Narrator: They won't.
this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2025
360 points (99.2% liked)
politics
25872 readers
3437 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
While I agree with the principle and spirit, I feel like the Dems should be fighting to preserve and restore the voting rights that are being shredded wholesale before pursuing unicorn fantasies like this.
It's the Supreme Court that is shredding the voting rights to begin with, starting from when they allowed Citizens United.
The two are related
People don't rush to their polling places for "we'll undo some of the damage" as a message. They need well spoken people to sell a lasting solution.
Lifetime appointments should be illegal.
Nobody should be paying their debts or vacations. That should be illegal and judges must be removed from the court during any corruption investigation.
judges must be removed from the court during any corruption investigation
What's to stop someone with enough sway from getting an investigation going against an "unfriendly" judge?
What's stopping corrupt judges right now?
I really appreciate that this article repeatedly drives home the simple fact that this court is corrupt.
This isn't simply an ideological dispute. Roberts, Alito and Thomas, most notably, are corrupt traitors who are actively and repeatedly violating their oaths of office and every ethical standard they're sworn to uphold. They've gone so far in ruling contrary to law, precedent and even the Constitution that at this point they don't even bother trying to explain, much less justify, their rulings. They just issue them.
Personally, I think they are the most egregiously destructive criminals in this administration - they, even more than Trump and his handlers and lackeys and sycophants, are responsible for the fact that the United States is accelerating into autocracy, because their job is to ensure that the federal government stays within the bounds of existing law and of the Constitution, and they have willfully refused to do that job.
Every single brazenly illegal and destructive thing the Trump regime is doing it's doing because the supreme court has refused to honor its commitment to truth and the rule of law, and that in turn because the conservative justices are entirely corrupt and compromised.
And exactly as noted, something must be done. If those corrupt traitors are allowed to continue operating as they have, then anything anyone who wants to save this country from autocracy might do will be for naught, because those corrupt traitors will just arbitrarily rule against them and in favor of the autocrats, entirely regardless of law, precedent or the Constitution. That cannot last - it must be stopped.
As soon as they passed down their ruling on presidential immunity Biden should've had them thrown in a black site. But he was either too idealistic, incompetent, or cowardly to take any action to combat the rising fascism. Thx for the economy Joe I guess, but the country needed you to be much more and you failed us all.
Biden was just doing his part for the DNC and the Dem leadership and their big money donors.
One of their many dirty little secrets is that they want free rein for autocracy and corruption just as much as the Republicans do, but since there isn't a good way to frame it in a leftist narrative, they have to wait for the Republicans to pursue it, so that then they can just not quite manage to stop them. Which they do, every time.
That's been on full display under Trump, since not managing to stop him is pretty much a full time job. But they have lots of experience with it now and are so good at it that if necessary they can even, like they did in the last budget battle, have a few members cross the aisle and vote with the Republicsns to ensure passage, and still maintain the illusion that they really wanted to stop them, but just couldn't quite manage it.
And watch for that in this coming shutdown showdown. They will fold, guaranteed. They always do, because they never really intend to do anything else.
Republicans and Democrats have had a gentleman's agreement about corruption for a long time and he was determined to uphold his end of it.
Republicans and Democrats have had a gentleman's agreement about corruption for a long time and he was determined to uphold his end of it.
Republicans and Democrats have had a gentleman's agreement about corruption for a long time and he was determined to uphold his end of it.
Assuming that the America we knew dies and is replaced entirely, I think that it should have an expanded National Court that has 21 justices. The nation itself divided into four major regions, with each region assigning 4 justices for 10 year terms. 16 judges so far. Each region also has a president, who picks a former Regional Justice, who serves until their associated president has left office. 20 justices. The four Regional Presidents also vote for a Figurehead President from retired presidents, who can only serve one term to represent the nation as a whole. This president chooses a retired National justice as a tie breaker when the National Court is stymied, and to write up the overall opinion of the court.
21 justices. 16 serve for 10 years, 4 up to 8, and 1 for only 4 years.
This prevents any one faction from being able to pack the courts, and keeps them relevant to the general populations by replacing them within a decade.
A live look at Democrats championing it:
Democrats are fine with it
The entire framework of power needs to be reviewed and amendments created to deal with the corrupting influence of money in politics. We should not be where we are.
Government needs a complete overhaul
That will never happen. The current system is designed to keep the status quo for rich and corporate interests. They will never work against the monied interests that support them. If they do, corporate money will just fund their opponents from both sides of the political spectrum.
Citizens United and the bast amount of money available to corporations has eroded the power of governments to actually govern.
The court should be expanded to 13 seats.
Yeah, it should, but instead of legislating the number as 13 until a future law changes it, the number of seats should be tied to the number of Federal Court Circuits. That's how it used to be, with one Justice overseeing each circuit. They stopped at 9 Justices, but there are 13 circuits right now.
They should be appointed on a regular basis (e.g., every two years) instead of having a fixed number of seats and waiting for vacancies.
As long as you’ve got at least six (the original number), the exact number of justices isn’t critical.
Oh please. It’s over, people. There’s no “championing” anything. The only options for survival is removing them all
Should have, could have, would have. But didn't and it's probably too late.
If they ever get the chance to rectify the problem, I won't be surprised if the again pass it up in the name of decorum.
Biden wouldn't do it, because his handling of the Anita Hill investigation is why Clarence got his seat in the first place
When Biden lamented about "the good ole days" of politics, the Republicans liked him because he did shit like push their anti-american SC picks thru.
When he was no longer useful to Republicans and their masters, he was discarded and legitimately never understood he's been taken advantage of his entire career, or he was in on it the whole time and still laughing at Dem voters behind closed doors.
Either Biden was/is an idiot, or he's been working against his voters intentionally for generations.
Biden's always served the interests of the Monied elite. The main factor in which political party he joined was in how electable it was in his district.
Look at the Biden crime bill.
1986 or 1994?
Both were incredibly harmful to Americans, especially the poor and not white.
Yes.
Biden wouldn’t do it, because ~~his handling of the Anita Hill investigation is why Clarence got his seat in the first place~~ it's not within the powers of the president to change the number of judges, it's set by federal statute by Congress.
Fixed it for you. All any president can do about it is pressure Congress. And Biden never had a Senate majority that would ever consider either expanding the court or impeaching the corrupt justices (Manchin and Sinema, for starters).
While I would be in favor of reforming the Court in a variety of ways, if this is meant to be a practical suggestion then any discussion would have to be limited to actions that wouldn't require a constitutional amendment. There is simply no way you will get 2/3 majorities in both houses and 3/4 of the states to all agree on something which is going to shift the balance of power. It would actually be easier to impeach the bad actors on the court, and even that's basically impossible without an unbelievably massive shift in the political landscape.
We can potentially change the number of justices, and we can probably make some meaningful changes to the laws and procedures surrounding the court, but getting rid of lifetime appointments isn't going to happen.
Democrats won't do anything to change it, they stay in power with dysfunction.
They've ridden being "the lesser of two evils" as hard as possible for as long as possible but people have started to get numb to it and Republicans broke the Gentlemans agreement on corruption they had with Democrats.