How about an age limit on presidents while you got your pen out boss.
this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2024
80 points (100.0% liked)
U.S. News
2245 readers
22 users here now
News about and pertaining to the United States and its people.
Please read what's functionally the mission statement before posting for the first time. We have a narrower definition of news than you might be accustomed to.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Post the original source of information as the link.
- If there is any Nazi imagery in the linked story, mark your post NSFW.
- If there is a paywall, provide an archive link in the body.
- Post using the original headline; edits for clarity (as in providing crucial info a clickbait hed omits) are fine.
- Social media is not a news source.
For World News, see the News community.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The hard part is that it would certainly need to go through Congress, and they have a minority in the House and only a technical coalition in the Senate. He can talk, but not much can be done without wining control of the legislature in the next election.
Lmao My family references this all the time. My kids will ask me if they can do something. 'dont let your dreams be dreams' I reply
That's actually so sweet and wholesome. More kids should hear that one.
My guiding principle for my kids is 'dont be a shitsack; there's enough people out there like that already'. I also want them to be educated so they have more choices.
The rest is up to them.
Hell ya!
The effort would be appreciated regardless, assuming there's enough resources to "waste" on such an endeavor.
Agreed. I don't think it will go anywhere right now, but until politicians actually try to push this, it will never gain traction. With the number of voters that support it though, I'd like to think this can eventually be a winner for politicians...
People support such things, as e.g. gun control (90% of us including registered members of the NRA), but donors oppose them. Therefore I suspect we will see the donors chosen over their constituents, as has happened every time as of late π’.
Even so, this particular battle must be fought - unlike e.g. the one with gun control where it is primarily the children of the poors that are being slaughtered (sorry, it's upsetting but true) - bc this lies at the very foundation of this country, and to not fight it would be suicide for our little "experiment" (multiple hundreds of years going!) in democracy.
Every time they don't vote the way the dems want them to they want to change the rules. It always comes back to bite them later though
How is implementing ethics rules and enforcement bad? How can it come back to "bite" them?
Because those that will actually enforce it will turn the other way until "the other guys" get caught.
That's not a problem with having ethics rules though. That's a problem with enforcement
Tomato, tomato. It's all window dressing.
Change the rules? No.
The "rules" are in place, they'd simply be exercising existing structure.
You should listen to the podcast More Perfect if you want to learn more about the court.
When you've convinced an entire political party that any changes in anything ever is always bad.. it's kinda difficult to please those people.
Like, opposing ethics reform? So if a judge gets bribed.. you want them to be able to say, "Nah nah can't get me, I'm friends with a billionaire!"
Or, to ask in a different way, do you think that it was the intention of the founders that the highest judges in our form or government make their rulings based on who gives them the most money?
because ^that is our current system
I have "seriously considered" many things on any given day, that I didn't take action on.
Anyone wanna place bets on if Biden will?
π€ I'm a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
The consideration of such proposals comes in response to growing outrage among Democrats about high court opinions that overturned landmark decisions on abortion rights and federal regulatory powers that had stood for decades.
There have also been increasing questions surrounding the ethics of the court after revelations about some of the justices, including that Clarence Thomas had accepted luxury trips from a GOP megadonor.
I donβt want to prematurely announce it, but Iβm about to come out with a major initiative on limiting the court and what we do and β Iβve been working with constitutional scholars for the last three months, and I need some help,β he said, according to a transcript of the call.
About 2 in 3 Americans say they favor term limits or a mandatory retirement age for Supreme Court justices, according to a 2022 poll from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.
When Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., was the majority leader, he refused to even meet in 2016 with Obamaβs pick for the high court β current Attorney General Merrick Garland, a federal judge at that time.
Trump, in a post on his Truth Social platform, panned the possible Biden move, saying: βThe Democrats are attempting to interfere in the Presidential Election, and destroy our Justice System, by attacking their Political Opponent, ME, and our Honorable Supreme Court.
Saved 74% of original text.