I sincerely hope that the Dems get in and the first thing they do besides impeaching tRump or getting rid of those corrupt regime and undoing the damage he's done is expand SCOTUS, set ethics rules in place v for them and establish term limits and make them retroactive.
Wouldn't it be easier to impeach Thomas for corruption, and Kavanaugh and Barrett for lying under oath in their testimonies to be approved by the Senate? They both said Roe was settled law, then voted to do away with it in Dobbs. That of course would take the Dems taking control of both houses with super majorities in November. It would also prevent Trump from replacing them with equal or worse choices.
Thank you! Finally, some sensible, knowledgeable discussion of both the Supreme Court ruling on the voting rights act and on Epstein. The wall of silence around Epstein's doings makes perfect sense now. The survivors for decades have been battling the tiny class of invisible investors who use wealth so vast it beggars the mind as political leverage to get what they want. All behind the scenes, far away from the legislative spotlight. No wonder the survivors have had to fight so hard for any small gain. My new name for these invisible manipulators: the Epstain class.
What this optimistic take on the ruling totally neglects is Alito’s “updated” Gingles test. You have to pass thru those before you even get to intent. And to get past it you have to show that the state must be able to attain its “legitimate” political goals before all else. Only then can you attempt (somehow) to show that race not partisan gerrymandering was the motivation. This is a nearly impossible task in the south where racial block voting aligns with political party. The upshot is a state merely need show their objectives were political and partisan. That the new map denies blacks the opportunity to elect a candidate of their choice (the plain meaning of section 2 of the VRA) is irrelevant. Partisan gerrymandering rules. The text and sprit - or better, Alito’s selective and here absent “history and traditions “ test - of the 14th and 15th amendments is twisted into a justification for denying blacks an opportunity to elect candidates of their choice - as the plain text of Section 2 clearly calls for.
Sorry but when the act of having to prove intent helps the criminal more than the victim then this is not equal justice or wanting to protect ALL citizens and make the field more even. SCOTUS in its premeditated decision was INTENTIONAL in disenfranchising a group that often votes polar to those in the Republican Party. To prove my point SCOTUS has take every opportunity to make it easier for Republicans to gain an advantage and vote while denying the same be given to Democrats and Independents = SUPREME BIAS AND PUNISHMENT OF A SECT THAT DOESNT AGREE WITH YOU = THE OPPOSITE OF DEMOCRACY!!!
What I've been thinking about is why can't a newly elected Congress with veto override power (don't think that's an impossibility this November) and control the Senate could just rectify the VRA it's not constitutional it's just a regular law so rewrite the VRA so it's supreme Court proof!
“The election wasn’t stolen. The Supreme Court was.”
This article gives me hope, which is in short supply these days.
I sincerely hope that the Dems get in and the first thing they do besides impeaching tRump or getting rid of those corrupt regime and undoing the damage he's done is expand SCOTUS, set ethics rules in place v for them and establish term limits and make them retroactive.
Wouldn't it be easier to impeach Thomas for corruption, and Kavanaugh and Barrett for lying under oath in their testimonies to be approved by the Senate? They both said Roe was settled law, then voted to do away with it in Dobbs. That of course would take the Dems taking control of both houses with super majorities in November. It would also prevent Trump from replacing them with equal or worse choices.
Or, if the Dems take over they could do both which would be even better.
Those lifetime terms were written when most people didn't live as long as they do now.
I would upgrade to paid (I read Raw daily). However, I am unemployed as I am one of the 300K minority women Elon Musk got rid of.
I'm so sorry.
Thank you Ms. Dotty, this is tuff but it has also made me reevaluate what is important in life. Grinding to get ahead is not so great anymore.
Thank you! Finally, some sensible, knowledgeable discussion of both the Supreme Court ruling on the voting rights act and on Epstein. The wall of silence around Epstein's doings makes perfect sense now. The survivors for decades have been battling the tiny class of invisible investors who use wealth so vast it beggars the mind as political leverage to get what they want. All behind the scenes, far away from the legislative spotlight. No wonder the survivors have had to fight so hard for any small gain. My new name for these invisible manipulators: the Epstain class.
What this optimistic take on the ruling totally neglects is Alito’s “updated” Gingles test. You have to pass thru those before you even get to intent. And to get past it you have to show that the state must be able to attain its “legitimate” political goals before all else. Only then can you attempt (somehow) to show that race not partisan gerrymandering was the motivation. This is a nearly impossible task in the south where racial block voting aligns with political party. The upshot is a state merely need show their objectives were political and partisan. That the new map denies blacks the opportunity to elect a candidate of their choice (the plain meaning of section 2 of the VRA) is irrelevant. Partisan gerrymandering rules. The text and sprit - or better, Alito’s selective and here absent “history and traditions “ test - of the 14th and 15th amendments is twisted into a justification for denying blacks an opportunity to elect candidates of their choice - as the plain text of Section 2 clearly calls for.
Sorry but when the act of having to prove intent helps the criminal more than the victim then this is not equal justice or wanting to protect ALL citizens and make the field more even. SCOTUS in its premeditated decision was INTENTIONAL in disenfranchising a group that often votes polar to those in the Republican Party. To prove my point SCOTUS has take every opportunity to make it easier for Republicans to gain an advantage and vote while denying the same be given to Democrats and Independents = SUPREME BIAS AND PUNISHMENT OF A SECT THAT DOESNT AGREE WITH YOU = THE OPPOSITE OF DEMOCRACY!!!
Thank you, John. For the tireless work and for aiming to sharw knowledge, not mind-numbing clickbait.
What I've been thinking about is why can't a newly elected Congress with veto override power (don't think that's an impossibility this November) and control the Senate could just rectify the VRA it's not constitutional it's just a regular law so rewrite the VRA so it's supreme Court proof!
Thanks, John