• Audacious@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    218
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    This would be amazing if he can do it. At least he’s promising good changes vs trump promising judgment day on day one…

    • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      It is weird that they dicked around for 4 years on this, though.

      Still, vote blue, your vassals beg you (Australian here).

      • evenglow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        4 years of daily Republican sabotage of the US government. Democrats are not perfect. They are also not the problem at hand.

      • Wahots@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Undoing the amount of damage they caused takes time. Biden inherited a spiraling economy, hundreds of thousands of people sick and dying, and a coup attempt that nearly got a bunch of people killed.

        Not to mention all the idiotic shit the prior president had done while in office, such as austerity cuts that fucked social programs, legal systems, and low and middle income Americans.

        It will take 12-16 years of unified democrat rule to fix corruption, regulatory capture, anti-trust for monopolies, universal healthcare, infrastructure investments that don’t get slashed by idiotic presidents, etc.

        Four years of chemotherapy isn’t nearly enough when we have policy tumors and R&D funding cut abscesses from fucking idiots like Regan, Bush, and Trump.

    • Wahots@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Hmmm, genuinely improving the lives of Americans vs fire and brimstone and a dictator. Tough choice for Americans in November /s

      Get everyone you can to vote in November, seriously. Trump’s faction is barely scraping by. We can do this.

  • daikiki@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    142
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Just pack the goddamn court. There’s ONE conservative justice on the Supreme Court who was appointed by a president who came to power having received more votes than his opponent, and that’s Clarence Thomas, the man whose loyalties can be bought with a luxury vacation and whose wife aided and abetted insurrectionist traitors.

    The ENTIRE conservative wing of the Supreme Court is illegitimate. Every single one of them. And you know what? Thanks to the GOP, it only takes 50 votes to approve a supreme court justice. It used to be sixty, but they changed the rules so they could more conveniently destroy America.

    • IamSparticles@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      Easier than a constitutional amendment, but it still requires 60 votes in the senate to expand the number of justices in the court.

  • MyOpinion@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    113
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    There needs to be a true check to the complete corruption of the supreme court.

    • praechaox@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      73
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yep, exactly. I remember seeing many warnings in 2021-22 saying that then was the right time to pack the courts. Establishment Dems twiddled their thumbs while insisting that everyone everywhere needs to follow proper decorum and procedure. And now look what happened with the string of terrible Supreme Court decisions.

      • Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        The fact that the US has to ‘pack the courts’ to get anything through shows how broken the system is.

        Not that any other country is better but still, you’d think judges should be impartial and resistant to influence, and yet you get Clarence offering up his chocolate starfish for a vacation in a warm climate

      • LaunchesKayaks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Fuck procedure. Dems need to act instead of just talking about shit. I’m legit terrified for this next election.

    • Omega@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      2 months ago

      Only if the ranking is applied at the state level AND the national level. I’m not going to throw away my vote or my delegate’s vote.

        • Omega@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          32
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yes please. As someone who isn’t in a swing state, I would like my vote to matter.

          And a popular vote means citizens in other countries could vote (Puerto Rico).

          Also, prisoners should get a vote.

          • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            33
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            And a popular vote means citizens in other countries could vote (Puerto Rico).

            I just want to point out that Puerto Rico is not a separate country, it is part of the United States. The people there are US Citizens just like those in the 50 States. However, as a territory they do not have the same representation in government or federal support as a full State.

            A lot of people get this wrong. Including some Border Patrol officers. They don’t exactly hire the most educated for the Frontline positions, that’s pretty clear from the stupid clearly wrong or illegal shit CBP ends up doing.

            • Omega@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              2 months ago

              Thank you. I meant to say other territories (hence citizens), since they don’t get a vote. But yeah, a lot of people don’t realize they are part of the U.S.

      • Mog_fanatic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        Isn’t ranked choice like straight up banned in like 12 states or something? You’d have to flip each of those states first before even going down that road right?

        • Omega@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          2 months ago

          Well, theoretically federal law would supercede state law. But current SCOTUS is kinda wack right now.

            • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              2 months ago

              The Constitution is so vague on the point, it doesn’t even require that states hold elections. It just says that the legislature decides how the state’s presidential electors are appointed. That didn’t stop the Originalists on the Best Supreme Court Money Can Buy™ from ruling in the Colorado ballot case that, well, akshually, legislatures aren’t allowed to decide how to run their state’s elections.

              Now, you’d think that a ruling that federal law supersedes state control of elections means that federal law supersedes state control of elections, but that principle may only apply to who appears on the ballot. It may only apply to whether their guy appears on the ballot. Don’t pin down the Best Supreme Court Money Can Buy™, man! They need to know who’s going to benefit from ranked-choice voting before they know what the Constitution actually says. Hell, the Constitution may actually contain a list of which states are allowed to have ranked-choice voting, and which are not. We just don’t know yet!

  • Scroll Responsibly@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Make every US citizen a Supreme Court justice when they turn 18. There’s nothing in the constitution that says you can’t do that. Put cases up to popular vote every year or two. Also, whatever law passed to do this would count as senate approval because who’s going to strike it down… the Supreme Court?

      • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        2 months ago

        This meme is great but it drives me crazy. There are certainly multiple eligibility requirements to play on a school basketball team, including age and being a registered student, which would prevent a dog from qualifying.

      • Notyou@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        There is that basketball court that’s on top of the Supreme Court…does that mean another Air Bud sequel but this time he’s a justice?

    • ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      This is hilarious. I’m sure someone with more bandwidth than me can point out a dozen reasons why this is bad, but fuck if it isn’t funny and appealing.

  • ProvableGecko@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    PACK THE FUCKING COURT! You’re in that office to serve the people not the fucking system. Doesn’t matter anyway republicans are going to destroy everything they can get their hands on.

    • Ooops@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Yeah, why would you try to actually solve a problem instead of just applying a band-aid that the next administration can rip of again (by incresing the size of the court again)?

      • BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Every solution that works within the system would be a band-aid. The entire system is band-aids. The government set up by a group of wealthy white men almost 250 years ago for a population 130 times smaller than it is now simply does not and cannot work in today’s world.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    He can’t do it with a Republican House and a Senate that requires 60 votes to do anything.

    • EnderWiggin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 months ago

      That’s the real problem, but too many people here and elsewhere are unaware of the limitations on how the legislative process works. Anything like this is pretty much DOA and purely ceremonial. I’m happy for all of the positive things Biden has been able to get done in spite of such gridlock, but amendment level change in this country is just not at all possible right now.

    • retrospectology@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      2 months ago

      And even if he could, there’s literally zero reason to think he would. This is more empty campaign rhetoric like back in 2020.

      • jordanlund@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        That’s the thing that kills me, he makes these promises that he KNOWS he can’t get done, which leads to the whole “Well, Democrats never do anything!” argument.

        What he NEEDS to say is “Here’s what I want to do, but I need your help throwing out the bastards in the House and Senate blocking it! Here are their names, let’s get them gone!”

  • PenisWenisGenius@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    inb4 the Supreme Court rules that new laws made about the Supreme Court are illegal. Why even stop there. They can simply rule that ACKTCHUALLY the US is a monarchy and Clarence Thomas is in charge of it all.

      • PenisWenisGenius@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Become ungovernable instead, whatever that means to you. Refusing to have kids and then living as flat as possible so you can smoke weed is one example of social behavior that harms their agenda a lot more than committing suicide does.

    • LesserAbe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Imagine shit hitting the fan if Congress passed a law limiting a clearly corrupt court and then the court “ruled it unconstitutional”.

      That isn’t going to fly.

      It’s not even in the constitution that the supreme court can rule something unconstitutional, they just did it once early on and everyone went with it.

  • Phoenix3875@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    2 months ago

    The reforms backed by Biden would need congressional approval and the constitutional amendment would require ratification by 38 states in a process that seems nearly impossible to succeed.

    • shottymcb@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Requires an act of congress and elimination of the filibuster. Not possible with the current makeup of the Senate. Need more blue senators, which is hard because California gets the same number of Senators as North Dakota, which has the same population as a small apartment complex in LA.

      So we need record turnout for that. Vote.

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

          Are you talking about the period in which Sinema and Manchin actively sabotaged the agenda of their own party?

      • InternetUser2012@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Vote and volunteer to help others get to the booths if they can’t on their own. We know they want to do everything they can to make voting harder for the blue. Getting the blue to stay home is their only chance of winning. If everyone votes, there is no longer a republican party. (or those that are around won’t matter, they won’t be able to strip rights from the American people)

    • sudo@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Pack it, but better yet is to completely restructure it. The Constitution is extremely vague about what SCOTUS is. Just that it exists, its the highest court in the land, and Congress defines it.

      • BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        You mean conservatives, but I agree. Our less-fascist conservative party doesn’t like to even attempt too much progress; it would upset their owners.

        • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          You mean conservatives

          Incrementalists believe in doing as little as possible and would do nothing if they thought they could get away with it. Conservatives believe in fascism and will implement it as quickly as we let them. Incrementalists believe in letting them.