politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
That doesn’t sound like an abuse of checks and balances to me, to be honest. This is exactly how the system is designed. They still need a majority to pass anything.
Flip the script for a moment; imagine we had ultra right wing judges who make insane judgements. Is it not the whole point of checks and balances for the legislative and executive branches to be able to exert some control over the judiciary branch provided they have an appropriate majority?
I don’t agree with Johnson, he’s a cunt, but this doesn’t seem like abuse per se, rather exactly how the system was designed. I’m not worried about it because they don’t have the votes.
If you have ultra right wing judges making insane judgements you impeach them, not dismantle an entire branch of government. This is not "how the system was designed" and if you think that, reread the constitution. Even if they don't have the votes, the fact that its being suggested should be setting off red alert alarms about the next stage that the Rs are aiming to put into motion.
That's not what's going on here. The courts are standing up for the law. The President is trying to use the congress as a weapon to ensure the courts cannot force him to follow the law. It's tyranny and we must not accept it.
What insane judgements? I don't think this is a very good example given his orders have ignored laws outright. The rendition thing is basic due process. Its from right wing judges enforcing law. It is by no means ultra left wing judges making insane judgements. I just don't think this example you are giving is apt to the current condition.
"gestures at the 5th circuit"
again its not apt to the situation in that its not ultra leftist making judgements against trump its right wing judges. at least in the case of the renditions. All the same if we are just talking completely unrelated and issue with the courts overall being to bias its not a proper way to deal with it by defunding the whole court system any more than you remove congress or the office of presidency to deal with something. There is processes to remove individuals from any of the branches and that is a within the system, appropriate process. Removing the system is anti system so would be appropriate for a revolutionary this is more usurper activity. That is the idea of taking power from within by removing it. Maybe there is a better word.
sry if I wasn't clear. what Johnson is trying to do is insane. I was just pointing to the 5th circuit that had been throwing out insane rulings and the judge every crazy gop team shops for.