• qantravon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    It would be possibly the most egregious thing SCOTUS has done (and they’ve done some shit) if they use this argument. We have the records of the adoption of the 14th, its original wording specified only members of the Confederacy were barred, but they explicitly changed it to cover any act of insurrection. We also know that they considered the language of “any officer” to cover the presidency because someone asked that question, and it’s in the minutes.

    • fiat_lux@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Egregious has been escalating at the Supreme Court, in my opinion they’ve been testing the waters to see what the American public will tolerate.

      • Roe v Wade overturn showed that Americans will tolerate the removal of rights for half the population
      • the fake web designer who pretended to refuse service to LGBT+ decision showed they are willing to engage with dishonest hypothetical situations and the people will tolerate it
      • the affirmative action decision showed that when marginalised communities are further institutionally marginalised, there will be little backlash

      They’ve been steadily entrenching conservative power. Sotomayor has been warning everyone for years, but when one of the sitting judges publicly says that a decision is “unjustified exercise of power,” and the President says the court isn’t making good decisions, shit is not going well and it doesn’t give me much hope.