this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2025
149 points (98.7% liked)

United States | News & Politics

3903 readers
122 users here now

Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.

If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.

Rules

Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.

No memes/pics of text

Post news related to the United States.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A justice suggests flouting democratic norms after taking part in a decades-long project to weaken democratic rights.

all 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] snekerpimp@lemmy.world 44 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Cool, I’ll optionally listen to the next judge I get in front of and I’ll let you know how many feet under the fucking jail I end up.

[–] Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world 19 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You'll be lucky if there's a real judge involved in the future if this is the way things are going to progress. You'll get an immediate hearing with a judge from an executive branch judiciary division.

Police officer: "you're under arrest for walking outside of your socioeconomic zone."

Defendant: "When's my trial?"

Judiciary officer: "Right now." [Gaval sounds] "Guilty."

[–] snekerpimp@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You laugh, but this is coming soon if it's not here already.

[–] Wilco@lemm.ee 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

We already have Administrative Law Judges (ALJ). You can get tied up in a "court" hearing with a person that has never practiced law as a "judge". This happens in administrative offices like Child Protective Services, the Social Security Administration, state unemployment agencies, and even the ATF. You can eventually appeal yourself out of these idiot-run hearings, but if you make a misstep like a missed hearing call or late form within the complex process you get denied justice.

[–] Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Thanks for teaching me something new, albeit highly concerning. Can you imagine how bad it might get if an administration that promotes unitary executive theory took control? Oh, boy. We'd be in some hot water then.

[–] clonedhuman@lemmy.world 37 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

The Fascists are in power now.

These are people who want power, only care about power, and only ever 'respect' power greater than their own.

They don't ever question power. They worship it.

[–] Thrawne@lemmy.world 29 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's treason then

[–] ABetterTomorrow@lemm.ee 20 points 11 months ago

You heard him folks, remove the nazis in the Supreme Court!

[–] Toneswirly@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Damn Alito, why do we need you then?

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

His purpose is to prevent a moral and ethical non-fascist from taking the seat.

[–] _haha_oh_wow_@sh.itjust.works 10 points 11 months ago

Of course he did.

[–] collapse_already@lemmy.ml 8 points 11 months ago

I didn't realize Marbury v. Madison was controversial. Good precedent since 1803, so in the dumper it goes?

[–] Eryn6844@beehaw.org 8 points 11 months ago

that sounds like a great idea. no one needs to show for parking tickets or jury duty either.

[–] Uniquitous@lemmy.one 3 points 11 months ago

So we're just done with the rule of law? Anything goes now? I don't think that's a door he necessarily wants to open.

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago

What Webster dictionary definition did he base this legal opinion on?

[–] TacoButtPlug@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

Oh course he does.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 2 points 11 months ago

I just think about whats going to happen to clarence thomas once judges are powerless.