Reining in the rogue court is a crucial goal with wide support from Americans across the political spectrum
“Better late than never” is a useful maxim in all of life and in politics as well. On Monday, Joe Biden caught the “better late than never” bug when he unveiled a series of proposals to reform the US supreme court.
Those proposals come more than two and a half years after the US president’s presidential commission on the supreme court issued its recommendations, and more than 40 years after Biden called former president Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s plan to impose term limits on the court “boneheaded”.
In 2020, during his quest for the White House, Biden again distanced himself from people who were pushing for significant institutional reform at the court.
How times have changed. That was before the court overruled Roe v Wade, the ethics scandals of justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas came to light, and before the court gave the president almost blanket immunity from criminal prosecution.
Biden is?
Clearly you’re mistaken. The right-wing starts down this road a long time ago, and have only intensified their efforts. We wouldn’t even be having this conversation right now if they hadn’t blocked Obama from naming a justice, which was his rightful action as sitting President. All this shit with Thomas, Alito, and Roberts that’s finally gotten some attention is only having a light shined on it finally.
Mitch McConnell blocked Obama from nominating Garland to the Supreme Court in March 2016 as “the voters should decide”. Then he fast tracked Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination in September 2020, despite being 6 months closer to an election than the last time he was in the exact same situation.
But please, tell me again how Democrats are politicizing the stolen court?
I mean…you’re just elaborating on what I just said. Can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not, but 🤷
Sometimes replies are concurrences or addendums instead of rebuttals.
It’s rare enough that it’s understandable that one assume the worst by default, though.
The tone was rather confrontational.
That’s true, but it’s possible that it was directed at the article writer rather than the parent commenter. (If that were the case then it should’ve been made more clear, but I know it’s possible that’s what he meant even without clarification because I’ve made the same mistake before.)
It reads like it was meant to be a top level comment.
No, no, no. You see, the cons behaving badly is just situation normal and only right and natural.
If the Democrats were to even point their bad behavior out, never mind do anything to counter the actions of the cons, that is “politicizing” things.