this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2025
279 points (98.9% liked)

politics

22829 readers
3674 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Justice Amy Coney Barrett sided with the Supreme Court’s three liberal justices to co-sign key parts of Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s blistering dissent in a 5-4 ruling allowing Trump to resume deportations of alleged Venezuelan gang members.

The four female justices warned the deportations could “have life or death consequences” for detainees sent to El Salvador’s CECOT mega-prison without judicial review.

Right-wing figures erupted, branding Barrett a “DEI hire” and “disgraceful.”

Influencers like Mike Cernovich and Charlie Kirk accused her of betraying conservative values despite past praise.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 116 points 6 days ago (2 children)

In March, she and Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court’s three liberal justices in holding that Elon Musk’s nebulous cost-cutting initiative DOGE could not unilaterally freeze $2 billion in congressionally approved aid for work that had already been completed.

“She is evil, chosen solely because she checked identity politics boxes,” Cernovich wrote. “Another DEI hire. It always ends badly.”

Notably, Roberts was not accused of being a turncoat—just Coney Barrett.

Hmmmm wonder why. Man, she did her job and got roe v wade overturned, and they'll still outright call her "evil."

[–] [email protected] 56 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Another DEI hire.

They will not be satisfied until the only people allowed to earn a living or have any power are straight white cis men. It's becoming blatantly obvious they don't give a shit about "merit". Woman/minority/LGBT = DEI no matter how they got there. They could have every qualification in the world and it wouldn't be enough to avoid the DEI label.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Wrong. This is fascism, there must always be another enemy. Cis white men will eventually become the "wrong kind" of cis white men. They will one day be labeled "impure", and find themselves under the barrel

[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 days ago

Yep. If they somehow were left with only cis white men, they'd redefine cis, white, or man to divide the remaining people.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 days ago

turning on your own group to appease the overlords will only ever provide temporary reprieve