The Supreme Court gave him an avenue, an official act by executive order. Remove 3 conservative justices reducing the Court to it’s original number of 6.
Let the 6 member court deliberate this executive decision. Democrats need to stop asking for permission. Republicans don’t. They act, then apologize for overstepping. Democrats need to stop being defensive and start being offensive.
No, there are a lot of things that are not legal but also not criminal. Here, the difference is whether or not the President is empowered to take such action. Similarly, the President cannot enact a new tax law or bind the nation to a treaty as he lacks the legal authority to do so, but attempting to do so wouldn’t (under some scenarios) be an otherwise criminal act.
Also, the reality is these rulings are only when it benefits whomever pays them the most.
You’d have to convince Putin and a lot of trillion dollar corps that own these justices first. Which seems very unlikely.
He could sacrifice himself for the greater good and commit illegal acts to wipe the SCOTUS and start again with people that will hold him accountable for his illegal acts. He has a unique opportunity that will go away either through reform or the dismantling of US democracy. Either way, the opportunity is now or never
Or, better yet, increase the number of justices to at least the number of circuits we have. I would say take that number and multiply it by three so that there are 3 from each that can form a small panel to deal with smaller issues and form a larger, randomly selected, 9-11 judge panel to deal with bigger issues. It would also dramatically limit the power any one justice holds. Mandate a strict code of ethics and disclosure and put in term limits.
Despite the actual structure of the Constitution and all of its amendments, the Supreme Court, as an institution, has fought to exceed the limits of its constitutional power from the very beginning. Its ruling in Loper Bright is only its latest and most brazen move to set itself up as the ultimate and final authority in the nation. As I said, the appropriate historical context for its ruling today is not 1984 and its Chevrondecision but its 1803 ruling in Marbury v. Madison. It was then, back when the country was still in its swaddling blankets, that the Supreme Court declared itself the sole interpreter of the Constitution. The word “unconstitutional” appears nowhere in the Constitution, and the power to decide what is or is not constitutional was not given to the court in the Constitution or by any of the amendments. The court decided for itself that it had the power to revoke acts of Congress and declare actions by the president “unconstitutional,” and the elected branches went along with it. The Supreme Court was never supposed to have this much power
Oh really? I’d now like to see you throughout historical events right before they happened, expressing your doubts as if you uniquely had them… “I don’t know, guys…”
Yes, that’s the point. Nobody has 100% faith that this is a rubber stamp, that’s not the point.
First, the announcement itself from a sitting American president is historic and important, second, it keeps a hard focus on the corrupt conservative frauds and illegitimacy of this current court. Those are the victories, the actual congressional amendment (a process designed to be difficult in a process that demands consensus) is and always was the long shot that could happen.
i haven’t been to mcd in years, but my parents were sick with covid and requested i pick up some mcdonalds for them-- JFC how could i have ever thought it couldn’t get any worse–what a fucking shitshow
Why bother telling retailers how to package them? Just hold the card companies financially responsible for the theft/scams and force them to honor what the customer paid for in the store. I’m sure the card companies will figure out on their own how to stop the thefts and scams, once they are actually responsible for the money.
That still forces customers to report fraud, and then fight whatever refund hurdles the company can implement. Most people will not do the above for a few dollars.
Doing both is an even better situation. Make them fix the packaging to a minimum standard but also put them on the hook for fraud loses.
I stopped going to McDonalds around 2004 after seeing Super-Size Me (which didn't really convince me of anything other than what I already knew; Fast food in general is gross).
A few years later, I was hanging out with some friends and someone wanted a drink or something, so we walked in, and the smell was overwhelming, and disgusting. It wasn't different, it was the exact same McDonalds smell, it was just gross as fuck.
About a decade after that, I was dating someone who wanted some of their fries (they were having a bad day and wanted comfort food). So I drive over there, just order the fries (everything else she wanted was already at home), and head home. The entire time, my car was filling with this gross, oily, I-don't-know-what smell of those fries. It occurs to me that I could only define it as "smelling like McDonalds".
Mind you, I've gotten fries at Wendy's, Jack in the Box, Arby's, etc. None of them smell gross. They smell like salty potatoes (except any place that has curly fries; they all seem to be from the same supplier, and they're gross).
I haven't been back to McDonalds in probably another 10 years, but I can only imagine that my first reaction would be to wretch, and my second reaction would be to leave. I have no idea how they fucked things up so bad, I had them all the time as a kid. I still eat Wendy's spicy chicken sandwiches, they're fine. wtf.
I’m betting what your smelling is the “beef flavor” (actually made of wheat and milk) in their fry seasoning. McDonald’s once used beef fat to cook their fries, so when they switched to vegetable oil they started throwing “beef flavor” on their fries to replicate the meaty flavor.
When there’s another Republican president, this will be the least of our worries. The Heritage Foundation and Federalist Society have captured the courts. There are no judicial means to enact this. If it is challenged in court, it will lose. Waiting for Congress to act is hopium. Do it, then apologize for having to do the right thing.
The Supreme Court dominates our elected branches of government because our political leaders lack the strength to do otherwise. We deserve no better than the yoke the court has fashioned for us, because we are the ones putting it on. source.
I’m open to other ideas. But, we’ve tried nothing and we’re all out of ideas won’t cut it with fascism looming. Act in a utilitarian manner, and sort out the deficiencies later.
Why not? As an originalist constitutionalists, conservatives should laud a president who reduces the court back to its Constitutionally mandated 6 justices.
You seem confused on what an executive order is (or you’re not confused and are just saying this in bad faith). It’s not just the president randomly saying I order this to happen like some kind of dictator. It’s the executive laying out his/her interpretation of specifics on how a law should be implemented, a law already passed by congress. So unless congress has passed a law already, saying congress gives the executive the power to increase the size of the court on a whim, or decide to impose term limits on a whim (and they most certainly have not), then the power still rests with congress. Setting up and regulating the courts is a job expressly delegated to congress in the constitution. An executive order is meaningless here. What law would it derive its authority from? A congressional law might not even be enough for all of this, that’s why part of the plan talks about a constitutional amendment.
And “No words” ?! How on earth are we supposed to build a concensus to do something, if in your opinion no one is allowed to even talk about it or express their support until it’s already happened? You make no sense. The sitting president endorsing supreme court reform is a huge step. And Harris is endorsing it too. Now we just need enough members of congress to get on board, and that’s how it could happen. Not talking about it because it can’t happen this second doesn’t make it any more likely to happen. Comments like yours if anything make it less likely, and discourage support for the people trying to actually get it done.
I’m tired of all these nonsensical, “why doesn’t Biden just become dictator right now” comments. We’re voting against Trump because we don’t want a dictator.
I went to McD’s a week ago for an Egg McMuffin meal with an extra hash brown and a large Coke for the drink: $15.00. Less than 2 years ago, this exact meal was like $5.
I mean yeah, but I wonder how many other vendors so this kind of crap to franchises. Again, not taking any blame towards McD (they can fuck off into the sunset), I was just wondering if there was even a small percentage of chance that vendors could also have something to do with the price increases.
I don’t understand getting to the drive-thru and seeing those prices and ordering the food anyhow. Why don’t you just tell the person, “actually, never mind. this is too expensive?”
Go to a grocery store nearby and grab a deli sandwich and fountain drink. At least it’ll be fresh food.
If you are pressed for time and/or have your hungry kids in the car then a couple of dollars isn’t a big deal. But that doesn’t mean those consumers are going to come back again after getting burned by high prices.
Starbucks raised the price of my iced coffee and changed the recipe for the brew. I still ordered and drank it, but I have cut my visits from three or four times a week to only once in the last three months. This means they lost out on not only my drink revenue, but the revenue on what I would have ordered for my wife and kids as well.
The Guardian Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [Medium] (Click to view Full Report)### The Guardian is rated with Medium Creditability by Media Bias Fact Check. > Bias: Left-Center
> Factual Reporting: Mixed
> Country: United Kingdom
> Full Report: mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-guardian/
Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News:
Media Bias Fact Check is a fact-checking website that rates the bias and credibility of news sources. They are known for their comprehensive and detailed reports.
Beep boop. This action was performed automatically. If you dont like me then please block me.💔
If you have any questions or comments about me, you can make a post to LW Support lemmy community.
Daily Beast Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [Medium] (Click to view Full Report)### Daily Beast is rated with Medium Creditability by Media Bias Fact Check. > Bias: Left
> Factual Reporting: Mixed
> Country: United States of America
> Full Report: mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-beast/
Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News:
Media Bias Fact Check is a fact-checking website that rates the bias and credibility of news sources. They are known for their comprehensive and detailed reports.
Beep boop. This action was performed automatically. If you dont like me then please block me.💔
If you have any questions or comments about me, you can make a post to LW Support lemmy community.
The Democratic governor of California, Gavin Newsom, posted on X on Sunday evening that the manipulated Harris video should be “illegal” and that he would soon sign a bill banning such media, in apparent reference to a proposal supported by California lawmakers to ban “materially deceptive” election deepfakes.
I don’t know why they’re still on Twitter
If everyone except the right-wing trolls leave, then the whole platform dies quickly.
Well an alternative won’t appear as long as people are still sheltering in the corpse of Twitter. I think Mastadon and Blue Sky together will end up holding that torch.
Well an alternative won’t appear as long as people are still sheltering in the corpse of Twitter
I am not disagreeing with you - I am not using twitter for ages, even before Musk due to their stance on the genocide of Palestinians. I can however see why the politicians do.
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.