politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
My greater concern here is less how they ruled, an more that they ruled along "party lines". This isn't a situation where the court is reaching outside its mandate (as some could argue with social rights issues) - they are adjudicating a fundamental check and balance between the Legislature and Executive. There really should be some consensus on how this works.
The court is a sham at this point. Damn near every ruling these days is a party line vote and it's disappointing. Why even haven them hear cases if we already know the outcome?
The odd thing is that when they do agree, they still get it wrong: their ruling against faithless electors was unanimous, but in their statements they justify the decision by saying that if they ruled based on the text there would be chaos. Folks, that's not your job. If the constitution needs to be fixed it needs to be fixed through proper channels. You don't get to decide something is constitutional (or not) just because you like it (or not).
Exactly! That's what they have been doing lately and it pisses me off.
I wish we'd stop complaining that SCOTUS judges have opinions, because they do, and they will along party lines.
So we have to elect judges that don't think the only non-dirtball people worthy of dignity, are hedge fund owners.