Biden (Biden's handlers) go after SCOTUS
-
It’s not about passing it now, it’s a Hail Mary for the election.
@LuFins-Dad said in Biden (Biden's handlers) go after SCOTUS:
It’s not about passing it now, it’s a Hail Mary for the election.
Pretty much.
It's throwing anything against the wall and seeing if it will stick long enough to buy some votes.
-
It’s not about passing it now, it’s a Hail Mary for the election.
@LuFins-Dad said in Biden (Biden's handlers) go after SCOTUS:
It’s not about passing it now, it’s a Hail Mary for the election.
It's a "promise" that he knows damn well will never be kept.
-
An nice clean standalone ethics bill would have been nice. It would have put the gop on the spot - either oppose very reasonable ethics rules or embarrass Thomas.
But they have good excuses to be against this. So we’ll never hear about it again after the splashy announcement.
-
An nice clean standalone ethics bill would have been nice. It would have put the gop on the spot - either oppose very reasonable ethics rules or embarrass Thomas.
But they have good excuses to be against this. So we’ll never hear about it again after the splashy announcement.
@jon-nyc said in Biden (Biden's handlers) go after SCOTUS:
An nice clean standalone ethics bill would have been nice.
Genuinely curious. Does such a thing exist for the other co-equal branch of government, or is the only solution impeachment and trial?
Assuming no laws were broken, of course.
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/07/16/biden-supreme-court-reforms/
President Biden is finalizing plans to endorse major changes to the Supreme Court in the coming weeks, including proposals for legislation to establish term limits for the justices and an enforceable ethics code, according to two people briefed on the plans.
Cut through the 2024 election noise. Get The Campaign Moment newsletter.He is also weighing whether to call for a constitutional amendment to eliminate broad immunity for presidents and other constitutional officeholders, the people said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss private deliberations.
The announcement would mark a major shift for Biden, a former chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who has long resisted calls to make substantive changes to the high court. The potential changes come in response to growing outrage among his supporters about recent ethics scandals surrounding Justice Clarence Thomas and decisions by the new court majority that have changed legal precedent on issues including abortion and federal regulatory powers.
Biden previewed the shift in a Zoom call Saturday with the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
“I’m going to need your help on the Supreme Court, because I’m about to come out — I don’t want to prematurely announce it — but I’m about to come out with a major initiative on limiting the court. … I’ve been working with constitutional scholars for the last three months, and I need some help,” Biden said, according to a transcript of the call obtained by The Washington Post.
Term limits and an ethics code would be subject to congressional approval, which would face long odds in the Republican-controlled House and a slim Democratic majority in the Senate. Under current rules, passage in the Senate would require 60 votes. A constitutional amendment requires even more hurdles, including two-thirds support of both chambers, or by a convention of two-thirds of the states, and then approval by three-fourths of state legislatures.
@George-K said in Biden (Biden's handlers) go after SCOTUS:
including proposals for legislation to establish term limits for the justices and an enforceable ethics code,
I don't agree with term limits, but do think that there should be an age limit.
Ethics seems like a "no brainer". As @Doctor-Phibes has said before, pretty much every company and most government companies have some sort of ethics requirement. Not sure why anybody would be against this.
-
@George-K said in Biden (Biden's handlers) go after SCOTUS:
including proposals for legislation to establish term limits for the justices and an enforceable ethics code,
I don't agree with term limits, but do think that there should be an age limit.
Ethics seems like a "no brainer". As @Doctor-Phibes has said before, pretty much every company and most government companies have some sort of ethics requirement. Not sure why anybody would be against this.
@taiwan_girl said in Biden (Biden's handlers) go after SCOTUS:
@George-K said in Biden (Biden's handlers) go after SCOTUS:
including proposals for legislation to establish term limits for the justices and an enforceable ethics code,
I don't agree with term limits, but do think that there should be an age limit.
Ethics seems like a "no brainer". As @Doctor-Phibes has said before, pretty much every company and most government companies have some sort of ethics requirement. Not sure why anybody would be against this.
Constitution. SCOTUS polices SCOTUS. Political pressure can be used, especially since the court values their image. But without Constitutional change, there is only so much that can be done.
-
@taiwan_girl said in Biden (Biden's handlers) go after SCOTUS:
@George-K said in Biden (Biden's handlers) go after SCOTUS:
including proposals for legislation to establish term limits for the justices and an enforceable ethics code,
I don't agree with term limits, but do think that there should be an age limit.
Ethics seems like a "no brainer". As @Doctor-Phibes has said before, pretty much every company and most government companies have some sort of ethics requirement. Not sure why anybody would be against this.
Constitution. SCOTUS polices SCOTUS. Political pressure can be used, especially since the court values their image. But without Constitutional change, there is only so much that can be done.
@Jolly said in Biden (Biden's handlers) go after SCOTUS:
Constitution. SCOTUS polices SCOTUS. Political pressure can be used, especially since the court values their image. But without Constitutional change, there is only so much that can be done.
And that, after all, is the definition of "co-equal."
If Congress wants to rein in SCOTUS, the power of the purse is within their legitimate powers.
If you don't like it, everything else is hot air.
-
@Jolly said in Biden (Biden's handlers) go after SCOTUS:
Constitution. SCOTUS polices SCOTUS. Political pressure can be used, especially since the court values their image. But without Constitutional change, there is only so much that can be done.
And that, after all, is the definition of "co-equal."
If Congress wants to rein in SCOTUS, the power of the purse is within their legitimate powers.
If you don't like it, everything else is hot air.
@George-K said in Biden (Biden's handlers) go after SCOTUS:
@Jolly said in Biden (Biden's handlers) go after SCOTUS:
Constitution. SCOTUS polices SCOTUS. Political pressure can be used, especially since the court values their image. But without Constitutional change, there is only so much that can be done.
And that, after all, is the definition of "co-equal."
If Congress wants to rein in SCOTUS, the power of the purse is within their legitimate powers.
If you don't like it, everything else is hot air.
Of course.
The political hail mary of an addle-pated man.
