• mecfs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s not gonna happen, we need 2/3rds of states, but when republicans block it, it sends a clear message who the wannabe autocrats are.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        it sends a clear message

        eye-roll Need to stop pretending that Republicans are just being cutesy and cryptic, and recognize that large parts of the country fully endorse a fascist federal government.

      • BigMacHole@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Agreed! Them voting Against this is a MUCH clearer Message then them Literally saying You Won’t Need To Vote Ever Again Because The Fix Will Be In!

      • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        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.

    • Ranvier@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      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.

      • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        ”Mankind soon learn to make interested uses of every right and power which they possess, or may assume. The public money and public liberty, intended to have been deposited with three branches of magistracy, but found inadvertently to be in the hands of one only, will soon be discovered to be sources of wealth and dominion to those who hold them… They [the assembly] should look forward to a time, and that not a distant one, when a corruption in this, as in the country from which we derive our origin, will have seized the heads of government, and be spread by them through the body of the people; when they will purchase the voices of the people, and make them pay the price. Human nature is the same on every side of the Atlantic, and will be alike influenced by the same causes. The time to guard against corruption and tyranny, is before they shall have gotten hold of us. It is better to keep the wolf out of the fold, than to trust to drawing his teeth and talons after he shall have entered.”

        Thomas Jefferson

        I understand the limits of Executive Orders, but the Supreme Court has overstepped its bounds. How can you reel in a branch of government that decides which laws will be enforced? Congress is feckless and stilted and captured by interests.

        Pretending that America can litigate itself away from fascism is foolish. Republicans and the conservatives will not give up power willingly. It has to be taken.

        If the Democrats, who claim to want to uphold the conventions of democracy, will not act dictatorially, the Republicans, with the help of the Supreme Court, surely will.

        I know what I am saying seems extreme, because it is. We are experiencing turmoil because of unchecked power. If the Democrats do not ACT the republic will be lost, if it is not already too late.

        • Ranvier@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I fundamentally disagree. I think if you invoke authoritarianism to supposedly prevent it, you’ve already lost. I don’t think that’s the case yet though. I still have hope. Our country has been much less democratic than this before and managed to improve, it can happen again.

            • Ranvier@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              I mean this very practically, if Biden actually began acting extra judicially like you said, he’d just shatter norms faster, make all the false things Republicans say about democrats wanting to destroy democracy true, and lead to a landslide election victory for republicans in the fall (unless Biden went truly authoritarian and stopped the fall elections too). And it’d be obvious what would happen from there. I’m sorry but you just can’t fight fascism with fascism. It doesn’t work. You just get more fascism.

  • elbucho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I’m a bit skeptical on the first bullet point: while I’m all for an amendment to the US constitution that spells out in detail the limits on presidential authority, it’s still an amendment that has to get passed. That means that it needs a 2/3rds majority in both the House and the Senate, or it needs to be supported by 2/3rds of the state legislatures. I don’t think there’s any way in hell that Biden’s going to be able to get that through while the prospect of Trump regaining the presidency is on the horizon. At the moment, 47% of the US Senate is Democrat, with 4% caucusing with the Democrats most of the time, 49% of the US House is Democrat, and 46% of State Governors are Democrat. While it’s not 100% certain that all Republicans would vote along party lines, I’m reasonably certain that all Republicans would vote along party lines, which means a constitutional amendment is dead in the water.

    Now, if Harris wins the presidency, there’s a good chance that the Republicans would be willing to vote for an amendment to curtail presidential authority. But right now? Nuh uh. Not gonna happen. As for the other two bullet points, they’re certainly more possible right now than a constitutional amendment, but still unlikely. Dems don’t have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, and I’m certain that the Republicans would filibuster the shit out of that. Even if that wasn’t the case, there’s no way it’d pass the House. Best case scenario, Harris wins, with a large majority in both houses, and is able to push some legislation along these lines through.

    Edit: changed language from “ratified by 2/3rds of the states” to “supported by 2/3rds of the state legislatures”.

    • pezhore@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Fun fact, it doesn’t have to be an amendment - it can just be a normal law. The check on judiciary is if Congress and the President both say, " you got it wrong SCOTUS" and pass a law that specifically says things are different.

      Now I’m basing that on my 9th grade civics knowledge which could be wrong… But I thought that’s why there were pushes for contraceptive laws post gutting of abortion rights. Basically telling the high court, this is what we’re doing now.

      • snooggums@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        SCOTUS can simply rule the law unconstitutional…

        Laws for contraceptive right are needed because SCOTUS ruled there weren’t any laws saying it was a right, because they have the constitution backwards.

  • katy ✨@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    it’s a testament to how corrupt the court has gotten that just four years ago public sentiment was steadfastly against reforming the court.

    • Delusional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      And that’s how much damage one lunatic republican can do when in office. Four more years of it without some kind of safety net in place will destroy the country as we know it. Thanks for ruining everything good republicans!

      • Ferrous@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        If you think the issue lies in one bombastic and opportunistic president, and not our deity-like elevation of these lifetime-appointed robed clerics who are the only ones we entrust to interpret the constitution as if they have some divine patriotism, then you have been oriented by the democratic party away from what would otherwise be discontentment with the political system, and instead against the republican party which, as it just so happens, makes you fall in line with the democratic party and their fundraising strategies. The democrats desperately want you to ignore the gaping insecurities, volatility, and exploitation in our political system and instead instill a fear of Republicans.

        Trump merely saw how easy it’d be to capture our judicial system that was devised by 20 year old white slavers only 4 generations ago. He correctly identified how the Supreme law of the land is all based on a flimsy interpretation of the honor system: we appoint justices for life and basically just trust them to play nice for their entire tenure without provisions to deal with judicial capture. It’s honestly a miracle we’ve gotten this far without more judges being captured.

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Trump merely saw how easy it’d be to capture our judicial system that was devised by 20 year old white slavers only 4 generations ago.

          Still notice how much smarter were those 20 years old white slavers than most of today’s 40 years olds. They’ve actually designed something that works.

  • zbyte64@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Step 1) Executive order that appoints fake judges to the supreme Court, bypass Congress by ordering the executive branch to treat the judges as legitimate.

    There is no step 2.

  • JamesTBagg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I have doubts a constitutional amendment will pass, but hopefully there are other avenues to enact this plan.

    • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      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.

  • SeattleRain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    They’ll just rule all this unconstitutional without more justices. Democrats are so useless.

    • noride@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I hope you’re sitting down for this one because it’s quite shocking; things ammend to the Constitution become a part of the constitution itself, and thus constitutional.

      • SeattleRain@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Bro, they already ruled Trump a king which the constitution also says isn’t possible. They don’t care what it says.