Post

No one in this regime will face federal criminal accountability unless we reform the Supreme Court first. That's what folks should be running on. That should be the lesson of the Jack Smith prosecutions: it doesn't matter who the AG is.

4.1K reposts15.8K likes

Agreed. Maybe we could ship them all outside of US jurisdiction for tribunals? Just saying. Or temporarily suspend the Supreme Court while it's being reformed.

Other advanced developed countries also concluded having judges serve a lifetime tenure sans any accountability whatsoever to be anti-democratic & anathema to the betterment of their people — Why do we not consider ourselves deserving of such ? Why must we be at the bottom of the league tables ?

At least 5 of the "Justices" appear to take large amounts of money from donors with cases before the court. When I was growing up in the 1950's they would have been called bribes.

We can’t do that until we take back the house and the Senate, and hopefully the presidency. Then we can create term limits, and expand the court to 13 justices to oversee the 13 districts.

Let’s ban ICE & kill Citizens United! [Narrator] “When asked about the Supreme Authority of the People to Self-Govern & Perfect Coequality of Women protected under Constitution for the U.S.A." (our Republic), Ken Paxton did NOT RESPOND. [Candidate] “I am James Talarico, and I approve this message”

republia.substack.comNative Coequality is Natural LawAlong Paths to Reconciliation by a Return to Grace.

He will blanket pardon EVERYONE attached to him or pays him so NO ONE WILL FACE anything. As for himself it will never reach trial because the way he works the delaying system. Sad state of affairs American has fallen. New Start REMOVE everything Trump and fix laws so it dont happen again.

Thirteen Justices with cases heard by seven randomly selected by computer. Justices must meet requirements such as having ruled on a certain number of cases and go through background checks including financial investigations to rule out large debt.

All of those requirements would call for an amendment to the constitution and that would take 2/3 of the house AND the senate agreeing on the wording of the amendment AND THEN 2/3 of the states legislatures (33) and that would be impossible with the parties in control and how they’re divided.

It won’t be a whole new one. It would just be an amendment. Article 3 is the part that sets up the federal courts and lays out how the Supreme Court is seated and how long they serve. If any changes to the current “lifetime” term they have now, would have to be done through the amendment process.

maybe SCOTUS should be the first to be held criminally liable? Anyone can see the corruption there, verdicts alter depending on which political party or politician gains.

And reverse Presidential immunity for sitting and non-sitting Presidents, and for Presidents who pass out during cabinet meetings. No one should be above the law in a democratic republic. 🚬😎

Agreed. SCOTUS, as the arbiter of truth, must come first to provide rational and ethical judgments on the US Constitution and the balanced seperation of powers. SCOTUS is fundamentally flawed and compromised by the political appointments system. Fixed terms will help, but not solve this problem.

If AG Garland had not been so timid, and Smith had filed the documents case in DC, instead of FL, maybe Trump would have faced more consequences, but yes - Term limits, stack the Court, impeach Alito & Thomas - this SCOTUS will cover for Trump, unless its reformed.

Also reform ideas that could be used to cement authoritarian rule don’t help either. Trump has been TRYING to kill the filibuster for his Stop Americans Voting Ever act. He would love to expand it enough to toss Tiffany Trump and other unqualified loyalists on it. We need ethics and term limits.

Some state convictions can steer clear of their jurisdiction. Our County Prosecutor has said she is interested in bringing state charges against federal employees for directing the commission of crimes in our state, if so it will take longer than 4 years to get there.

When the Supreme Court balance was at its tipping point, too many progressives stayed home or voted Jill Stein because Hillary was just a leeeeeeetle too cozy with Wall Street....

We can't add any justices until we take back the WH in 28. We don't want to put term limits on them either, until traitor trump in gone. Until then it should be ethics laws for Extreme Court justices.

Our laws have to be strengthened and enforced regardless who is in power No one is above the law An entire political party has forsaken our constitution and our country for a corrupt, lying, and incompetent man who is stealing from our nation and enriching himself This must never happen again

I agree with the SCOTUS issue, but it does matter who the AG is. Any of these people would have been more aggressive than Garland: Sally Yates, Doug jones, Preet Bharara, or Jamie Raskin - but we still need him in congress.

BUSINESS INSIDER Jane Roberts,Chief Justice R’s wife made $10.3 million commissions from elite law firms, whistleblowers show In disclosure forms, he mischaracterized $20 million household income from high-powered law firms, concealed her equity stake and failed to recuse in 500 relevant cases.

You hit the nail on the head and drove it all the way home! There must also be a Nuremberg style, January 6th style investigation commission with the power to arrest and imprison those who broke the law. If we don't, conservatives will use the 2024 election as a training exercise.

I agree in general but the AG matters a lot. I recall you defending Garland, the biggest failure at AG in the history of the country, as he hid under his desk for 2 years. Imagine if the orange Felon and rapist was in jail instead of the oval office.

I didn’t defend Garland. I defended facts. He didn’t hide for two years. In month two, he launched the probe into Trump. Here’s a list of things Garland did before he appointed Smith. And keep in mind, he had two trials on the calendar well before the election. SCOTUS stopped them.

Garland said he wanted to look forward and not back. He did tinkering around the edges but refused to do anything substantial until the Congressional investigation forced it. Trump should have been indicted within the 1st 3 months. The J6 riots alone would have had Trump in jail with any other AD.

He never said he wanted to look forward and not back. The J6 committee didn’t force anything. Trump can’t have been indicted in the first 3 months because nearly a dozen key witnesses took Garland to court over privilege. That took a year. And regardless, SCOTUS blocked the trial. Facts matter.

Who decided to file the classified documents case in the district where they were sure to draw Aileen Cannon? Not sure that was Garland. But it showed they cared more about avoiding criticism than getting justice done.

Exactly. Garland also put a 2 month hold on the trump investigations in the fall of ‘22 because the felon was seen as the head of the GOP. Just 1 of 1000 things Garland did to slow walk the investigations.

My feeling is that if the temperature gets hot enough and they see the writing on the wall, at least 2 or 3 will retire so they can be replaced before 2028.

I prefer candidates that agree with you on that, but it isn't an issue to run on if you want votes outside the D activist bubble. So, yes, we want candidates that are committed to that, but no it would not be good tactics to center the campaign on that.

I for sure agree that the SC needs reform, but how do we do that? We have 2 guys who have been around like 100 years, who will eventually be replaced by two other guys just like them for another 100 years. How do we fix this?

I have my concerns about that too. People are too inclined to say, okay it's fixed, when a band aid is applied. Right now, we are on the precipice of disaster, in my opinion. If no disaster happens they will say we overreacted. If it happens, will we be able to recover in our lifetime, if ever?

But candidates should also talk about the endgame, to fully prosecute every person in and out of this administration that violated any law, especially Trump, even when they try to argue that he’s senile and we should have pity. Fuck him!

It goes all the way back to the 1820’s with President Jackson when he blatantly ignored a ruling by the Supreme Court. He was able to get away with it because The House was on his side and since they are the ones to start an impeachment process, he only had to get to the end of his term.

True. But it’s now used another MAGA weapon against candidates suggesting this. MAGA are told they want to eliminate the current judges and don’t like the idea of ethically, morally and legally , holding anyone on their MAGA party accountable to courts, judges , juries or rule of law.

We will need to reform the Supreme Court, break the filibuster, and fire every Democratic member of Congress who refuses to liberate politics from money, reforming the Supreme Court and reversing Citizens United are at the top of the list.

Reforming the Supreme Court has to be championed by the next Democratic leader. If they're unwilling to say it & do it, then they aren't made for this moment. The 6 corrupt judges won't stop until they undo the progress made in the past 75 years on their way to creating their Christian Kingdom.

Agree. But our Constitution didn’t protect us or provide a way for smaller voices to be heard. Politicians are for sale to the highest bidder and that’s not us. We need bottom to top reform, a parliamentary government where everyone gets a shot at representation, not winner take all.

67 Senate seats and 288 House seats We will need to flip 20 in the senate and 74 in the house…. Seems HIGHLY unlikely. And if the president is of a different party, I see there being a huge mess with issuing endless executive orders.

Has there ever been a veto-proof supermajority in both houses of the US legislature? When was there ever one? If there ever had been, that would mean the president would be completely irrelevant when it came to passing any law and it would mean at least two years of MAJOR overhauls to everything

I thought Garland and Smith should have acted quicker and aggressively, but I understood the tightrope they were walking. The Rs would yell "weaponization" no matter what, but they were careful to give that 0 merit. But faster, slower, careful or aggessive, SCOTUS was always going to stop them.

All true. First we need the blue wave.Then we need to impeach, convict, remove this administration. Then we must address SCOTUS.We can assemble a list Then prioritize the issues so as to have a road map for what to do.First is this November VOTE, VOTE BLUE, VOTE EARLY. Then we can move down the list

We The People have not been clear with Congress about our goals. Congress needs a list of Performance Objectives like any other employee with a review before the next election. No more voting on fucking showerheads and kitchen appliances.

I believe they won't also. They've proven that as long as these Republicans/Maga are there nothing will change. All of this Administration n SCOTUS will taint any new people. This regime must be changed.

The Supreme Court should be politically neutral and political appointments should be abolished. Then the correct interpretation of the law would be followed rather than a political one.

I disagree. The entire lesson from Jack Smith is that it matters immensely who the AG is. If you have a feckless coward like Merrick Garland who waits 3 years to start an investigation it is doomed. The next Dem AG needs to go scorched earth from Day1. Armed raids, perp walks and televised trials.

Who told you he waited 3 years to start an investigation into Trump? Whoever it was, you should probably stop listening to them. It’s bananas that you think he didn’t start investigating until March 2024.

My apologies. 2 years. Jack smith was appointed special counsel November 18 2022. 21 months after inauguration. Knowing the way Orange Shitshimself fights by delay, and the length and complexity of the investigation this should have happened Jan 2021.

Impeach, remove, and replace the blatantly corrupt and bias with hopefully honest justices. Then expand the court. Also, we the people need to elect the judges and have term (and age) limits for them.

Let them take their chances in a court where they're on trial for treason against the United States... Historically, fascist enablers don't fare very well.

if and when Democrats are able to take control of one or both houses of Congress, they will face countless glaring challenges. Each will have experts screaming that this one or that one is the A Number One Absolute Top Priority. So what should we do first? Honest question, deserves honest debate.

They'd have to explain it in a way that clearly connects to people's daily lives. Most voters don't prioritize this the way engaged political folks on social media do. "Reform the Supreme Court" is abstract; "here's how these decisions affect your healthcare, rights, or accountability" is concrete.

No Dem politician has the guts to do anything about the court. And they never will. The GOP does have the guts. It is even in project 2025 and Vance waxed poetically about how based and redpilled he would feel if he ignored SCOTUS

It still matters who the AG is, but yes, the SC must be made to obey the constitution and act like we were intended to be a democracy, not a fascist regime. They have a duty to support democracy, just like everyone else does.

Run on three things: 1) anti-corruption 2) affordability & 3) freedoms These values address EVERY single issue and illness afflicting our body politic, economic system, and society writ large.

Congress is supposed to be the most powerful branch of government. If they act in lockstep they can impeach presidents and judges. It is sad to watch the most powerful branch completely abdicate their power and refuse to reign in this lawlessness.

There needs to be a strong enforceable ethics code for the Supreme Court. Zero tolerance for the exchange of goods or money for influence. Zero. If they lie during confirmation, they should be removed from the bench. These are the very people who really should be held to the highest standard..

Well, most of that is true , but leadership matters , Intelligence matters, doing your job right matters. So, being an AG with an oath to country and very specific job descriptions is vital to a healthy democracy !

Dems need to run on reforming SCOTUS because Republicans have ALREADY packed this court with their cronies from the Heritage Foundation. They broke “norms” to do it by denying Obama a nominee and then ramming one through while people were voting. They packed state courts too. Dems are in denial.

They have to focus on issues that directly affect the voters. Runaway inflation is hurting everyone—except the wealthiest among us. Candidates who have a plan to tackle prices of gas, food, insurance, and so on, will drive more people to the polls, IMO.

Exactly right. But it also has to be the democratic president. Gotta be someone who will set aside the "healing of America" and Kumbaya democratic "kindness and compassion" long enough to prosecute & jail the traitors that broke the laws & tried to change United States into a fascist military state.

It’s not only that Democrats need to get their shit together. Biden failed us so did garland no one tell me they didn’t. Schumer did as well. Dems suck at the game and messaging and no country allows a coup for four years. For gods sake they tried to hang the vp and no one went to jail!

I disagree. Lauren Bobert got her second election because of the Democrats' incompetence. Dems not putting enough judges in place while Biden had a majority also major fail that was Schumer failing. MD is going to have issues this time because Dems are incompetent here as well.

And how is that going to happen? I agree but lots of opportunities have come and gone. Unless they die while Dems are in power nothing will change this corrupt SCOTUS.

For all intents and purposes, for a lot of people, they are the same. Granted, this is a coup, so became different. But I can see why some people might think that. The Dems should spend less effort trying to become Republicans and more effort becoming more differentiated from them.

Just off the top of my head. But I have 2 1/2 years to refine it 1. National Healthcare paid for by cutting military 50% 2. Reform Supreme court 3. Tax reforms to make billionaires and companies pay their fair share

Beware! No guarantees... Eisenhower never could understand how after nominating him, his conservative friend Earl Warren would become a revolutionary liberal leader of his great Supreme Court. But also... Trump may beat us to the punch on expansion of SCOTUS.

We need to do exactly what FDR planned: pack the freaking court. We need at least as many Justices as there are appeals courts, so that means at least 13. I'd also push for term limits and absolute fealty to all types of monetary limits on those justices. No stocks unless held in blind trust, etc.

We need to go bigger. Adding 12, making it 21. That wipes out the influence of any one judge. And if we don't dream big then when the pendulum swings both parties will add a few more every time they have a trifecta. We need a generational shift now.

I don't know about 50 justices, but the blind rotation to prevent bribing or even simply playing the argument of a case toward the known prejudice of a justice --we need that.

I agree. 21 should at very least be the starting point for the ask. Every single Presidential primary candidate needs to commit to expanding the court to some level.

WE need 13 Justices on OUR Supreme Court who are committed to interpreting OUR US CONSTITUTION & NOT their opinions or Religious & Partisan leanings! We need: 1 Female Chief Justice (finally!) 6 Female & 6 Male Justices (to end Misogyny) Representing White, Black, Brown & other ethnicities!

Its unredeemable at this point and this is the point where it will do the most damage to America Let me rephrase👉AmeriKKKa becus once the forces converge & sink the former iteration AMERICA will emerge & start the process of trying to be great & it will have all the tools at its disposal

Don't stop there. While you're redistributing SC seats, we need at least 1 LGBTQ, 2 of religions other than Christianity (tempted to cap the number of Roman Catholics but wouldn't be fair), 2 atheists, 1 vegetarian. And I'm sure I've left out some other important population segments.

More people of color and women. It’s time for a woman president but I don’t see it happening. Not yet. We need a solid leadership team who are fighters. The status quo has nearly lost us our democracy. That 💩 has to end. R’s are corrupt & we need people who will stand up to the corruption & fight.

15 appeals courts and 21 SC justices. Term limits and age limits. Ethics rules the same as other judges and enforcement. Graham Platner had my support when he said he was ready to impeach Thomas and Alito immediately.

The Supreme Court‘s as corrupt as tRUMP. I know it will never happen, but there needs t be term limits on court positions. Our democracy is a house of cards in this country with our current state.

I agree, but I don't think it's a winning plank of the platform. It will turn off some moderates and many orphaned Republicans. It certainly can be used as an issue to look into, but 'promising change' on the Court might alienate too many

Hopefully, when the Democrats regain the White House the president will make Jamie Raskin AG, who should have been the AG under Biden. If he had chosen him over Garland Congress and the country would’ve looked a lot different.

I respectfully disagree, generally with magic bullet thinking but also specifically here. It matters who the AG is, VP, speaker etc. Fight everywhere, win somewhere and get moving. This is why the failure of the Dem leadership placeholders to get behind the #TrumpStein issue is so egregious. #Fight

Absolutely! We can’t be governed by the rule of law if the top court refuses to follow it, is corrupted by partisan influence, has virtually no code of ethics and isn’t held accountable unless enough of Congress deems it necessary. All of that must change. Lifetime appointments have backfired.

Ist. We make term limits. Then while in charge next year elect new ones. But they need to be very careful. Then maybe charge the recently retired With accepting bribes. Hoping for change. 💙🌊

You could have the justice league as the AG and the Supreme Court will stop them. I'm not saying we shouldn't have a great AG. But they won't be able to do anything with the current Supreme Court there.

They’re already trying to. Congress sets the number of Supreme Court seats through legislation. They’re introducing a bill to set it at 9 justices Which that number was set decades ago so it’s a meaningless action.