precise ways to engage. I expect he will rally us with a newsletter devoted to what our next steps could be. It is on each of us to engage in meaningful work to re-elect President Biden and Vice-President Harris!
It does not work to conflate this gross scotus opinion by using it when it is against everything we believe is right and just! The very best way is to follow President Biden’s lead and work hard to get out the vote and keep Biden in the presidency. It is as simple and hard as that.
I have often been frustrated being liberal. Wide differences with sometimes an inability to compromise for the better good within the party and thinking, "millions of Republicans, one voice. One Democrat, missions of voices.
I grew up believing the Supreme Court was something to be looked up to. Today that view was shattered as it was for so many of us. The Supreme Court is operating only for an entitled minority who have put the needs and whims of an indicted felon and insurrectionist above the Constitution
and the needs, rights, and responsibilities of Americans. I have asked myself over and over again, is the money that good? Is the money worth trashing liberty and justice for all? Apparently, for some it is. There is no joy in this decision. No victory. Just a gut punch to democracy by an arrogant minority convinced of their self-importance while paying only lip service to the original framers of the Constitution they purport to honor.
That's my ambition today. Going to the nursery to buy beauty in the form of flowers. I will be planting them in LA's hot weather, and hoping they'll survive our summer! Luckily, geraniums and vinca can survive it, and I will find gorgeous examples of these to plant. Beauty can be an antidote to ugliness! We have to dig deep to find our strength. We have to stay on the job, too!
Get out those votes. Play taxi for people that need to get to the polls. Talk to young people. When I lived in New Jersey, I did it twice for Obama Biden and if I could I would again. Stay strong dear friends for our children and grandchildren.
The styling of the case, "Trump v the United States," portends this indefensible ruling and tells us everything we need to know about the Roberts court. Trump has been given primacy and deference, in virtually all things, in this SCOTUS opinion. We the People, a party to the case, have been painfully discounted and discarded. We must assert our power at the polls on Nov. 5th.
The Marbury Doctrine that the Supreme Court derived from its 1803 decision in Marbury v. Madison has no Constitutional grounding: the Court simply usurped the power of legislative review for themselves. The Congress either made the decision that the Supreme Court could be trusted with this power, or they lacked the self-confidence to object. This absence of action established the tradition of accepting the Marbury "Doctrine" despite the Court's frequent failure over the years to live up to the trust that Congress acquiesced in giving them.
Two things call out for change: 1. Trump demonstrated the frailty of Implicit traditions in the instance of someone unprincipled enough to ignore them; and 2. this Supreme Court, with its record of Consistently outrageous decisions, has arguably earned the title of worst in American history, wresting that disgraceful title from the Taney Court for its one outrageous decision regarding Dred Scott.
Consequently, if Democrats gain control of the federal government in the November election, they should also break implicit tradition and modify the 1803 Marbury Usurpation: legislate a mechanism that any Supreme Court decision affecting federal legislation will activate an automatic Congressional review--an opportunity, if they choose, to adjust the legislation to accommodate the Court decision or, with simple majority votes in both Houses, reject the Court decision in whole or in part. They should also establish a retrospective process to examine, for modification or reversal, past Court decisions (such as Citizens United, Dobbs, Heller, the Chevron revocation, or this latest Trump decision). With these modifications the Supreme Court would still be allowed to offer a perspective on Congressional legislation, but not one that overrides the majority of both Houses. (Practically speaking, Congress would likely need to abolish the Senate filibuster to make this action possible. But the Senate filibuster has degenerated into the requirement of an automatic super-majority for legislative passage, which is grossly undemocratic. It should have been abolished long ago.)
In addition, Congress should establish a Standing Committee to oversee Supreme Court ethical behavior. Define what constitutes “good behavior” including absence of persistent political partisanship (which will require an explicit written definition to facilitate impeachment and removal).
Very interesting comments that go to the heart of the problem.
Here is another approach: The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over a very narrow set of disputes--Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party. That original jurisdiction cannot be modified. But as to appellate jurisdiction, the Constitution says that it is burdened with "such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make."
So, I propose that Congress simply restrict the Court's appellate jurisdiction to those cases in which the Justices have agreed to a binding ethics code and have filed a sworn affidavit disclosing their interests in the matter and swearing that they have no conflict of interest. If any justice fails to do so, the Court has no jurisdiction over the matter on appeal. I suspect the number of cases subject to the Court's review with shrink dramatically.
The sworn affidavits would be enforceable by perjury convictions; no need to go the impeachment route.
WOW, Robert. What an idea. Your brain is a national treasure. I hope our Congress and Executive branch read and take to heart Today's Edition Newsletter every day.
(Sorry, I realized after composing the following that I hadn't addressed the specific mechanism you described. I'll have to think about whether I have anything useful to add to that.)
Robert, this would be very useful in most cases, though it would have to be used When the legislation was written. They wouldn't be able to tell the Court retrospectively, after they have made an adverse decision, that Congress had put the issue outside the Court's domain so their decision was voided. (Though they could write new similar legislation, perhaps modified somewhat to respond to the Court's decision, and include an Article III prohibition on Appellate Review of the new legislation.)
Also, I can think of one vital case for which Article III would be unavailable. The Electoral College has favored the Republicans in every election this century except 2004. Partisan Republicans would resist losing it, so the Amendment process to abolish it is not practically available. In 2006 an agreement called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) was initiated. The member states agree that when activated, their electoral votes will be given to the candidate winning the national popular vote. The Electoral College would still be in place but rendered dead in effect. The Pact is to activate for Presidential elections after the members have accumulated within their membership a winning number of electoral votes--270, until another state joins the Union. They currently hold 209 electoral votes among the member states with another 81 pending votes in states where the process is underway. Federal legislation endorsing the Compact would strengthen their position against any judicial challenge and should certainly be enacted. The judicial challenge would seem likely to come from non-member states, which would create a case within the Original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. I would expect the Roberts Supreme Court to display their blatant Republican partisanship by dreaming up some reason to reject the constitutionality of the NPVIC and preserve an effective Electoral College. The NPVIC is an important reform, and this Court rejection would be intolerable!
Why not adopt both proposals: Use the appellate jurisdiction given Congress in Article III, but also modify the Marbury Usurpation as a backup?
What’s to stop President Biden from arresting Trump and throwing him in jail since he can do whatever he wants?. He’s the president and can act as a king and is immune from prosecution.
From Heather Cox Richardson, Letters from an American: “ But this extraordinary power grab does not mean President Joe Biden can do as he wishes. As legal commentator Asha Rangappa pointed out, the court gave itself the power to determine which actions can be prosecuted and which cannot by making itself the final arbiter of what is “official” and what is not. Thus any action a president takes is subject to review by the Supreme Court, and it is reasonable to assume that this particular court would not give a Democrat the same leeway it would give Trump.”
HCR is right, except for "core presidential functions." If Biden acts as commander in chief, that is a core function and is absolutely immune. HCR is also right that the Supreme Court would. not hesitate to limit Biden's immunity while expansively interpreting Trump's. That's why I said that Court is no longer a good faith participant in a constitutional democracy.
My wish for a happy retirement in a few years, with a political climate conducive to supporting the will of the people, has now been blown to smithereens. When Biden wins the presidency again, I predict a very sad future for this nation as we will face even more recalcitrance and shenanigans from sociopathic Republicans and Christian Nationalists.
I have been retired for 4 years and want nothing more than to enjoy my life, keep my SS and Medicare, my retirement funds. All of these items are endangered in a Republican administration.
It is time for us to immediately go to the streets to protest this injustice that the unsupreme court has hurled up for us. We need the leadership of the Democratic Party to organize us. Where are they?? And we need to personally go to the polls and save our nation from a tyrannical unAmerican MAGA dictator wannabe and his sycophants.
I agree we should all be in the streets. Fourth of July parades should be canceled— this Court just made a mockery of the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution— and replaced with rallies demanding impeachment of the so-called Justices who have signed on to creating a king who is above the law.
After reading Robert’s excellent overview of the meaning and impact of the Supreme Court decision I acknowledged my own clarity on this situation. Like you I am totally upset but the clarity I gained was that only us as voters and concerned citizens who care about the future of democracy can change things, not the courts or the president. This decision and what it means in real life and applied specifically to Trump has to be shouted from the roof tops. This decision allows Trump to pardon himself; take bribes for political favors and use the Justice Department as a weapon of revenge, all things Trump will do. This is just the tip of the iceberg and everyone needs to pay attention. Biden needs to run his campaign on how and what he is going to do to fix a broken democracy not what he had already has accomplished. Surprisingly the media attacked the decision and now it is up to us and the Biden Administration to make it a major campaign issue.
I'm going to ask a really dumb question. I'm obviously not a lawyer as you will soon see, but bear with me. Can a Supreme Court "Justice" be disbarred? Can that "Justice" lose their law license? And is it a requirement for sitting on the Supreme Court that someone holds an active license to practice law? I fully expect that my question is comparable to asking whether one can shoot down a satellite with a slingshot.
Justices can be impeached. They don't need to be lawyers to be on the Court, so it wouldn't matter if a local jurisdiction disbarred them. In fact, i believe most judges resign from the bar when they are appointed. The only remedy is impeachment.
"There are no explicit requirements in the U.S. Constitution for a person to be nominated to become a Supreme Court justice. No age, education, job experience, or citizenship rules exist. In fact, according to the Constitution, a Supreme Court justice does not need to even have a law degree."
Someone similarly, I would like to see the US bar system (whatever that is) and US law schools put out strong statements. I have read some law professors saying this is not even US law, i.e., it undermines everything taught in law school.
What about impeaching justices? Perhaps impractical and maybe not the best use of lawmakers’ time, but get it on record?
Justices can be impeached. They don't need to be lawyers to be on the Court, so it wouldn't matter if a local jurisdiction disbarred them. In fact, i believe most judges resign from the bar when they are appointed. The only remedy is impeachment.
Gary the problem is making a decision on a case you don’t agree with or misinterpreting the constitution is not grounds for anything. They are in the court for life which is why we need term limits.
I mostly agree. But there are two "justices" who did not recuse from the case in contravention of standard practices requiring recusal, and there's a chief "justice" who didn't require an ethics code that could be enforced. These are unethical practices. Yes, of course, we know that SCOTUS is the ultimate arbiter, which is the probable conclusion to my slingshot question.
I am not a lawyer either but I’ve been told many times that having a law degree is not a requirement for appointment to the Supreme Court. Maybe it’s time to get a couple of intelligent non-lawyers in the mix to bring the Court back to at least a minimal respect for the needs of the People over the needs of the Profit Gods.
They can be impeached and kicked off the court. Call Dick Durbin, chair of the Judiciary, and order him to do it. Durbin works for the voters and is supposed to do what we tell him. (Disbar them after they're impeached.)
I believe that impeachment needs to start in the House, which is a non-starter now. Then you would have to convict by 60 votes, and the Senate is too evenly divided. We need to elect a strong trifecta, so let’s work really hard to see what is possible.
It would be a long and largely unprecedented process, right? I suppose what I would like to see now, is a strong, widespread, call from citizens across the board for impeachment. I would like to hear a demand from a broad spectrum of Americans that these un-American people be impeached. The process can begin when pressure from the public reaches a high-water mark.
As I wrote earlier, the only good thing I can imagine that this decision could bring is that it may motivate more voters to oppose Trump and help to achieve a Biden victory. If the Democrats can also take both houses of Congress, Robert's and other's impassioned advocacy for enlarging the Supreme Court could lead to a future Court that will overcome the dominance that the "reactionary majority" enjoys today. Justice Sonia Sotomayor deserves the utmost respect for her dissent.
Hi, everyone. Passions and frustrations are running high. But please, no suggestions of violence, even if those suggestions are made in the course of legal arguments. We cannot normalize the notion that the president can assassinate an opponent. That would be wrong, and we would live to regret it if Trump is elected. Let's stop suggesting that it is something Biden can do. We need to honor the Constitution as written, not as it was violated yesterday by the Court.
I buried the lead: If you suggest violence, I will delete your comment.
Thank you, Robert.
Hi Robert, I hate that the trolls seem to have found you! if it gets burdensome please go back to limiting comments to paid subscribers. (Of course, I am saying this as a paid subscriber ;-)
It also might be helpful to pin a brief comment about how to report an inappropriate comment so that we can help with the policing - especially when you open up the comments to everyone. It took me the longest time to figure out the ellipsis allows you to edit (or delete) your own comment and report someone else's comment. :-)
I really enjoyed the Zoom meeting this afternoon and I hope you do it again on a regular or semi-regular basis.
This is not intended in any way as a criticism, but I suggest if you do it again, that you set the meeting up to mute people on entry since an awful lot of people are either oblivious when you ask them to mute themselves or unaware of how to do so. The host (and or co-host) can also pull up the participant list and mute anyone who unmutes themselves without raising their hand and getting called upon.
Definitely make use of a cohost or assistant to perform these functions to leave yourself free to focus. A high enough pressure situation.
I had a conflicting appointment but look forward to catching up.
TCinLA just posted a great wake-up call that I heartily recommend:
https://open.substack.com/pub/tcinla757/p/stuart-stevens-on-the-absurdity-of
Thanks, Bob. I am passing along Stevens’s post. If we didn’t need every Dem in the House, I would call for Rep. Doggett (Tx) to resign.
I hear you, and it's called "Clothespin Voting." In a perfect world, it wouldn't be necessary or desirable. Yet here we are.
Seriously no violent comments people... Even the hypothetical calls of violence are being grabbed by right wing pundits and bad faith actors are are running with it. It doesn't matter that they are hypocritical and Trump has literally called for violence multiple times.
I constantly remind myself of Michelle Obama’s… “When they go low…we go high”. Thank you Robert.
Thank you.
Last Thursday Joe Biden had a bad day. Today America had a bad day. Let's get over it quickly, now, and move on to electing the Biden Harris team!
We' have the capacity to overwhelm them at the ballot box. Millions of unregistered folk trend heavily Democratic. Register them to save democracy. Gen Z can outnumber them.
https://www.fieldteam6.org/
Thanks, Daniel. I've seen how you faithfully post the Field Team 6 link. I've been in zooms where the organization is represented and am somewhat familiar with it's fine work. Though today, I shared the link with a couple of friends who checked them out and may well become a part of the effort. Me too. So thanks again. Your fidelity to the cause may be more fruitful than you may know.
True but we need to give them a viable reason to vote.
HOW ABOUT SO THEY WON'T BE SLAVES!
I have long felt that our opposition has desired--and obtained-- a nation of serfs: people who have to scramble in 2 or more jobs, or work relentlessly long hours just to eat and (hopefully) have shelter. People without power, people who have no recourse except to keep slogging along with minimal or no benefits.
GOP = Feudalism
Daniel, I don't know you, but I've admired your constant reminders to work with fieldteam6 to get the vote out, with calm and rhythmic repetition day-after-day.
After the last few days, I didn't think anything could give an all out laugh but your answer to Stephen Berg's comment "True but we need to give them a viable reason to vote." Solomon: HOW ABOUT SO THEY WON'T BE SLAVES, cracked me up. Stephen Berg is one of my courage teachers as well. So I heard this exchange as too grizzled veterans reminding each other (and all of us) that we need to redouble our efforts and get to work.
Thank you both.
An old Three Stooge gag.
What comes after 75? .......76. That's the spirit!!! Let's cry and laugh and cheer on to victory for democracy. And tell those representatives of the "donor class" and others in the Beltway to shut up and get working. Biden's our guy!
When George Washington had the Declaration of Independence read to his troops, the odds of the colonials winning were probably a lot less than Biden's. And some of the smart money among Tory sympathizers were already bailing. We are made of stronger, smarter, and more resilient stuff the powerful who think they control our futures whether they be luke warm Democrats or dyed in the wool Trumpists or just rich cats who've been told all their lives they are better and smarter than the rest of us. Nothing, against smarts (I spent my life in higher education) and nothing against the rich. But brains and wealth does not absolutely and invariably make courage and virtue.
Go Joe, sink it. Swish!!
Not the message that will get new voters.
There are extremely qualified political strategists working to re-elect Joe Biden. Successful political strategists such as Simon Rosenberg and the Lincoln Project folks have been working for the past few years crafting that message.
I leave it up to them to hone this message and spread it outward.
Our role as voters is to do our part to re-elect Joe Biden. The rest is playing mind games.
I happen to be involved. Working with companies that do data mining. I took the DNC candidate course. They can identify those who are persuadable. The message varies to fit the audience.
I made some FT6 calls. People want to know how to register. A lot of them had been purged -- close to a million in Florida. https://voterizer.org/
I also spend some of my own money to target swing states. E.G. FT 6 Text Arcade, $25 for 1400 texts. https://www.fieldteam6.org/actions
I am also a "DNC "Social Ambassador." https://democrats.org/share/
I also have "co-hosted" donor groups like Focus for Democracy. In one program more than $5 MM went to two deserving organizations.
The way to win is to outscore the opponent. If I were wealthy I'd finance the registration groups.
You are right, the answer to defeating this nauseating wrench to fascism is so simple and easy to do. Vote blue. And by the next election, Trump will be too old if he hasn't had a heart attack by being shown to be a loser again and, as Joe Biden has pointed out, a one-man crime wave.
MOST are enthusiastic.
Don't get sucked in.
That is not an unclear task!
How about this Stephen: if they ever want to vote again, they’d better vote the Democratic ticket. Keep in mind there is NOTHING in the Constitution that grants citizens the right to vote so Trump and his Supreme Court asslickers and 2025 seditionists will gladly eliminate the right to vote, except for their wealthy friends and supporters.
You mean there isn’t a viable reason RIGHT NOW, Stephen?!?
Your correct.
Anat Shenker-Osorio and her ASO Communications generally advise to appeal to freedoms (instead of rights).
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/words-to-win-by/id1477929959
On 6/20/24, Robert hosted a Zoom for a GenZ event, Tour to Save Democracy:
https://tourtosavedemocracy.com/
Robert asked the wonderful young panel how we can be most helpful to them. Their comments:
Issues are reproductive rights/family planning, voting rights, housing expense, climate, gun safety
No lectures or hair on fire. Listen more, elicit their issues, then amplify them on social media.
What an awful no good week. I was thinking of the hundreds of thousands who took to the streets in Israel & other countries to protest those attempts to dismantle democracy, and wondered what it will take to see the same here?
We are better served taking to the polls.
Independence Day has taken on a whole new meaning. Let's declare ours by uniting behind President Biden and drive the traitors from our shores.
Here's a link to the Declaration of Independence, a good reminder:
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript
Yes, Bob: Independence Day has taken on a whole new meaning – independence from the usurping Trumpsters.
I would like to fly our flag upside down, but those damn “conservatives” have taken it over as one of their symbols.
I'm picturing the flag of a second Felonious T term: upside down and backwards.
That's not true. Many posted their American flag upside down after the 2016 election. It just didn't get the press. (how alarming)
Unfortunately, that doesn’t negate the truth of my post: Yes, many people posted flags upside down after the 2016 election. But *subsequently*, right-wingers adopted the upside-down flag as their own. Because right-wingers have had better press and propaganda sense than liberals/progressives, the right-wing usage seems to have (unfortunately) won the propaganda war.
If Biden is not re-elected, the distress flag will take on a whole new and REAL warning.
Fly it right side up!!!
They’ve taken usurped that as well.
Thank you, Bob!
I agree, though yesterday was far more than a bad day
News cycles evaporate fast, quasi legal rulings by the Imperial Court can incite people to vote them out
That is exactly my hope, Dave!
Thanks Peter. Less ruing and more doing.
I STAND WITH PRESIDENT BIDEN AND VP KAMALA HARRIS🇺🇸
Thank you Robert. An overwhelming day.
"We owe a debt of gratitude to those who came before us and are charged with the sacred trust of delivering democracy to future generations. We can do that."
We MUST do that. We have no choice, as the overwhelmed RAF did in the Battle of Britain. It was Do Or Die. Perhaps do AND die. But nevertheless, DO!!
The biggest threat to democracy perhaps is a Democratic Party that doesn’t know how to play hard ball. We citizens can yell from the rooftops and they are unlikely to do it. Instead of hard ball, they’ll do what they do, intellectualize and make excuses for not playing hard ball. They lack imagination for just how bad this could get under Trump so they don’t take the steps necessary to prevent it. We didn’t imagine 9/11 would happen and we didn’t imagine 1/6 would happen now we’re not imagining what a global nightmare a second Trump term would be. We can encourage it, but it’s the Dems in power who need to act.
Biden was just given unimaginable presidential power - will he use it? Unlikely. Maybe we’ll be lucky and the Dems will succeed. We’re all working for that every day. But if the Dems don’t win, Trump will most assuredly not just use those powers but push them even further. This is being realistic not hyperbolic.
And former Republicans who could come together to stop Trump - like the unprecedented 20+ former Trump administration officials who have formally said that Trump is unfit and should never get close to the White House again… they also are unlikely to step up, due to fear, tribalism, etc. Where are the profiles in courage?
So we focus on voter turn out and voter registration as we must. But it’s hard to help a party that truly doesn’t know how to fight along with Republicans who know better but are unlikely to step up.
We must be the profiles in courage.
Just my opinion, but I think that the Dems are in the business of adhering to the Constitution. We have just found out that our supreme court (lower case on purpose) does not feel obligated to do the same.
Is there a way to play hard ball and still adhere to the rules? Asking, because I do not know the answer to that.
Can President Biden remove the six conservative justices and install six Democratic justices, or does this immunity apply to Republican presidents only?
No; neither president could do so.
I don't see how it avoids applying to Biden as well. I'm just doubtful he'll do something that goes against our constitution, even if the GOP scotus has made that possible. If I were in his place, and tempted, I'd consult with Luttig and Tribe.
The Imperial Court of 6 gets to rule on that
Good point. We need to stop being nice guys and go on the offensive
La loi, c’est nous* (et DJT)
– John Roberts and his fivd collaborators.
* a take-off on King Louis XIV of France (“I am the law.”)
Let us just collectively decide to ignore this rogue "court."
New rules.
Since it is the voters who make up the whole of the Democratic Party, I recommend each of us step up and refrain from slamming our own Party. Incessant whining and criticism are unnecessary and end up being defeatism. It weakens our efforts.
So let's focus on our own message we are sending out in support of the Democratic Party. We can't get out the vote if we are complaining about who we are recommending people vote for.
This is right: " I recommend each of us step up and refrain from slamming our own Party."
Shoulder to shoulder with all our terrific candidates. And write or call to criticize those waffling and failung--Mcgaskill, raskin...
Thank you for this. It's been said that this is a fight to preserve democracy. You preserve strawberries. We need to make democracy an action verb by fighting back with all the inalienable rights we the people have been granted under the Constitution.
Yes,Heather Cox Richardson said yesterday in her Facebook live talk that it entirely up to us, to We The People, to stand strong against this affront by a severely damaged supreme court and to come out and behead this monster king that they have created.And so we shall.
Not sure who your "preserve strawberries" comment is directed to, but if it is directed to tens of millions of people who want to honor the Constitution AND elect Joe Biden, it feels a bit harsh. Did you mean to do that?
We ain't no stinkin' strawberries!
Make Democracy!
Charles, you want Biden to fight Trump by becoming Trump?
Excellent point!
Not at all. But at present, justice processes are failing us. Didn’t Trump try to overthrown a free and fair election? Why is justice taking so long? It is very tricky for sure. But we have a forest fire on our hands and you don’t fight it with a garden hose or trying to change policies or encouraging citizens to get out their garden hoses. The preservation of US democracy is going to be a very long hard battle. Is Biden taking leadership and pulling together the forces needed to help that such as former Republicans? Is there a game plan for accountability for those who tried to overthrow the country? What about the Joint Chiefs who are very concerned about another Trump world and how that will affect US armed forces? And the list of key executive leadership questions goes on and on.
What specific actions are you talking about then?
“Pulling together the forces needed”? What does that mean and are you sure it isn’t happening now?
You seek something here, be specific, otherwise it comes off as handwringing
I think Joe Biden is not a corruptible man and that he would not use the power he has just been given in an unethical way...unless he was put into an unimaginable position where he had to make a binary choice. All hypothetical....but not too long ago it was hypothetical (and unimaginable)l that our highest court would create a kingship out of a presidency.
Great comment. You've helped me clarify my own thinking on this subject. Thank you MJ.
YES!!! The republicans have been planning this since Reagan! And the Dems??? “oh it would never get that bad…that’s not the American way”…. WHEN ARE WE GOING TO LEARN TO PLAN AHEAD FOR THE WORST? Where is our Project 2025 for defending and FIXING our democracy?? Is anyone out there figuring out what we do if we lose this election? Because, hard as we are all working to GOTV, there is a real possibility we will lose! And even if we win, trump and his backers will not accept it.
Yes we have to fight like hell to win the election, but win or lose, that is only the beginning. Can DP hold two ideas at once in their precious heads???
This is why I hold my nose while voting for democrats.
Here’s a thought: Biden should use these outrageous imperial powers immediately- see how fast the trumpers cry foul and change the rules.
Thank you for voting for Democrats. I know you understand that saying you will "Hold your nose" while doing so is off-putting to other Democrats. In this fragile moment for Democracy, is it helpful to slam the party that is trying to the right thing--poorly in your view--but trying nonetheless?
These are emotional moments, but I believe each of us has a "moral and patriotic" duty to be part of the solution. Again, glad to have your vote; wish we had your enthusiastic support.
What you are saying to the President of the United States and his supporters is that you suck and I am holding my nose at the thought of voting for you and who you support. A quick question here. Do you think this is offensive?
In this world of instant communication of every thought and feelings some things are better left unsaid. Stop knocking the Democrats. We are trying to win an election.
Sage advice: If you don't like someone at least have good manners.
Johanna –
I agree that Democrats should develop their answer to Project 2025. A vehicle is at hand — the Democratic Convention Platform – if only Democrats will make it focused, succinct, and hard-hitting.
What do you mean "if only"?
You are speaking of a President and a Party that literally rebuilt a Nation after trump and the Republicans had trashed it. This President created an economy that is the envy of the world. He created an at home and abroad safety net for us.
People HAVE GOT to stop trashing the only Party and the President standing between us and a Dictatorship. It's become a bad habit that people need to break now. We are running out of time.
The *President’s* record speaks for itself.
The good things in Congress’s record have resulted from unnecessarily huge amounts of Biden’s wheedling and negotiating with Democrats, many of whom have tended to put their personal/ideological agendas and interests ahead of Biden’s. They have not been good team members.
If Alito and Thomas were Democrats and Trump were president, they would be facing indictment for tax evasion after a thorough FBI/IRS investigation.
Where is Waldo? I mean Garland...
I've often thought it was McConnels genius not to let his nomination go through for supreme court --- in turn he succeeded in getting a milique toast AG for us
In my fantasy world, the AG is Kamala Harris. Not that she wouldn't make a terrific president or Supreme Court Justice.
OK, but please, let's please stop with the sports analogy 'hard ball'. Most people have no experience whatsoever in seeing a fastball pitched toward them at 90mph, so the reference is mostly muted. I know your intention is good, born from frustration.
Great comment. Although now that you said it, I just imagined it. Effin scary!
What would you suggest for Dems to do that would be 'fighting back?" I ask in all seriousness
Put enough people in Congress to turn SCOTUS on its head and write laws that support the Constitution........
For now, that is the answer.
GET OUT THE VOTE!!!!! Redirect all this handwringing and such and work harder than ever before to GET OUT THE VOTE (GOTV). There are lots of ways to do this. Robert regularly posts in his daily newsletter precise ways to engage. I expect he will rally us with a newsletter devoted to what our next steps could be. It is on each of us to engage in meaningful work to re-elect President Biden and Vice-President Harris!
If Biden uses the new King like powers, say, to add 3 more justices to the Supreme Court, does that ignite an anti-Dems back-lash?
Could they (current SC bench/GOP house/ any unconvinced Dem legislators) stop him?
Would it make it harder to take the high ground?
Just putting that out there as a possibility to consider.
It does not work to conflate this gross scotus opinion by using it when it is against everything we believe is right and just! The very best way is to follow President Biden’s lead and work hard to get out the vote and keep Biden in the presidency. It is as simple and hard as that.
It's up to us. Ramparts if necessary.
100% agree. Let's Go, Dems!
I have often been frustrated being liberal. Wide differences with sometimes an inability to compromise for the better good within the party and thinking, "millions of Republicans, one voice. One Democrat, missions of voices.
This Today’s Edition should be required reading for every American Citizen.
Yes, and I’ll also be sharing the abridged version for those with short attention spans.
* A president can accept bribes in exchange for pardons.
* A president can issue a self-pardon.
* A president can pressure the Attorney General to corruptly target the president's political enemies.
* A president can pressure the Vice President to corruptly miscount the Electoral Ballots.
Need to add: Donald Trump will do these very acts; he said so, and worse He must be defeated.
Although this SC decision was terrible, there is no need for undue alarm.
Trump doesn't have a Vice President this election year, 2024. Kamala Harris will be the sitting VP.
Yes; and Mike Johnson won't be speaker on 1/6/25, Hakeem Jeffries will be. Also the Electoral Count Reform Act will be in place.
Don't forget, a president can order the Navy Seals to assassinate his rivals.
Totally!!
This is no longer a WWE match - it's an MMA fight to the end. Time to take the gloves off.
this ruling today just takes my breath away
I will fight this court and trump with everything I’ve got.
Thank you Robert for making time together tomorrow. We need to help each other stay strong.
I'm with you on that.
I grew up believing the Supreme Court was something to be looked up to. Today that view was shattered as it was for so many of us. The Supreme Court is operating only for an entitled minority who have put the needs and whims of an indicted felon and insurrectionist above the Constitution
and the needs, rights, and responsibilities of Americans. I have asked myself over and over again, is the money that good? Is the money worth trashing liberty and justice for all? Apparently, for some it is. There is no joy in this decision. No victory. Just a gut punch to democracy by an arrogant minority convinced of their self-importance while paying only lip service to the original framers of the Constitution they purport to honor.
I just want to scream I DISSENT to everyone I see.
I'm with you on that. I had the distinct desire yesterday afternoon to go out into my garden and simply scream period!
The garden is a great place to be. I fully believe in the therapeutic value of having one's hands in the soil.
That's my ambition today. Going to the nursery to buy beauty in the form of flowers. I will be planting them in LA's hot weather, and hoping they'll survive our summer! Luckily, geraniums and vinca can survive it, and I will find gorgeous examples of these to plant. Beauty can be an antidote to ugliness! We have to dig deep to find our strength. We have to stay on the job, too!
Agreed 100%!
Where are the t-shirts?
Pricing them out
Amazon’s got a slew of them. I’m going for a hat as I wear those all the time
I think it's hundreds of millions for each bad apple, plus a lifetime high position in the Trump emperorship/oligarchy.
Get out those votes. Play taxi for people that need to get to the polls. Talk to young people. When I lived in New Jersey, I did it twice for Obama Biden and if I could I would again. Stay strong dear friends for our children and grandchildren.
Seconded!
My fear now is that, if Trump and the GOP do not succeed in stealing the election, this Supreme Court will give it to him.
Like they did with W and with Citizens United
Given the powers they've just given Biden, I doubt they could give it to TFG.
The styling of the case, "Trump v the United States," portends this indefensible ruling and tells us everything we need to know about the Roberts court. Trump has been given primacy and deference, in virtually all things, in this SCOTUS opinion. We the People, a party to the case, have been painfully discounted and discarded. We must assert our power at the polls on Nov. 5th.
Indeed, turnout, turnout, turnout for the crucial election on November 5th.
The Marbury Doctrine that the Supreme Court derived from its 1803 decision in Marbury v. Madison has no Constitutional grounding: the Court simply usurped the power of legislative review for themselves. The Congress either made the decision that the Supreme Court could be trusted with this power, or they lacked the self-confidence to object. This absence of action established the tradition of accepting the Marbury "Doctrine" despite the Court's frequent failure over the years to live up to the trust that Congress acquiesced in giving them.
Two things call out for change: 1. Trump demonstrated the frailty of Implicit traditions in the instance of someone unprincipled enough to ignore them; and 2. this Supreme Court, with its record of Consistently outrageous decisions, has arguably earned the title of worst in American history, wresting that disgraceful title from the Taney Court for its one outrageous decision regarding Dred Scott.
Consequently, if Democrats gain control of the federal government in the November election, they should also break implicit tradition and modify the 1803 Marbury Usurpation: legislate a mechanism that any Supreme Court decision affecting federal legislation will activate an automatic Congressional review--an opportunity, if they choose, to adjust the legislation to accommodate the Court decision or, with simple majority votes in both Houses, reject the Court decision in whole or in part. They should also establish a retrospective process to examine, for modification or reversal, past Court decisions (such as Citizens United, Dobbs, Heller, the Chevron revocation, or this latest Trump decision). With these modifications the Supreme Court would still be allowed to offer a perspective on Congressional legislation, but not one that overrides the majority of both Houses. (Practically speaking, Congress would likely need to abolish the Senate filibuster to make this action possible. But the Senate filibuster has degenerated into the requirement of an automatic super-majority for legislative passage, which is grossly undemocratic. It should have been abolished long ago.)
In addition, Congress should establish a Standing Committee to oversee Supreme Court ethical behavior. Define what constitutes “good behavior” including absence of persistent political partisanship (which will require an explicit written definition to facilitate impeachment and removal).
Very interesting comments that go to the heart of the problem.
Here is another approach: The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over a very narrow set of disputes--Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party. That original jurisdiction cannot be modified. But as to appellate jurisdiction, the Constitution says that it is burdened with "such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make."
So, I propose that Congress simply restrict the Court's appellate jurisdiction to those cases in which the Justices have agreed to a binding ethics code and have filed a sworn affidavit disclosing their interests in the matter and swearing that they have no conflict of interest. If any justice fails to do so, the Court has no jurisdiction over the matter on appeal. I suspect the number of cases subject to the Court's review with shrink dramatically.
The sworn affidavits would be enforceable by perjury convictions; no need to go the impeachment route.
WOW, Robert. What an idea. Your brain is a national treasure. I hope our Congress and Executive branch read and take to heart Today's Edition Newsletter every day.
(Sorry, I realized after composing the following that I hadn't addressed the specific mechanism you described. I'll have to think about whether I have anything useful to add to that.)
Robert, this would be very useful in most cases, though it would have to be used When the legislation was written. They wouldn't be able to tell the Court retrospectively, after they have made an adverse decision, that Congress had put the issue outside the Court's domain so their decision was voided. (Though they could write new similar legislation, perhaps modified somewhat to respond to the Court's decision, and include an Article III prohibition on Appellate Review of the new legislation.)
Also, I can think of one vital case for which Article III would be unavailable. The Electoral College has favored the Republicans in every election this century except 2004. Partisan Republicans would resist losing it, so the Amendment process to abolish it is not practically available. In 2006 an agreement called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) was initiated. The member states agree that when activated, their electoral votes will be given to the candidate winning the national popular vote. The Electoral College would still be in place but rendered dead in effect. The Pact is to activate for Presidential elections after the members have accumulated within their membership a winning number of electoral votes--270, until another state joins the Union. They currently hold 209 electoral votes among the member states with another 81 pending votes in states where the process is underway. Federal legislation endorsing the Compact would strengthen their position against any judicial challenge and should certainly be enacted. The judicial challenge would seem likely to come from non-member states, which would create a case within the Original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. I would expect the Roberts Supreme Court to display their blatant Republican partisanship by dreaming up some reason to reject the constitutionality of the NPVIC and preserve an effective Electoral College. The NPVIC is an important reform, and this Court rejection would be intolerable!
Why not adopt both proposals: Use the appellate jurisdiction given Congress in Article III, but also modify the Marbury Usurpation as a backup?
Why do we need these idiots at all? Let's disband them and rely upon whatever the next lower level of courts is.
What’s to stop President Biden from arresting Trump and throwing him in jail since he can do whatever he wants?. He’s the president and can act as a king and is immune from prosecution.
From Heather Cox Richardson, Letters from an American: “ But this extraordinary power grab does not mean President Joe Biden can do as he wishes. As legal commentator Asha Rangappa pointed out, the court gave itself the power to determine which actions can be prosecuted and which cannot by making itself the final arbiter of what is “official” and what is not. Thus any action a president takes is subject to review by the Supreme Court, and it is reasonable to assume that this particular court would not give a Democrat the same leeway it would give Trump.”
HCR is right, except for "core presidential functions." If Biden acts as commander in chief, that is a core function and is absolutely immune. HCR is also right that the Supreme Court would. not hesitate to limit Biden's immunity while expansively interpreting Trump's. That's why I said that Court is no longer a good faith participant in a constitutional democracy.
Please, folks, stop saying “the Supreme Court”. Say *this* Supreme Court.
The word “the” accords respect that is not due to this Supreme Court.
Yes, indeed. This court is corrupt.
Thanks for clarifying this. (I haven't yet read HCR today.)
Like George Washington before him, Joe Biden does not want to be king. That is yet another reason why Joe Biden is a good president.
Jail him for attempting to overthrow the u.s. government! No due process needed! Love it!
My wish for a happy retirement in a few years, with a political climate conducive to supporting the will of the people, has now been blown to smithereens. When Biden wins the presidency again, I predict a very sad future for this nation as we will face even more recalcitrance and shenanigans from sociopathic Republicans and Christian Nationalists.
I have been retired for 4 years and want nothing more than to enjoy my life, keep my SS and Medicare, my retirement funds. All of these items are endangered in a Republican administration.
Yes.
I hope they will be Democratic “talking points”.
It is time for us to immediately go to the streets to protest this injustice that the unsupreme court has hurled up for us. We need the leadership of the Democratic Party to organize us. Where are they?? And we need to personally go to the polls and save our nation from a tyrannical unAmerican MAGA dictator wannabe and his sycophants.
I agree we should all be in the streets. Fourth of July parades should be canceled— this Court just made a mockery of the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution— and replaced with rallies demanding impeachment of the so-called Justices who have signed on to creating a king who is above the law.
You are the “they.” You don’t have to wait for somebody else to organize a protest.
After reading Robert’s excellent overview of the meaning and impact of the Supreme Court decision I acknowledged my own clarity on this situation. Like you I am totally upset but the clarity I gained was that only us as voters and concerned citizens who care about the future of democracy can change things, not the courts or the president. This decision and what it means in real life and applied specifically to Trump has to be shouted from the roof tops. This decision allows Trump to pardon himself; take bribes for political favors and use the Justice Department as a weapon of revenge, all things Trump will do. This is just the tip of the iceberg and everyone needs to pay attention. Biden needs to run his campaign on how and what he is going to do to fix a broken democracy not what he had already has accomplished. Surprisingly the media attacked the decision and now it is up to us and the Biden Administration to make it a major campaign issue.
Well said!
I'm going to ask a really dumb question. I'm obviously not a lawyer as you will soon see, but bear with me. Can a Supreme Court "Justice" be disbarred? Can that "Justice" lose their law license? And is it a requirement for sitting on the Supreme Court that someone holds an active license to practice law? I fully expect that my question is comparable to asking whether one can shoot down a satellite with a slingshot.
Justices can be impeached. They don't need to be lawyers to be on the Court, so it wouldn't matter if a local jurisdiction disbarred them. In fact, i believe most judges resign from the bar when they are appointed. The only remedy is impeachment.
"There are no explicit requirements in the U.S. Constitution for a person to be nominated to become a Supreme Court justice. No age, education, job experience, or citizenship rules exist. In fact, according to the Constitution, a Supreme Court justice does not need to even have a law degree."
https://www.thoughtco.com/what-are-the-requirements-to-become-a-supreme-court-justice-104780
So put our energy into electing Democrats to take the House, keep the Senate and Presidency, then expand the court, set term limits and ethics code.
Someone similarly, I would like to see the US bar system (whatever that is) and US law schools put out strong statements. I have read some law professors saying this is not even US law, i.e., it undermines everything taught in law school.
What about impeaching justices? Perhaps impractical and maybe not the best use of lawmakers’ time, but get it on record?
I would love to hear an answer to this question.
Justices can be impeached. They don't need to be lawyers to be on the Court, so it wouldn't matter if a local jurisdiction disbarred them. In fact, i believe most judges resign from the bar when they are appointed. The only remedy is impeachment.
Gary the problem is making a decision on a case you don’t agree with or misinterpreting the constitution is not grounds for anything. They are in the court for life which is why we need term limits.
I mostly agree. But there are two "justices" who did not recuse from the case in contravention of standard practices requiring recusal, and there's a chief "justice" who didn't require an ethics code that could be enforced. These are unethical practices. Yes, of course, we know that SCOTUS is the ultimate arbiter, which is the probable conclusion to my slingshot question.
I am not a lawyer either but I’ve been told many times that having a law degree is not a requirement for appointment to the Supreme Court. Maybe it’s time to get a couple of intelligent non-lawyers in the mix to bring the Court back to at least a minimal respect for the needs of the People over the needs of the Profit Gods.
They can be impeached and kicked off the court. Call Dick Durbin, chair of the Judiciary, and order him to do it. Durbin works for the voters and is supposed to do what we tell him. (Disbar them after they're impeached.)
I believe that impeachment needs to start in the House, which is a non-starter now. Then you would have to convict by 60 votes, and the Senate is too evenly divided. We need to elect a strong trifecta, so let’s work really hard to see what is possible.
It would be a long and largely unprecedented process, right? I suppose what I would like to see now, is a strong, widespread, call from citizens across the board for impeachment. I would like to hear a demand from a broad spectrum of Americans that these un-American people be impeached. The process can begin when pressure from the public reaches a high-water mark.
As I wrote earlier, the only good thing I can imagine that this decision could bring is that it may motivate more voters to oppose Trump and help to achieve a Biden victory. If the Democrats can also take both houses of Congress, Robert's and other's impassioned advocacy for enlarging the Supreme Court could lead to a future Court that will overcome the dominance that the "reactionary majority" enjoys today. Justice Sonia Sotomayor deserves the utmost respect for her dissent.
Supreme Court Crowns Trump King: Ten Things Trump Can Now Do With Immunity
https://thedemlabs.org/2024/07/01/maga-supreme-court-crowns-trump-king-10-things-he-can-now-do-with-immunity/