Biden plans to undermine the Supreme Court.

[Rogue AI]

Biden’s brain is pudding. Who is running this circus?

Fags, eco-nazis, and 'it takes a village' idiots.

 

[OKTexas]

Doesn't matter. We expect a modicom of moral certainty from people who are nominated to sit in final judgement for decisions to uphold or strike down laws that will have an effect on millions of people in this country. This is the highest court in the land. Your behavior, your ethical standards must be above reproach.

Who gives a shit about politicians. Shit, the unwashed masses elect people like Boebert, MTG, Gaetz, Menendez....and You Know Who.
We expect this behavior from them. Not from Supreme Court justices.

That's the purpose of the confirmation process.

.

 

[OKTexas]

You said the same thing about Biden forgiving student loans.

How's that workin out for ya?

There's going to be a bunch of disappointed people when it works it's way through the courts. And xiden could be held personally responsible for misappropriation of government funds.

.

 

[OKTexas]

The SC were given lifetime appointments to guard against political partisanship

Clearly that is not working

It has for 248 years, no reason it can't do so in the future. You commies just have your panties in a twist because a few decisions didn't go the way you wanted.

.

 

[OKTexas]

I believe there are standards that other judges operate under.

Inferior courts are established by congress, they can set the rules for them.

.

 

[OKTexas]

You have no say in it. Roe v Wade was PRECEDENT. Decided decades ago. By better minded judges than the conservatives we are forced to bear today. Not to be touched by any state and overturned.

You want to end abortion? Support policies that make it unnecessary. Not making women second class citizens in this country.

About 240 other cases were precedent until they were overturned by subsequent courts. Roe wasn't special. It's an issue for the States to deal with, as the founders intended.

.

 

[OKTexas]

So precedent doesn’t exist?

Only until the next case that challenges it. Then it will be upheld or overturned. Very simple concept.

.

 

[conserveguy877]

He's ridiculous becoming desperate since his own people are turning on him.

 

[Foxfyre]

Biden to announce support for major changes to Supreme Court amid outrage over recent decisions: report

President Biden is reportedly planning to propose changes to the U.S. Supreme Court that could include proposals for legislation to establish term limits.

www.foxnews.com

President Biden is reportedly planning to endorse major changes to the U.S. Supreme Court, including proposals for legislation to establish term limits for the justices and an enforceable ethics code, as growing outrage continues following a series of controversial decisions.

"This decision today has continued the court’s attack in recent years on a wide range of long-established legal principles in our nation, from gutting voting rights (that is a lie) and civil rights (that is a lie) to taking away a woman’s right to choose (that is a lie), to today’s decision that undermines the rule of law of this nation,(that is a lie)" Biden said in public remarks later that day.


Comment:
Our constitution was designed to protect the citizens from a tyrannical government.
The Supreme Court is trying to protect us from the lawless Democrat Party.
They are not saving "democracy", they want a one-party dictatorship.
The corrupt Democrat Party can't operate within the bounds of our constitution; therefore, they are trying to destroy the balance of power between the Executive branch, Legislative branch and Judicial branch.
This is very dangerous; they will create a totalitarian police state.

He'll never get it past the House. How is somebody in politics for 50 years and not understand that Supreme Court justices have lifetime appointments unless they resign for the explicit purpose of taking politics out of it?

 

[OKTexas]

But but but super senile Joe and his staff will do it with a pen and a phone.
Blood and ashes in the streets will soon follow

And it will be struck down by the courts.

.

 

[ozro]

And it will be struck down by the courts.

.

Of course

 

[OKTexas]

Of course

.

 

[pknopp]

Funny how it's only needed now that the court isn't licking Joe's feet.

It should have been in place 50 years ago.

Absolutely. So where is the problem?

 

[pknopp]

First, term limits on the court would require a constitutional amendment, GOOD LUCK WITH THAT!

I never mentioned that so I'm not sure why you even brought that up.

Second, congress has no authority to impose any rules on the other co-equal branches of government. Jus like the executive and SCOTUS can't impose rules on congress.

The court created a ruling out of nothing that covered the Executive.

Third, under our current Constitution, the only way to remove a justice or any other federal judge for that matter is impeachment. How would you think that would work out?

.

It should work out fine for an unethical judge.