Why stop at expansion? Reign in the Court’s power. There’s nothing in the Constitution about judicial review, and the Sullied Six have shown over and over that precedent is meaningless. Hoist them on their own petard.
I'm posting this in several places (apologies to those who love the same Substacks as I do) because I would really like an answer to this question. Am I missing something obvious?
----------------------------------
Is there a reason no one is talking about the fact that there already IS a statute that effectively does what Paragraph 3 says?
18 USC §2383. Rebellion or insurrection
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
Is it because no one has used this? Obviously, it is DOJ who would prosecute. I understand Smith didn't choose to charge this because First Amendment issues would complicate a swift trial. If the trial is going to get postponed till after the election anyway, can he amend his complaint? Is there a statute of limitations issue?
If trump wins, all bets are off, of course. Trump is likely to appoint his faithful pool boy to the court, along with enough trumpites to destroy it as the institution it is supposed to be. But if trump LOSES, prosecution under that statute could preclude him from every running for anything again.
I am in complete agreement that the court won't save us. It is up to us to VOTE him out of office.
They don’t want to be caught holding the blame if it blows up in their faces… blew up in their faces. Thats why they were so non-committal in their opinion(s).
Thank you!
Not surprised that the opinion is absurd, given that 6/9 are questionable and/or corrupt. It all started with Bush v Gore.
Time to expand the Court. Glad Raskin etal are working on legislation.
Why stop at expansion? Reign in the Court’s power. There’s nothing in the Constitution about judicial review, and the Sullied Six have shown over and over that precedent is meaningless. Hoist them on their own petard.
Illegitimate court. Soon we will have no option but to simply ignore all rulings from this court
Ironically, this already happening on the right.
It's really hard to process the depth of disappointment and fear stemming from this court. Does democracy truly mean so little...?
I'm posting this in several places (apologies to those who love the same Substacks as I do) because I would really like an answer to this question. Am I missing something obvious?
----------------------------------
Is there a reason no one is talking about the fact that there already IS a statute that effectively does what Paragraph 3 says?
18 USC §2383. Rebellion or insurrection
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
Is it because no one has used this? Obviously, it is DOJ who would prosecute. I understand Smith didn't choose to charge this because First Amendment issues would complicate a swift trial. If the trial is going to get postponed till after the election anyway, can he amend his complaint? Is there a statute of limitations issue?
If trump wins, all bets are off, of course. Trump is likely to appoint his faithful pool boy to the court, along with enough trumpites to destroy it as the institution it is supposed to be. But if trump LOSES, prosecution under that statute could preclude him from every running for anything again.
I am in complete agreement that the court won't save us. It is up to us to VOTE him out of office.
Excellent article; lays bare the corruption of the Supreme Court succinctly and bluntly, with receipts.
Great analysis.
The “state’s rights” people always want it both ways. If they truly wanted state’s rights, they would let us in Colorado keep him off the ballot.
Lisa,
Your analysis is by far the best I have read, and I've read lots of them about the latest SCOTUS over-reach.
Thank you.
They don’t want to be caught holding the blame if it blows up in their faces… blew up in their faces. Thats why they were so non-committal in their opinion(s).