4 ms·

This is a direct response to what began as systematic abuse of the court system by left-wingers and is an attempt to restore the status quo. You can find probab

by _bin_ 1y ago

This is a direct response to what began as systematic abuse of the court system by left-wingers and is an attempt to restore the status quo. You can find probably the most prominent early example of this here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_(Supreme_Court) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_(Supreme_Court) Nearly a century ago, FDR was already threatening to pack the court if the justices didn't quit striking down his blatantly unconstitutional legislation. It continued steadily from there with the Warren court bench-legislating at a historic scale. You are misrepresenting what the actual status quo is to make an attempt to restore it appear malicious or power-hungry.

exe34 1y ago
What status quo? They're sending innocents to a concentration camp against the wishes of the supreme court that they packed with their own allies.
RajT88 1y ago
Respectfully, talking about the Democratic party 100 years ago is an incredibly shaky basis for your argument. Packing courts with partisans is malicious and power hungry no matter how you spin it. "Restoring balance" is rhetoric used by all kinds of historical leaders you do not want to be compared to... Dig up.
- _bin_ 1y ago
  It's not really, because courts move slowly. We're just now starting to see the repair of some things like chevron deference. Wickard v. Filburn still hasn't been overturned. It's just as inconsistent to say "we should leave things tilted forever" as it is to say "we should restore balance".
  - exe34 1y ago
    is sending innocents to a concentration camp in defiance of the supreme court restoring balance, in your opinion?
    - RajT88 1y ago
      Exactly. The myriad of unconstitutional behaviors, and decisions which ignore precedent and the laws as written which are friendly to what Trump is doing is hardly conservative or liberal. It is tilted for sure, but in a way which needs correcting - in the direction of a society where the powerful have to obey laws.
      - _bin_ 1y ago
        This is a pretty loaded question. Innocents is something many would disagree with. Anyone who immigrates illegally at any time is guilty. Concentration camp is also a pretty controversial term, and one I would disagree with. I do not care for Trump's actions, and I don't believe I wrote an explicit defense of them. I will happily defend the overall policy of sending every single illegal back. The recent comments to which y'all are replying aren't addressing Trump's disregard for law, they're addressing your claim that the right has been abusing or weaponizing the justice system.
        exe34 1y ago
        > Anyone who immigrates illegally at any time is guilty. I don't see Elon getting sent to a prison that nobody ever gets released from against the orders of the supreme court. It sounds like you're just apologising for fascism at this point.
        _bin_ 1y ago
        I’ve seen no evidence that musk was here illegally. I’m not looking to carve out a special case for him though; show me proof. It sounds like you’re looking for an excuse to defend illegals.
        exe34 1y ago
        > I’ve seen no evidence that musk was here illegally. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/10/26/elon-musk-immigration-status/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/10/26/elon-musk... Yes, I'm defending "illegals". No I don't need an excuse - the constitution of the united states requires that legal/illegal be decided by a court, not the executive. Sending people to concentration camps is not deporting. It's human trafficking. > A federal judge on Wednesday said he has found probable cause to hold the Trump administration in criminal contempt of court for violating his orders to turn around planes carrying deportees to El Salvador. (https://apnews.com/article/trump-deportees-el-salvador-contempt-boasberg-da282511ac6f5c8dd19af620995ca440 https://apnews.com/article/trump-deportees-el-salvador-conte...) So ironically, you're defending a convicted felon once more committing a crime, and accusing me of defending crime in the same breath.

by _bin_ 1y ago

exe34 1y ago

What status quo? They're sending innocents to a concentration camp against the wishes of the supreme court that they packed with their own allies.

RajT88 1y ago

Respectfully, talking about the Democratic party 100 years ago is an incredibly shaky basis for your argument. Packing courts with partisans is malicious and power hungry no matter how you spin it. "Restoring balance" is rhetoric used by all kinds of historical leaders you do not want to be compared to... Dig up.

_bin_ 1y ago
It's not really, because courts move slowly. We're just now starting to see the repair of some things like chevron deference. Wickard v. Filburn still hasn't been overturned. It's just as inconsistent to say "we should leave things tilted forever" as it is to say "we should restore balance".
- exe34 1y ago
  is sending innocents to a concentration camp in defiance of the supreme court restoring balance, in your opinion?
  - RajT88 1y ago
    Exactly. The myriad of unconstitutional behaviors, and decisions which ignore precedent and the laws as written which are friendly to what Trump is doing is hardly conservative or liberal. It is tilted for sure, but in a way which needs correcting - in the direction of a society where the powerful have to obey laws.
    - _bin_ 1y ago
      This is a pretty loaded question. Innocents is something many would disagree with. Anyone who immigrates illegally at any time is guilty. Concentration camp is also a pretty controversial term, and one I would disagree with. I do not care for Trump's actions, and I don't believe I wrote an explicit defense of them. I will happily defend the overall policy of sending every single illegal back. The recent comments to which y'all are replying aren't addressing Trump's disregard for law, they're addressing your claim that the right has been abusing or weaponizing the justice system.
      - exe34 1y ago
        > Anyone who immigrates illegally at any time is guilty. I don't see Elon getting sent to a prison that nobody ever gets released from against the orders of the supreme court. It sounds like you're just apologising for fascism at this point.
        _bin_ 1y ago
        I’ve seen no evidence that musk was here illegally. I’m not looking to carve out a special case for him though; show me proof. It sounds like you’re looking for an excuse to defend illegals.
        exe34 1y ago
        > I’ve seen no evidence that musk was here illegally. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/10/26/elon-musk-immigration-status/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/10/26/elon-musk... Yes, I'm defending "illegals". No I don't need an excuse - the constitution of the united states requires that legal/illegal be decided by a court, not the executive. Sending people to concentration camps is not deporting. It's human trafficking. > A federal judge on Wednesday said he has found probable cause to hold the Trump administration in criminal contempt of court for violating his orders to turn around planes carrying deportees to El Salvador. (https://apnews.com/article/trump-deportees-el-salvador-contempt-boasberg-da282511ac6f5c8dd19af620995ca440 https://apnews.com/article/trump-deportees-el-salvador-conte...) So ironically, you're defending a convicted felon once more committing a crime, and accusing me of defending crime in the same breath.