Time to Accept: US Supreme Court is Illegitimate

Saturday, December 20, 2025

Ryan Doerfler and Samuel Moyn: We need to remake the US high court so Americans don't suffer future decades of oligarchy-facilitating rule

Posted by Corky at 10:40 AM | 94 COMMENTS | permalink

Yes. Yes. Yes. It's time to accept that the US supreme court is illegitimate and must be replaced www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...[image or embed]
" Jeff (Gutenberg Parenthesis) Jarvis (@jeffjarvis.bsky.social) Dec 19, 2025 at 7:04 AM

Comments

"Rather than adhere to the same institutionalist strategies that helped our current crisis, reformers must insist on remaking institutions like the US supreme court so that Americans don't have to suffer future decades of oligarchy-facilitating rule that makes a parody of the democracy they were promised.

In Trump's second term, the Republican-appointed majority on the supreme court has brought their institution to the brink of illegitimacy. Far from pulling it back from the edge, our goal has to be to push it off."

#1 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-19 10:45 PM

Lol.

Good stuff Corky.

#2 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-12-19 11:03 PM

How would you know?

#3 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-19 11:41 PM

This is Dems telegraphing that they plan on court packing once they regain power. All because the court isn't giving the left the victories they feel entitled to.

#4 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-12-19 11:47 PM

How would you know?
#3 | POSTED BY CORKY

Its not?

#5 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-12-19 11:58 PM

All because the court isn't giving the left the victories they feel entitled to.
#4 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Are you saying Corky feels entitled? Is Corky a White Male Boomer? The type of Boomer that sold White Male Millennials down the river?

#6 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-12-20 12:00 AM

" Are you saying Corky feels entitled?"

Absolutely. The Obama presidency brought a massive sense of political entitlement on the left and when Hillary was anointed and lost in 2016 too much of the left lost their collective minds.

#7 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-12-20 12:05 AM

Amen Corky Amen. Preach.

#8 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2025-12-20 12:19 AM

-This is Dems telegraphing that they plan on court packing once they regain power.

How can they do that?

It'll take 20 years for the Democratic Party to effectively flip the court back to the left. And that's if they demonstrate they have any balls at all.

#9 | Posted by eberly at 2025-12-20 12:53 AM

How can they do that?

I think the theory is to increase the number of members on the court.

#10 | Posted by REDIAL at 2025-12-20 12:57 AM

" How can they do that? "

They tried it in 2021. They needed to first nuke the filibuster but only had 50 Senate seats (VP Harris would have been the tie breaker). Manchin and Synema were opposed and both are gone now. The only vocal opposition the such a blatant power grab is Fetterman.

So with a slim House majority, 50 Senate seats and the WH this is what they already tried:

Nuke the filibuster
Add at least 4 SCOTUS seats with activist leftist judges (Kagan becomes a bit of a wild card here, so maybe add judges).
With the court being a rubber stamp, add DC and Puerto Rico as states given Dems 4 more Senators.
Again, with the court as a rubber stamp, create a national voting law that strips away most voting integrity protections.

Every thing I just mentioned was seriously attempted at the beginning of Biden's term.

The way I see it, all they need to accomplish these things is: 51 Senate seats, the slimmest House majority and the WH. Fetterman won't sign on but he is likely the only one.

#11 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-12-20 01:24 AM

They're paid off --------.

#12 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-12-20 01:24 AM

A lot of lefties on this site try to vote shame. It's a beloved tactic. The bullet points in #11 are EXACTLY why I will oppose Democrats for the foreseeable future. That is an absolute destruction of this country and it's something that will happen at lightning speed with the slimmest of majorities.

#13 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-12-20 01:36 AM

---- off you slobbering MAGAT whore

#14 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-12-20 01:46 AM

We can always expect----------- LGH to humiliate himself. It's become a DR staple.

#15 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-12-20 01:52 AM

"We need to remake the US high court so Americans don't suffer future decades of oligarchy-facilitating rule"

remake how?

#16 | Posted by madbomber at 2025-12-20 05:06 AM

#13,

I often wonder why RCADE allows something like this. What's the angle? And why doesn't he say something?

Back in the day, he used to ban people like this. Now he only does it if they are conservative.

#17 | Posted by boaz at 2025-12-20 06:55 AM

remake how?

#2 | Posted by madbomber

Increase to fifteen Justices.

Impeach Roberts and Thomas, at minimum.

#18 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-20 08:07 AM

Hell, impeach any Justice who lied during their comfirmation hearing about supporting stare decisis.

We need to get back to the principle that dishonest mofos make poor judges.

#19 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-20 08:16 AM

All because the court isn't giving the left the victories they feel entitled to.

#4 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

No, you stupid f^*%, it's because they're clearly no deciding in good faith in the spirit and letter of our Constitution.

Any "small government conservative" would have admitted that once they gave potus full immunity. I can't think of a decision more antithetical to our constitution.

#20 | Posted by jpw at 2025-12-20 08:59 AM

The bullet points in #11 are EXACTLY why I will oppose Democrats for the foreseeable future.

No, it's because you're a stupid, pedo protecting pile of s^*%.

There's a reason I call you Gutes Deutsch.

#21 | Posted by jpw at 2025-12-20 09:01 AM

Now he only does it if they are conservative.

#17 | POSTED BY BOAZ

You're not a victim you stupid, pedo protecting mooch that owes everything you have to the country and tax payers you hate.

#22 | Posted by jpw at 2025-12-20 09:02 AM

"I think the theory is to increase the number of members on the court."

What's stopping the current admin from doing that now and packing it with their own picks?

#23 | Posted by sentinel at 2025-12-20 09:08 AM

1) SCOTUS doesn't render decisions the left will accept

2) The left decides the court is illegitimate

Conclusion: Corky is desperate

#24 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-12-20 09:19 AM

Increase to fifteen Justices.

Impeach Roberts and Thomas, at minimum.

#18 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-20 08:07 AM | Reply | Flag:

Impeach them by what means? Or is this your view after the supposed winning of an election?

As Sentinel pointed out above, How would that sit with you if the Republicans did that exact thing right now?

#25 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-12-20 09:23 AM

The left decides the court is illegitimate

#24 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Clarence Thomas proved it's illegitimate by taking bribes.

Roberts proved it by letting him.

#26 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-20 09:23 AM

If you accept the recent court decisions you're unAmerican s^*% who should STFU.

#27 | Posted by jpw at 2025-12-20 09:23 AM

You're not a victim you stupid, pedo protecting mooch that owes everything you have to the country and tax payers you hate.

#22 | Posted by jpw at 2025-12-20 09:02 AM | Reply | Flag:

Somebody must've got a grease burn from the fryer...

#28 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-12-20 09:24 AM

If you accept the recent court decisions you're unAmerican s^*% who should STFU.

#27 | Posted by jpw at 2025-12-20 09:23 AM | Reply | Flag:

If you don't accept the decisions of the highest court in the land, you are an unAmerican schitbag.

#29 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-12-20 09:25 AM

How would that sit with you if the Republicans did that exact thing right now?

#25 | Posted by lfthndthrds

I mean really, My Man.

Is there anything a MAGA Republican would not do?

I'm beyond being scared by such things.

It plays into the hands of the enemy.

#30 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-20 09:25 AM

I'm beyond being scared by such things.

#30 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-20 09:25 AM | Reply | Flag:

You're also retarded. Just a few posts above you advocate for exactly that.

#31 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-12-20 09:28 AM

If you don't accept the decisions of the highest court in the land, you are an unAmerican schitbag.

#29 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Not accepting the decisions of the Supreme Court is exactly what this Supreme Court does.

Is stare decisis simply too much Latin for you?

#32 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-20 09:29 AM

Just a few posts above you advocate for exactly that.

#31 | Posted by lfthndthrds

You lost me, but then again---

Ex nihilo nihil fit.

More Latin.

Does it burn?

#33 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-20 09:31 AM

If you don't accept the decisions of the highest court in the land, you are an unAmerican schitbag.

#29 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

Some of us aren't stupid piles of shit, sport.

That's the only reason you are what you are.

#34 | Posted by jpw at 2025-12-20 09:32 AM

Is stare decisis simply too much Latin for you?

#32 | POSTED BY ZED

Latin, like Mexican?

-lfthnddumbpileofs^*%

#35 | Posted by jpw at 2025-12-20 09:33 AM

Is it the Supreme Court's decision that Donald Trump can't be prosecuted for having sex with underaged girls while president?

It's a serious question, so you'll ignore it.

#36 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-20 09:34 AM

It's a serious question, so you'll ignore it.

#36 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-20 09:34 AM | Reply | Flag

"If" More desperation.

#37 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-12-20 09:49 AM

Some of us aren't stupid piles of shit, sport.

#34 | Posted by jpw at 2025-12-20 09:32 AM | Reply | Flag:

Well, that sure is an accomplishment.

STFU you raetarded blowhard.

#38 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2025-12-20 09:51 AM

"If" More desperation.

#37 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Let me repeat what is obvious to the entire country---

Trump's behavior regarding the Epstein Files demonstrates that he is a very guilty man.

Yes, he is desperate.

#39 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-20 09:57 AM

Is it the Supreme Court's decision that Donald Trump can't be prosecuted for having sex with underaged girls while president?

Yes.

#40 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-20 09:58 AM

Great thread too Corky!!

This site is the sewer, just ask JPW, PoS everywhere.

#41 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-12-20 10:03 AM

Zed,

You don't even understand what Stare Decisis is. Previous rulings are not absolute under it.

JPW,

You are an immature toad and your opinions on most topics are not to be taken remotely seriously. You just throw a tantrum when you don't get your way.

And how in the heck does this stupid thread topic warrant a banner? Terrible site management.

#42 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-12-20 10:09 AM

Abolish the Supreme Court or stack the shit out of it.

Biden should have abolished it when the Supreme Court itself declared the presidency a kingship where the president is above the law.

#43 | Posted by a_monson at 2025-12-20 10:14 AM

What a bunch of unprincipled hacks. Good God, the American left sucks so bad these days.

#44 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-12-20 10:20 AM

how in the heck does this stupid thread topic warrant a banner?

#42 | Posted by BellRinger

The Supreme Court is illegitimate?

#45 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-20 10:34 AM

Ignore the courts as illegitimate, especially ones that expressly prevent enforcement of the law, deport all illegals

#46 | Posted by THEBULL at 2025-12-20 10:36 AM

Thread is more proof that rwingers don't actually read articles.

#47 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-20 10:37 AM

You don't even understand what Stare Decisis is. Previous rulings are not absolute under it.

#42 | Posted by BellRinger

Radical changes in the law, in violation of long-practiced, established law (stare decisis) should be as easy as moving a graveyard.

#48 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-20 10:38 AM

#42 | Posted by BellRinger

How many of these arguments do you actually win?

I mean, in your mind?

#49 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-20 10:39 AM

Clarence Thomas takes bribes, for God's sake, and he's not the only one.

#50 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-20 10:40 AM

You are an immature toad

#42 | Posted by BellRinger

An immature toad is a pollywog.

#51 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-20 10:41 AM

Also proof that they are OK with Justices not only accepting millions in bribes, but showing more loyalty to the Fascist that appointed them than to the Constitution and Law... including most recently deciding that legal precedents are unimportant.

MAGA!

#52 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-20 10:43 AM

This site is the sewer

#41 | Posted by oneironaut

From one POS to another---

Greetings!

#53 | Posted by Zed at 2025-12-20 10:44 AM

Ballwasher the pathetic MAGAT clown still thinks anyone takes what he bleats seriously.

Seriously, pal. Just take a fucking vacation. You're an idiot. And you prove it every time you pound your grubby little fingers on the keyboard.

Just wow. What a complete hack.

#54 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-12-20 10:45 AM

" An immature toad is a pollywog.

#51 | POSTED BY ZED AT 2025-12-20 10:41 AM | FLAG: "

Seriously? I didn't know that.

#55 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-12-20 10:51 AM

Democrats are babies when told 'no'. They want to burn down the system whenever they don't get their way. Sad really. It makes it hard for Trump to work with them to build a better future for everyone.

#56 | Posted by visitor_ at 2025-12-20 11:03 AM

"They want to burn down the system whenever they don't get their way."

Like when the South seceded from the Union?

Maybe you guys should ask the Blue states to leave, or just kick us out, since you think it's the Blue State people who are bringing you down.

#57 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-12-20 11:06 AM

"Radical changes in the law, in violation of long-practiced, established law (stare decisis) should be as easy as moving a graveyard."

Brown vs Board of Education ignored stare decisis, and rightly so. Those who support the recent overturning of precedents believe that they're just as morally justified. You can disagree with that in each case, but acting like stare decisis is some sort of sacred precept doesn't wash

#58 | Posted by sentinel at 2025-12-20 11:13 AM

This site is the sewer, just ask JPW, PoS everywhere.

#41 | POSTED BY ONEIRONAUT

Not everywhere. Just when followed by "posted by oneirondips^*%" or ballwasher or lfthndcuck.

It's not my fault yall are stupid pieces of s^%#.

#59 | Posted by jpw at 2025-12-20 11:13 AM

#42 STFU idiot.

#60 | Posted by jpw at 2025-12-20 11:13 AM

"[Extreme partisans] are babies when told 'no'. They want to burn down the system whenever they don't get their way."

FTFY.

#61 | Posted by sentinel at 2025-12-20 11:14 AM

"Those who support the recent overturning of precedents believe that they're just as morally justified."

And the people who ratted out Anne Frank thought they were morally justified.
And the police who took Anne Frank away thought they were morally justified.

Morally justify that.

#62 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-12-20 11:18 AM

"They want to burn down the system whenever they don't get their way."

Like rejecting the very idea that Supreme Court precedents ought to be given special consideration because they serve as a system of stability in our society.

Like rejecting the idea that it would be wrong for Mike Pence to use his power as President of the Senate to override the will of the voters in an election.

Those are just two of the things Republicans have already burnt down.

#63 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-12-20 11:20 AM

Headline: "Time to Accept: US Supreme Court is Illegitimate"

How utterly stupid. This is exactly what the current admin wants their opponents to say, because they can use it as an excuse or deflection any time they're ignoring the courts of rule of law. "See, our opponents admit they don't believe in court rulings, so their criticisms are just political noise."

#64 | Posted by sentinel at 2025-12-20 11:21 AM

#64

Is the SC Justices accepting bribes and showing more loyalty to the President than the Constitution and established Law legitimate or not?

#65 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-20 11:30 AM

This site is the sewer, just ask JPW, PoS everywhere.

#41 | POSTED BY ONEIRONAUT

Yup. It's just a small sewer.

Being a big fat dirty rat yourself you should try the larger sewers like Xitter or Truth Social.

#66 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-12-20 11:35 AM

JPW,

Break time is over. Get back to the middle stall.

#67 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-12-20 11:52 AM

#56 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

Who won the 2020 election? What was your republican maga maroon response? Fling your feces and attack the Capitol Police and threaten to Mike Pence and Burn it all down!

The January 6th 2021 attempted self-coup proves you are a lying idiot and a farging icehole.

A better future for everyone? LOL

The only future Trumpy is worried about is his own.

#68 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-12-20 12:04 PM

Break time is over. Get back to the middle stall.

#67 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

This is your tell that you have nothing.

Interesting that in response to being told you're an idiot, you have nothing ...

#69 | Posted by jpw at 2025-12-20 12:11 PM

Obviously bribing SC Justices is just fine with Trumpers.

#70 | Posted by Corky at 2025-12-20 12:24 PM

An enforceable Code of Ethics would be a nice start.
I don't care what Scalia told the others.

#71 | Posted by morris at 2025-12-20 12:38 PM

Clearance Thomas ruined the court, and Roberts let him do it.

#72 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-12-20 12:41 PM

" Interesting that in response to being told you're an idiot, you have nothing ...

#69 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2025-12-20 12:11 PM | FLAG: "

My response was appropriate to your BS.

#73 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-12-20 12:44 PM

Roberts refusing a code of ethics says it all.

NO ONE here will defend what Thomas has done, they just change the subject.

#74 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-12-20 12:48 PM

I agree with the premise of this piece. This SCOTUS is corrupt and beholden to the powers of wealth and authoritarianism. What I always question about statements like this is written in the first few words...

"We need to remake"

Who is the mythical "we" that has any ability to make such changes?

#75 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2025-12-20 12:52 PM

#74 because they're s^*%bags with out morals, values, principals ect

They'd do the same unscrupulous stuff if they could.

#76 | Posted by jpw at 2025-12-20 12:54 PM

hey bell-

Gonna defend Thomas? Here's your chance.

#77 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-12-20 12:55 PM

I will say this much: Something has gotta give. We can't go on with a Supreme Court that has such contempt for both the Constitution and stare decisis. It is destroying our society and even many rightwingers are beginning to understand that.

#78 | Posted by moder8 at 2025-12-20 01:09 PM

" NO ONE here will defend what Thomas has done, they just change the subject.

#74 | POSTED BY ALEXANDRITE AT 2025-12-20 12:48 PM | FLAG: "

It's a BS talking point. A bribe is a 2.way street. Zero evidence has ever been produced that Thomas engaged in any quid pro quo. He complied with all disclosure rules as they existed at the time of his friend's generosity.

All you have is libelous talking points.

#79 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-12-20 01:14 PM

" Supreme Court that has such contempt for both the Constitution and stare decisis"

You call yourself a retired lawyer? What an ignorant comment.

#80 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-12-20 01:15 PM

Where in the Constitution does it say the President can murder his political rivals and be exempt from criminal charges?

#81 | Posted by truthhurts at 2025-12-20 01:16 PM

"Zero evidence has ever been produced that Thomas engaged in any quid pro quo"

Only if you're not looking.

For example, feel free to explain why Clearance Thomas went from interest-only payments to NO payments on his expensive RV.

#82 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-12-20 01:17 PM

#79 | Posted by BellRinger

If you can't see the problem with extremely wealthy people giving justice expensive gifts (for years) then that is a YOU problem.

But no one around here will be surprised at your lack of morals.

#83 | Posted by truthhurts at 2025-12-20 01:19 PM

" Supreme Court that has such contempt for both the Constitution and stare decisis"
You call yourself a retired lawyer? What an ignorant comment.

#80 | Posted by BellRinger

50 years of an established decision, with supporting case law that multiple justices swore under oath was settled law, suddenly became an obviously flawed law because of reasons.

Yep lot's of respect for the constitution and stare decisis?

Where in the Constitution is originalism written?

Where in the Constitution is the major questions doctrine?

Where in the Constitution is there a history and traditions test?

How come Justices have to cherry pick history and tradition to reach a decision?

#84 | Posted by truthhurts at 2025-12-20 01:22 PM

"Clearance Thomas went from interest-only payments to NO payments on his expensive RV."

That, alone, would be enough for condemnation...if only there was a (D) after the name.

#85 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-12-20 01:23 PM

How was the SC decision on Biden's loan forgiveness NOT legislating from the bench?

How come there is an obvious trend to give republican presidents what they seek while denying similar requests from democratic presidents?

#86 | Posted by truthhurts at 2025-12-20 01:25 PM

How come Clarence Thomas's mother lives rent free in a billionaire's home and Thomas doesn't report that?

How come the republican SC justices regularly rule against enforcing public corruption statutes?

#87 | Posted by truthhurts at 2025-12-20 01:27 PM

All you have is libelous talking points.

And you wonder why we think you're an idiotic Trumper dumbf^*%.

#88 | Posted by jpw at 2025-12-20 01:31 PM

We can't go on with a Supreme Court that has such contempt for both the Constitution and stare decisis. It is destroying our society and even many rightwingers are beginning to understand that.
#78 | Posted by moder8

And that's why actual DR people
with actual conservative beliefs
don't post serious comments
on these threads.

#89 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-12-20 01:52 PM

"We need to remake the US high court so Americans don't suffer future decades of oligarchy-facilitating rule"

"we" in this case means "british jews"

#90 | Posted by john_savage at 2025-12-20 01:53 PM

Far from pulling it back from the edge, our goal has to be to push it off."

not sedition, since they are not Americans; rather a foreign attack on our constitutional institution.

#91 | Posted by john_savage at 2025-12-20 01:55 PM

stare decisis?

Oh, whataboutism.

#92 | Posted by john_savage at 2025-12-20 01:57 PM

Attagirl Jeffy. Go full racist dumbass