4 ms·

The current court is made up of members in their position by ignoring process. Does the process still matter?

by 8note 5y ago

giantg2 5y ago
I'm not sure what you mean by the ignoring process part. Is it the way they were appointed or something to do with the justices themselves? Government is ignoring processes and right at all levels to some degree. I sympathize with the idea that rule of law has become a joke since nobody can enforce it on the people in power.
- xeromal 5y ago
  This post is gonna be too hot to make reasonable arguments, but I think they're talking about how Garland was never confirmed when Obama appointed him. At least one of these seats should've been someone else.
  - cocacola1 5y ago
    Beyond that, it's probably also that McConnell used the excuse of the upcoming election to delay that nomination, but not when RBG died. Which, while perhaps unethical to someone on the other side of the political debate, doesn't contravene any rules as far as I'm aware. Same here, so I think the leak is fine.
    - KerrAvon 5y ago
      - sumedh 5y ago
        > It’s too bad there’s no opposition party to the cons in this country. If people dont vote for the opposition party then what exactly can the opposition do when they dont have the majority?
    - sumedh 5y ago
      > but not when RBG died. RBG could have retired earlier when democrats had majority but probably for some selfish reason she did not do that.
      - dredmorbius 5y ago
        Her decision didn't subvert process. His did.
        sumedh 5y ago
        That does not change the fact that she was very selfish person who could have easily predicted that the other side will play such political games. Instead of enjoying retirement her ego came in the way
        dredmorbius 5y ago
        I'm not arguing that point. I've made it myself. Again: it did not subvert process or go against precedent. Numerous justices have long-overstayed their terms.

4 ms·

The current court is made up of members in their position by ignoring process. Does the process still matter?

by 8note 5y ago

The current court is made up of members in their position by ignoring process. Does the process still matter?

giantg2 5y ago
I'm not sure what you mean by the ignoring process part. Is it the way they were appointed or something to do with the justices themselves? Government is ignoring processes and right at all levels to some degree. I sympathize with the idea that rule of law has become a joke since nobody can enforce it on the people in power.
- xeromal 5y ago
  This post is gonna be too hot to make reasonable arguments, but I think they're talking about how Garland was never confirmed when Obama appointed him. At least one of these seats should've been someone else.
  - cocacola1 5y ago
    Beyond that, it's probably also that McConnell used the excuse of the upcoming election to delay that nomination, but not when RBG died. Which, while perhaps unethical to someone on the other side of the political debate, doesn't contravene any rules as far as I'm aware. Same here, so I think the leak is fine.
    - KerrAvon 5y ago
      - sumedh 5y ago
        > It’s too bad there’s no opposition party to the cons in this country. If people dont vote for the opposition party then what exactly can the opposition do when they dont have the majority?
    - sumedh 5y ago
      > but not when RBG died. RBG could have retired earlier when democrats had majority but probably for some selfish reason she did not do that.
      - dredmorbius 5y ago
        Her decision didn't subvert process. His did.
        sumedh 5y ago
        That does not change the fact that she was very selfish person who could have easily predicted that the other side will play such political games. Instead of enjoying retirement her ego came in the way
        dredmorbius 5y ago
        I'm not arguing that point. I've made it myself. Again: it did not subvert process or go against precedent. Numerous justices have long-overstayed their terms.