I don't see a damn thing in the Magna Carta about this subject. Not one word about how many members are to be on the SCOTUS.
Looks like a wide open loophole we need to rush right into and exploit! Be the first, plant the flag, urinate on the spot and start printing the tee shirts.
The case law is clear! FINDERS KEEPERS! LOSERS WEEPERS!
Well, we won't have to worry about the judgment of man from the Extreme Court.
At least according to J.D. Couchfucker. The Antichrist may be walking among us (or maybe he's in the White Hosue; it's a myster) and the Good Lord may need someone to get the end of the world over the goal line.
J.D. said that he's fine with getting into the game if the big coach in the sky sees fit to put him in the lineup.
Actually, that sounds like something that would be more up Coach Tubervile's alley.
These plans have been floating around and studied for years so I hope we can enact them as soon as it's feasible. We won't get everything but we should get as much reform as we can. Congress should shake off its paralysis and stop hiding in a corner afraid of "what could happen" if they reform the court.
The Warren Court was vital in protecting the rights of vulnerable people, and refuting the notion that government exists to protect the money and power of a handful of obscenely wealthy straight white Christian men. Conservatives on the current SCOTUS have been reversing all that. As much as I support the expansion of the Court, how do we get to the point where democracy and equal rights aren’t dependent on which party fills the robes?
Well, they'd have a hard time overruling the change from South Sudan, where President J.B. Pritzker could use his Supreme Court-blessed superpowers to send them on January 21, 2029.
It cracks me up the way these assholes call us “communist socialists”; they’re like children who think they’ve discovered a dirty word and have no idea what it means.
Since I need a brain cleanser before I completely meltdown and that freaking heat dome with temps at 100° is not helping. I'm too tired to think so please and thank you!
Since we are talking about so called radical ideas, how about overhauling Congress? Proportional representation is how NH's House reps are determined. My district consists of two towns represented by three people, currently 2 Ds and 1 R. It's not perfect but it reflects the views of the entire population in the district. It also would encourage participation in elections. My belief is that there are more "blue" people in the red states than we give credit for. Constant gerrymandering means "their candidates never win, so why vote" and people get apathetic and in despair.
I'm all for expanding the House. It's been stuck at 435 members for a century, while the population of the US has tripled. The House could easily handle twice as many Reps.
The side benefit is that it would make the Electoral College (state EC votes = 2 senators + 1 per Rep) more in line with a state's population, AND reduce the overall importance of the Senate.
(No, you're NOT getting rid of the Senate or the EC - that would take a constitutional amendment, and there's not a chance in hell that you're going to get the small states like Vermont and Rhode Island to willingly give up some influence)
These all sound like sound reforms to the Supreme Court. There should be 1 Justice per judicial district, that seems reasonable. Long but limited terms make sense. An "Emeritus" status for justices who term out could be useful. A code of ethics seems like it should have been in place since the founding. The "Shadow Docket" needs to be restricted and protected from abuse.
The only reasons to oppose this slate of proposals are partisan, bad-faith, and not legitimate.
This is wild: the Missouri Attorney General’s office not only used taxpayer dollars for an anti-abortion ad—they also wrote said advertisement with an extremist organization that doesn’t believe in life-saving abortions. Buckle up.
KSDK News reports that an ad released by AG Catherine Hanaway’s office tells viewers that “abortion clinics in Missouri are not required to meet the same basic medical standards as other healthcare facilities.”
It’s not a coincidence that Hanaway released the ad now: in November, voters will decide on a ballot measure that would codify an abortion ban into the state constitution. As you probably remember, Missouri voters already passed a pro-choice ballot measure in 2024, but Republicans have been trying to repeal it ever since. This new ballot measure is their latest attempt. They even named the proposed ban Amendment 3, because that’s what the pro-choice measure was called. (They’re hoping to trick voters into supporting an abortion ban.)
Here’s the thing: Missouri law prevents state officials from using public funds to support or oppose a ballot measure. In other words, the ad is illegal. But Hanaway claims the ad doesn’t run afoul of Missouri law because it doesn’t mention the ballot measure by name.
“It says absolutely nothing about a ballot measure,” she told KSDK. This is exactly what Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said in 2024, when he illegally used state funds to launch a disinformation website against the pro-choice ballot measure Amendment 4. He insisted that everything on the site was “factual” and that it wasn’t “weighing in on any particular measure, whether you should vote for or against something.” (As you’ll see later in the newsletter, a grand jury just found that the DeSantis administration misappropriated funds for this campaign.)
If the Missouri GOP doesn’t care about the law, maybe they’ll care about bad PR: to write the ad, Hanaway’s office enlisted the help of the American Association of Pro-Life OB-GYNs (AAPLOG). This is a group that believes that emergency contraception and IUDs are really abortions, that raped children should be forced to give birth, and that women with life-threatening pregnancies should be given c-sections instead of standard abortions—even when it’s too early for a fetus to survive.
Why? Because they don’t believe in life-saving abortions. In fact, they claim abortion is never necessary to save a woman’s life.
If I were part of the “Stop the Ban” campaign in Missouri, I’d make damn sure that voters understand that these are the kinds of extremists that Republicans have aligned themselves with. Find out more about AAPLOG and their president, Christina Francis here:
I don't see a damn thing in the Magna Carta about this subject. Not one word about how many members are to be on the SCOTUS.
Looks like a wide open loophole we need to rush right into and exploit! Be the first, plant the flag, urinate on the spot and start printing the tee shirts.
The case law is clear! FINDERS KEEPERS! LOSERS WEEPERS!
Well, we won't have to worry about the judgment of man from the Extreme Court.
At least according to J.D. Couchfucker. The Antichrist may be walking among us (or maybe he's in the White Hosue; it's a myster) and the Good Lord may need someone to get the end of the world over the goal line.
J.D. said that he's fine with getting into the game if the big coach in the sky sees fit to put him in the lineup.
Actually, that sounds like something that would be more up Coach Tubervile's alley.
These plans have been floating around and studied for years so I hope we can enact them as soon as it's feasible. We won't get everything but we should get as much reform as we can. Congress should shake off its paralysis and stop hiding in a corner afraid of "what could happen" if they reform the court.
Such scurrying around by Rep. Johnson from Louisiana! Bless his heart! He sees what's coming and he thinks he can stop it with some song and dance.
Anything we can do to rein in the Skuzzy Six, the Slimy Six *the SS*, is better than this nightmare
The Warren Court was vital in protecting the rights of vulnerable people, and refuting the notion that government exists to protect the money and power of a handful of obscenely wealthy straight white Christian men. Conservatives on the current SCOTUS have been reversing all that. As much as I support the expansion of the Court, how do we get to the point where democracy and equal rights aren’t dependent on which party fills the robes?
We outlaw the Republican Party because it’s an anti-democratic crime ring?
Couldn't the maga's on the Supreme Court rule that any change to it is unconstitutional? What's to stop them?
Well, they'd have a hard time overruling the change from South Sudan, where President J.B. Pritzker could use his Supreme Court-blessed superpowers to send them on January 21, 2029.
TIL there's a name for it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisdiction_stripping
Maybe add some theory of flag fringe and the supremacy of sheriffs and then....MAGNA CARTA the fuck out of the thing?
Maybe.
Whar Admiralty?
It cracks me up the way these assholes call us “communist socialists”; they’re like children who think they’ve discovered a dirty word and have no idea what it means.
The whole thing would be a lot more fun if they just called us "a big, fat poopy-pants", but what do I know?
That would just be moar projection!
They might have had better luck by calling us "zombies".
Too bad we beat them to it by labeling the MAGA cult as the party of dead folks wandering around eating brains and hating the science of fire.
Expand the court! Nuke the filibuster!
Or better yet nuke the court
THEY'RE EATING THE FILIBUSTER THEY'RE EATING THE COURT.
Expand the filibuster??
If I missed this in the post I apologize (reading quickly while at work) but what’s stopping the republicans from just appointing 13 now?
Comatose Mitch McConnell is dreaming about that right now
You would need 60 votes in the Senate.
Since I need a brain cleanser before I completely meltdown and that freaking heat dome with temps at 100° is not helping. I'm too tired to think so please and thank you!
What sounds good for dinners?
I'm thinking that I need to eat more seafood. There's a restaurant in the area that does some decent scallops....
I am having baked cod rice and okra ( okra is still producing!)
Since we are talking about so called radical ideas, how about overhauling Congress? Proportional representation is how NH's House reps are determined. My district consists of two towns represented by three people, currently 2 Ds and 1 R. It's not perfect but it reflects the views of the entire population in the district. It also would encourage participation in elections. My belief is that there are more "blue" people in the red states than we give credit for. Constant gerrymandering means "their candidates never win, so why vote" and people get apathetic and in despair.
https://www.fixourhouse.org/
https://www.fixourhouse.org/proportional-representation
I'm all for expanding the House. It's been stuck at 435 members for a century, while the population of the US has tripled. The House could easily handle twice as many Reps.
The side benefit is that it would make the Electoral College (state EC votes = 2 senators + 1 per Rep) more in line with a state's population, AND reduce the overall importance of the Senate.
(No, you're NOT getting rid of the Senate or the EC - that would take a constitutional amendment, and there's not a chance in hell that you're going to get the small states like Vermont and Rhode Island to willingly give up some influence)
These all sound like sound reforms to the Supreme Court. There should be 1 Justice per judicial district, that seems reasonable. Long but limited terms make sense. An "Emeritus" status for justices who term out could be useful. A code of ethics seems like it should have been in place since the founding. The "Shadow Docket" needs to be restricted and protected from abuse.
The only reasons to oppose this slate of proposals are partisan, bad-faith, and not legitimate.
I spoke to Mitch yesterday about WINONA’S BROWN BEAVER
he seemed in good spirits.
This is wild: the Missouri Attorney General’s office not only used taxpayer dollars for an anti-abortion ad—they also wrote said advertisement with an extremist organization that doesn’t believe in life-saving abortions. Buckle up.
KSDK News reports that an ad released by AG Catherine Hanaway’s office tells viewers that “abortion clinics in Missouri are not required to meet the same basic medical standards as other healthcare facilities.”
It’s not a coincidence that Hanaway released the ad now: in November, voters will decide on a ballot measure that would codify an abortion ban into the state constitution. As you probably remember, Missouri voters already passed a pro-choice ballot measure in 2024, but Republicans have been trying to repeal it ever since. This new ballot measure is their latest attempt. They even named the proposed ban Amendment 3, because that’s what the pro-choice measure was called. (They’re hoping to trick voters into supporting an abortion ban.)
Here’s the thing: Missouri law prevents state officials from using public funds to support or oppose a ballot measure. In other words, the ad is illegal. But Hanaway claims the ad doesn’t run afoul of Missouri law because it doesn’t mention the ballot measure by name.
“It says absolutely nothing about a ballot measure,” she told KSDK. This is exactly what Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said in 2024, when he illegally used state funds to launch a disinformation website against the pro-choice ballot measure Amendment 4. He insisted that everything on the site was “factual” and that it wasn’t “weighing in on any particular measure, whether you should vote for or against something.” (As you’ll see later in the newsletter, a grand jury just found that the DeSantis administration misappropriated funds for this campaign.)
If the Missouri GOP doesn’t care about the law, maybe they’ll care about bad PR: to write the ad, Hanaway’s office enlisted the help of the American Association of Pro-Life OB-GYNs (AAPLOG). This is a group that believes that emergency contraception and IUDs are really abortions, that raped children should be forced to give birth, and that women with life-threatening pregnancies should be given c-sections instead of standard abortions—even when it’s too early for a fetus to survive.
Why? Because they don’t believe in life-saving abortions. In fact, they claim abortion is never necessary to save a woman’s life.
If I were part of the “Stop the Ban” campaign in Missouri, I’d make damn sure that voters understand that these are the kinds of extremists that Republicans have aligned themselves with. Find out more about AAPLOG and their president, Christina Francis here:
https://jessica.substack.com/p/missouri-using-taxpayer-dollars-on
https://substack.com/@justindeschamps/note/c-326587767?r=3htkm