Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, June 27, 2022

Jamelle Bouie: Make use of the constitutional system.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

In case you're payblocked by the NYT, here's what the editorial says:

"Make use of the constitutional system. It can impeach and remove justices. It can increase or decrease the size of the court itself (at its inception, the Supreme Court had only six members). It can strip the court of its jurisdiction over certain issues or it can weaken its power of judicial review by requiring a supermajority of justices to sign off on any decision that overturns a law. Congress can also rebuke the court with legislation that simply cancels the decision in question."

Welcome to the Goodship Lollypop.

I don't doubt that any of this is true . . but they left out the "if only" part.

#1 | Posted by Twinpac at 2022-06-27 03:05 PM | Reply

"How to Discipline a Rogue Supreme Court"

Pay $1.00 per week to the NY Times to find out.

#2 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2022-06-27 03:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Make use of the constitutional system. It can impeach and remove justices. It can increase or decrease the size of the court itself (at its inception, the Supreme Court had only six members). It can strip the court of its jurisdiction over certain issues or it can weaken its power of judicial review by requiring a supermajority of justices to sign off on any decision that overturns a law. Congress can also rebuke the court with legislation that simply cancels the decision in question."

Democrats don't have the balls to do any of those things.

#3 | Posted by qcp at 2022-06-27 03:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 7

You've been a naughty little Supreme Court, haven't you?

*smack*

You like making the neckbeards mad?

*smack*

Does that get you off?

*smack*

Yeah?

*smack*

#4 | Posted by Mao_Content at 2022-06-27 03:16 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

#3 | POSTED BY QCP

It's easy to tell because they haven't done any of these things.

#5 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2022-06-27 03:22 PM | Reply

- the neckbeards

60 percent of Americans?

Guess we should invest in shavers.

#6 | Posted by Corky at 2022-06-27 03:24 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

60 percent of Americans?

#6 | POSTED BY CORKY AT 2022-06-27 03:24 PM | REPLY

That's Hillary's story.

#7 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2022-06-27 03:47 PM | Reply

#7

3rd Grade Educations Matter.

Just not hardly at all.

#8 | Posted by Corky at 2022-06-27 04:16 PM | Reply

How many knees would the "Dem" have to cap to get any of this done. As long as Republicans control Congress and the Supreme Court

Of course, President Biden could act like Trump and start banging some heads together or start dirty smear rumors or threaten to burn down their houses or send thugs to terrorize their kids.

Is that what some of you would prefer? Really!

Bottom line, President Biden is hamstrung as long as some of you keep voting for the same people, year after year, who are responsible for this mess.

#9 | Posted by Twinpac at 2022-06-27 04:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Liberal Redneck - Not So Supreme Court

www.youtube.com

#10 | Posted by Corky at 2022-06-27 06:09 PM | Reply

In reading comments attributed to Clarence Thomas and put forth in the past week, I wonder to myself how those comments do not constitute 'judicial activism', one of the many bugaboos of the Right? Is such talk OK if it comes from someone from the Right, or even from 'one of the good ones' playing up to the Right? I suspect Uncle Thomas' comments are judicial activism, and yet are OK by the Right, because those comments were made by one of the Right. But that still doesn't make the comments right...

#11 | Posted by catdog at 2022-06-27 06:23 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Any issue or business interest could come before the court so to prevent a conflict of interest we need to impose a strict code of ethics.

They should be required to sell all investments.
No honorariums.
No free trips. If they give a speech they pay their own way and pay for the meal.
No outside employment or consulting.
Serious restrictions on employment after leaving the court.

Being required to live on the government salary would drive out the grifters but not the scholars.

#12 | Posted by TenMile at 2022-06-27 06:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

TENMILE

Or they could do what Marco Rubio did. Book yourself into a 5-star resort for a family vacation (with a government issued credit card) ~ and blame your wife for making a mistake.

The U.S. Supreme Court is already a snake in the grass so what's another scam here and there to round out their record,

#13 | Posted by Twinpac at 2022-06-27 07:03 PM | Reply

Being required to live on the government salary would drive out the grifters but not the scholars.
#12 | POSTED BY TENMILE

Wonderful idea. But since the grifters already run the show, they aren't going to vote themselves out of their free gifts.

#14 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2022-06-27 07:49 PM | Reply

This court has lost any legitimacy.

Stop playing footsie with these insurrectionists.

Stack the court and watch Mao lose his freaky little mind.

You know you are in the right track when they whine and fight against it so hard.

#15 | Posted by donnerboy at 2022-06-28 09:52 AM | Reply

"Democrats don't have the balls to do any of those things."
Democratic women will give the party more backbone.

#16 | Posted by danni at 2022-06-28 11:02 AM | Reply

The U.S. Supreme Court is already a snake in the grass so what's another scam here and there to round out their record,

#13 | POSTED BY TWINPAC

We could fight back by stacking the court. Or at least threatening to if they don't clean up their act. I am not sure what we are waiting for now.

When they show you who and what they are, believe them!!

#17 | Posted by donnerboy at 2022-06-28 11:36 AM | Reply

"Make use of the constitutional system. It can impeach and remove justices. It can increase or decrease the size of the court itself (at its inception, the Supreme Court had only six members). It can strip the court of its jurisdiction over certain issues or it can weaken its power of judicial review by requiring a supermajority of justices to sign off on any decision that overturns a law. Congress can also rebuke the court with legislation that simply cancels the decision in question."
Democrats don't have the balls to do any of those things.

POSTED BY QCP

I'll tell you what the Dems don't have balls to do.

Denounce "Defund the Police"
Lock up antifa protestors
Stop listening to AOC and others like her

This radicalism helped create Trump and America doesn't need 4 more years of that monstrosity.

#18 | Posted by crisisstills1 at 2022-06-28 12:27 PM | Reply

Ah, the old Democrat "punishment" for not thinking like they do.

#19 | Posted by boaz at 2022-06-28 01:08 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2022 World Readable

Drudge Retort