SCOTUS may be readying a ruling that sitting presidents have 100% immunity for everything. I think that sitting justices who vote contrary to the wishes of the current president may be in extreme danger if/when that ruling comes down.
I go out into the real world every day without a single bit of government-funded protection, and I sure don't live in the sort of gun-free bubble a Supreme Court justice does.
What it sounds to me like, is, they're afraid that the NY times is convincing the left that Biden is going to lose in November, so, we (the left) will off a couple of conservative SCOTI so Biden can replace them before he goes.
The Supreme Court is turning the heat up by consistently ruling in MAGA's favor. Or assisting in stalling on critical constitutional issues like is a president permanently immune from ordering the murder of political opponents while in office. An issue that should not take six months or more to resolve. Maybe ruling expeditiously and appropriately would help. Along with ridiculous judicial theories like originalism or textualism as something you can use when it favors your pre-ordained opinion and ignore when it doesn't. Use consistency, not hypocrisy, and stop lying during Senate confirmation hearings.
Finally, how about not accepting lavish trips and cash equivalent benefits from billionaires who may not have specific cases before the court but have a common interest with a party in a case before the court. After all, what benefits Exxon on property rights and pollution benefits every oil company along with numerous other billion dollar companies and individuals like real estate developers. And start recusing yourself in cases your wife has active involvement in on one side, especially as a paid lobbyist for an organization promoting that industry.
Start acting with ethics and respect for our laws, the constitution, and the impact your decisions have on the public rather than your religious zealotry and maybe you would get more respect and fewer threats from the left. Although that may greatly increase threats from the right, since that is the source of most of the true threats. "Go to hell" is not usually considered a threat unless preceded by "I'm going to shoot you."
I suspect this will never change for one simple reason - POLITICS. As long as only ONE person makes the initial decisions, some ne'er-do-wlls are always going to slip through. Now if the decison had to be made by the president and someone in the OTHER party, or a commisssion of people - again equally split, amybe things would get batter. But as no-one would dare ro chnage the oh-so-holy Constituion except for Christofascist reasons, It ain't going to happen.
SCOTUS may be readying a ruling that sitting presidents have 100% immunity for everything. I think that sitting justices who vote contrary to the wishes of the current president may be in extreme danger if/when that ruling comes down.
What's the matter?
Are they afraid that a group of patriotic Americans will take a peaceful tour of the building?
Why are these traitors shaking a tin cup at Congress?
Leonard Leo and Harlan Crow -- they broke it, they bought it, now let THEM pay to maintain their property.
Stop making stupid anti-Constitutional decisions and nobody gets hurt, amirite?
Dumb bunch of Christo-fascists seeks protection from howling mob of...? What exactly?
Sounds like they plan to make a bunch of insane, anti-Constitutional, Christo-fascist "rulings" that they know will enrage normal people.
Yeah, Metallica said it best:
Sleep with one eye open,
Gripping your pillow tight.
TLDR: cry harder.
F*** em. I don't give a rat's ass about their security. It's their own damn fault
I go out into the real world every day without a single bit of government-funded protection, and I sure don't live in the sort of gun-free bubble a Supreme Court justice does.
Not until you protect us... From Trump and his band of Magats.
Ta, Marcie. These m_____f_____s should familiarize themselves with the First Amendment.
And they'll get it. They can do anything they want.
THE LEFT. Stop them.
I'll make them a deal (What kind of a deal? A DEAL deal.). Give them the money and let Biden name four more Justices, no questions asked.
What it sounds to me like, is, they're afraid that the NY times is convincing the left that Biden is going to lose in November, so, we (the left) will off a couple of conservative SCOTI so Biden can replace them before he goes.
"It is not the Supreme Court the loonies are big mad at."
The people who are mad at the supreme court aren't the people who make violent threats against people they don't like...
Send the invoice to Harlan Crow. If he wants his justices protected from his rulings, he better be prepared to pay.
I mean, Jim Henson always took care of his puppets.
The Supreme Court is turning the heat up by consistently ruling in MAGA's favor. Or assisting in stalling on critical constitutional issues like is a president permanently immune from ordering the murder of political opponents while in office. An issue that should not take six months or more to resolve. Maybe ruling expeditiously and appropriately would help. Along with ridiculous judicial theories like originalism or textualism as something you can use when it favors your pre-ordained opinion and ignore when it doesn't. Use consistency, not hypocrisy, and stop lying during Senate confirmation hearings.
Finally, how about not accepting lavish trips and cash equivalent benefits from billionaires who may not have specific cases before the court but have a common interest with a party in a case before the court. After all, what benefits Exxon on property rights and pollution benefits every oil company along with numerous other billion dollar companies and individuals like real estate developers. And start recusing yourself in cases your wife has active involvement in on one side, especially as a paid lobbyist for an organization promoting that industry.
Start acting with ethics and respect for our laws, the constitution, and the impact your decisions have on the public rather than your religious zealotry and maybe you would get more respect and fewer threats from the left. Although that may greatly increase threats from the right, since that is the source of most of the true threats. "Go to hell" is not usually considered a threat unless preceded by "I'm going to shoot you."
If you proposed all of these things to The Six they have no response but SHUT UP
I suspect this will never change for one simple reason - POLITICS. As long as only ONE person makes the initial decisions, some ne'er-do-wlls are always going to slip through. Now if the decison had to be made by the president and someone in the OTHER party, or a commisssion of people - again equally split, amybe things would get batter. But as no-one would dare ro chnage the oh-so-holy Constituion except for Christofascist reasons, It ain't going to happen.
Remember what the Supremes said: You Can't Hurry Love or decisions that might negatively affect Trump.