this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2023
155 points (98.1% liked)

World News

32286 readers
855 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] minorsecond@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Wouldn't the Rs just do the same thing next time they have power? I get what you're saying, but isn't setting that precedent dangerous?

[–] dingus@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You're saying that as if the Rs won't do the same thing anyway without prior provocation. They've literally already broken the law to pack the court and the Democrats sat on their hands. They denied Obama picking a justice because it was "too close to an election" when the election was like six months away, but let Trump pick one when an election was already underway.

Take off the fucking blinders, the Republicans already do these kind of things.

They already set the precedent.

[–] riseuppikmin@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yes- the court is an illegitimate anti-democratic institution and the long-term goal should be its abolishment.

It is the final tool of the American oligarchs to prevent needed structural change in the country.

Anything to highlight this is a good thing. Playing ping-pong with court expansion would be great to accelerate its necessary demise.

[–] 14specks@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

R's don't care about precedent. That's why they actually get what they want. If Democrats actually got things done, they would consistently win elections and it would be be an issue anyway.

It's not going to happen anyway, though.