“All of the members of the Leopards Eating Peoples’ Faces Party strongly condemn the unfounded and bigoted suggestion that THIS PARTICULAR leopard would ever even DREAM of consuming your face!”
Periodic reminder that one of the reasons Hitler wasn't executed for treason against the state after the Beer Hall Putsch was that holdover Wilhelmine-era jurisprudence (who had contempt for the Weimar Republic they supposedly served) was lenient.
If only there was an opposition party that could opposed a SCOTUS nominee as being unfit (as in biased) and/or unqualified.
But no; the best we get is ad hominem attacks. In Covid Barrett's case, she's documented as being pretty determined to render certain decisions no matter the case.
It's the usual SCOTUS Kabuki in which the nominee's plainly stated beliefs regarding the law CANNOT BE QUESTIONED or even raised during the confirmation hearing. To do so would be unalloyed bigotry.
Biden says he’s “not a fan” of packing the courts. I can only hope he is 1) referring to the packing of the past four years and 2) open to being persuaded by the specter of all his legislation being overturned that Democrats have no choice but to add progressive judges at all levels.
We really, really need to have a chat about WHY JUDGES SHOULD NOT BE SO FUCKING YOUNG. We talk a lot about why they shouldn't be so old, but the "Young enough to influence decisions fifty years into the future" thing is utterly fucked up. We want them to have some experience in law, and also maybe some life experience. There's a reason the president can't be a twenty five year old. Tyhe only possible up side to such young judges is the ability to ratfuck people who aren't even born yet. There's no other argument for it. We don't know enough about them at this age, and they mostly don't know enough about themselves or anything else. I'm not trying to be an asshole, it's just that we want them to have some life experience and some experience in the law. Is that really too much to ask?
Bravo, Roy.
“All of the members of the Leopards Eating Peoples’ Faces Party strongly condemn the unfounded and bigoted suggestion that THIS PARTICULAR leopard would ever even DREAM of consuming your face!”
Periodic reminder that one of the reasons Hitler wasn't executed for treason against the state after the Beer Hall Putsch was that holdover Wilhelmine-era jurisprudence (who had contempt for the Weimar Republic they supposedly served) was lenient.
If only there was an opposition party that could opposed a SCOTUS nominee as being unfit (as in biased) and/or unqualified.
But no; the best we get is ad hominem attacks. In Covid Barrett's case, she's documented as being pretty determined to render certain decisions no matter the case.
It's the usual SCOTUS Kabuki in which the nominee's plainly stated beliefs regarding the law CANNOT BE QUESTIONED or even raised during the confirmation hearing. To do so would be unalloyed bigotry.
What can and MUST be discussed:
She has 7 children!
She's a working mom!
She sometimes bakes (or at least buys) cookies!
She has 7 children!
Many people like her!
She has 7 children!
And, finally, she has 7 children!
Biden says he’s “not a fan” of packing the courts. I can only hope he is 1) referring to the packing of the past four years and 2) open to being persuaded by the specter of all his legislation being overturned that Democrats have no choice but to add progressive judges at all levels.
"But stare decisis, ipso facto, nolo contendere, ibid. We trust we have made ourselves clear." Totally.
What's with all the questions? I was chosen by Donald Trump. DONALD FUCKING TRUMP! I mean, Jesus, bless His Holy Name, what more do you need to know?
"Goody Godlywench" LOL
We really, really need to have a chat about WHY JUDGES SHOULD NOT BE SO FUCKING YOUNG. We talk a lot about why they shouldn't be so old, but the "Young enough to influence decisions fifty years into the future" thing is utterly fucked up. We want them to have some experience in law, and also maybe some life experience. There's a reason the president can't be a twenty five year old. Tyhe only possible up side to such young judges is the ability to ratfuck people who aren't even born yet. There's no other argument for it. We don't know enough about them at this age, and they mostly don't know enough about themselves or anything else. I'm not trying to be an asshole, it's just that we want them to have some life experience and some experience in the law. Is that really too much to ask?