No surprise. He was a bad deal from the beginning and has only proven how much of a bad employee he is , so say nothing of his lousy judicial record. Making up his own reparations program as he went along. Get him out of there on the bad behavior clause of the constitution governing judicial appointments.
Clarence is doing what his Republican corporate owners set him up to do: bringing disgrace to himself, his race, and the judiciary. Well done, Clarence.
Eh. Language is language. Yes I want to expand the courts. Definitely. But I also want to pack them with pro-labor, pro-regulations, pro-civil rights judges. I'd like to see a reform on terms for judges as well, so the expanded panel has a number of justices rotating off of the bench every two years eventually. Until such a time as that reform, pack the bench. Take a page from the republican playbook and put a bunch of young judges on that bench.
is something someone says who hasn't had a chance to study the psychology of persuasive propaganda and the Overton Window
You know the Kremlin pays Moscow U scientists to help them with this stuff and that sometimes they share tidbits with their favorite oligarchs to hand on to folks like Farage and Bannon and Murdoch, yes?
I've read Marbury v. Madison. I need to read it again. He interpreted it but he didn't find it expressly stating the court had judicial review. What's great is that it revolved around what on the surface looked like petty politics but it was also a decision meant to skewer Jefferson.
I also want to pack them with pro-labor, pro-regulations, pro-civil rights judges
*sigh* You're one of those guys, aren't you?
The kind that neither
reviews the record of what's already been done before blurting out whatever (if you'd done ANY homework you'd already know the problem is not judicial ideology since 2020 but foot-dragging on expansion and blue slips) OR
reads what someone else has taken the time & trouble to put in front of them already, *before* blurting out another retort??
I'd like to see a reform on terms for judges as well, so the expanded panel has a number of justices rotating off of the bench every two years eventually
One of those people busy telling everyone else what to do, but with- no idea *how* to do what you propose and therefore no idea what the actual & current obstacles are,- no idea what's already been done- no intention to personally pitch in w/your own personal elbow grease ??
This was written in 2020. Please click and read before you say anything else.
MSNBC: Black man is always going to need help with numbers, just an oversight.
https://www.youtube.com/wat...
My neighbors had an early-60s model that cost as much as a house. I had no idea how expensive the damned things are.
So...many...sheets...
Be sure and read up on Marbury v Madison, then. John Marshall certainly found it in the Constitution.
No surprise. He was a bad deal from the beginning and has only proven how much of a bad employee he is , so say nothing of his lousy judicial record. Making up his own reparations program as he went along. Get him out of there on the bad behavior clause of the constitution governing judicial appointments.
Ironically, we're the ones getting fucked.
They hadn't counted on the Court having the power of judicial review (which is less a power than a norm that the other branches follow).
Clarence is doing what his Republican corporate owners set him up to do: bringing disgrace to himself, his race, and the judiciary. Well done, Clarence.
Or Bill Scott, (R-Va.) holding a press conference 1974 to proclaim that he was "NOT the dumbest Member of Congress."
The scumbags knew what kind of garbage man Thomas was when they nominated him.
Thanks for the link.
Eh. Language is language. Yes I want to expand the courts. Definitely. But I also want to pack them with pro-labor, pro-regulations, pro-civil rights judges. I'd like to see a reform on terms for judges as well, so the expanded panel has a number of justices rotating off of the bench every two years eventually. Until such a time as that reform, pack the bench. Take a page from the republican playbook and put a bunch of young judges on that bench.
I made the same mistake!
"Lamguage is language"
is something someone says who hasn't had a chance to study the psychology of persuasive propaganda and the Overton Window
You know the Kremlin pays Moscow U scientists to help them with this stuff and that sometimes they share tidbits with their favorite oligarchs to hand on to folks like Farage and Bannon and Murdoch, yes?
https://youtu.be/CgYvf3Ckdso
https://youtu.be/omc-5zj70M0
https://youtu.be/mpbeOCKZFfQ
https://youtu.be/ZcsT9v5ESHE
I've read Marbury v. Madison. I need to read it again. He interpreted it but he didn't find it expressly stating the court had judicial review. What's great is that it revolved around what on the surface looked like petty politics but it was also a decision meant to skewer Jefferson.
I also want to pack them with pro-labor, pro-regulations, pro-civil rights judges
*sigh* You're one of those guys, aren't you?
The kind that neither
reviews the record of what's already been done before blurting out whatever (if you'd done ANY homework you'd already know the problem is not judicial ideology since 2020 but foot-dragging on expansion and blue slips) OR
reads what someone else has taken the time & trouble to put in front of them already, *before* blurting out another retort??
I'd like to see a reform on terms for judges as well, so the expanded panel has a number of justices rotating off of the bench every two years eventually
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC...
One of those people busy telling everyone else what to do, but with- no idea *how* to do what you propose and therefore no idea what the actual & current obstacles are,- no idea what's already been done- no intention to personally pitch in w/your own personal elbow grease ??
This was written in 2020. Please click and read before you say anything else.
https://twitter.com/ElieNYC...