this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2024
412 points (99.0% liked)

politics

19243 readers
2171 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

SCOTUS doesn’t write legislation, they interpret the Constitution to rule on existing cases. They couldn’t criminalize being gay on their own. If a new case on gay marriage were brought to SCOTUS, the most they could do is overturn US v. Windsor, removing federally recognized gay marriage and federally protected gay marriage benefits.

Congress, however, could potentially criminalize being gay with legislation, unless vetoed by the President or challenged during SCOTUS’s judicial review.

[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 24 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

interpret the Constitution

you're thinking in the past now. please stop assuming that the constitution is a thing anymore. the country chose fascism. they got everything they want, and if what they want is "illegal," then it will soon be legal.

if you are not a billionaire, then i'm sorry--you have no protections. legal or otherwise. i would say buy all the guns you can, while you can, but honestly that might not even make a difference

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It absolutely still is, they just have the full trifecta now, so there’s no accountability. If SCOTUS makes an unjust ruling, it’s Congress’s job to challenge it. If Congress writes and votes for unjust legislation, it’s the President or SCOTUS’s job to challenge it.

The Constitution can’t be discarded by any branch, and requires 2/3 majority to amend through Congress. However, infringement could be outright ignored by those charged with checking the power of the other branches.

[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 month ago

ok. best of luck to you and yours

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Liberals, man. Straight delusional, not far behind MAGA.

"This piece of paper says you can't do this, fascist executioner"

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 month ago

I think people either just don't understand the magnitude of this, or are in denial. But it will become pretty hard to deny in a year or so, I'm afraid.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

What constitution? The one with the emoluments clause? lol