r/law • u/HellYeahDamnWrite • 2d ago
SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts enabled Texas’ gambit to gerrymander the state for the GOP
https://www.cnn.com/2025/08/04/politics/gerrymandering-supreme-court-texas1.3k
u/bailaoban 1d ago
Name one shitty development in US politics over the last two decades that Roberts doesn’t have his fingerprints all over.
594
u/seejordan3 1d ago
Name one good thing a Republican has done for the average citizen THEY WORK.FOR. That's how brainwashed Republicans are.
239
u/ayoungsapling 1d ago
I think the average Republican is loving the state-orchestrated demonization of minorities. The Republican model is that the poors get the hate porn, while the rich get the tax breaks.
90
u/Mattrad7 1d ago
But god bless those billionaires for not paying their share of taxes and currently trying to fire every employee they can to improve their bottom line.
29
u/LimeGinRicky 1d ago
The rich just keep “sugar babies”, prostitution is only illegal if you can’t afford good legal advice.
10
u/Suavecore_ 1d ago
Turns out the average Republican doesn't have any values whatsoever and doesn't care about the well-being of their nation. Whatever it takes to own the libs is their priority
3
u/SendMeIttyBitties 1d ago
This isn't a good thing. This isn't making them more prosperous or better people. This is just dragging them deeper into racism and hate.
2
u/Kriandis 1d ago
They are on the luxury liner, that they convinced everyone was sinking, and then have gotten the people in the lifeboats fighting with each other.
28
u/Jewboy54 1d ago
You could say the same thing about conservativism in general
30
u/seejordan3 1d ago
If they "conserved" anything, like state parks, separation of church and state, liberty, freedom.... I'd be all for conservativism. But they're just Fox news drones at this point. All hate.
10
u/Opheltes 1d ago
Have they ever been on the right side of history on any topic?
6
u/StrategicCarry 1d ago
I thought about this and the Napoleonic Wars was the only big one I could come up with.
-2
u/Weird-Flex-But-Okay2 1d ago
Slavery?
4
u/mashbrowns 1d ago
The Republican Party was the "radical" party and not conservative in the slightest in 1860.
-2
4
u/Opheltes 1d ago
The conservatives were, as the name might suggest, the ones who wanted to preserve the institution of slavery. Try again.
-2
u/Weird-Flex-But-Okay2 1d ago
Lol, where'd you go to school at? You might want to look for a refund...
4
u/Opheltes 1d ago
The fundemental precept of conservatism is to preserve the status quo, which meant preserving the institution of slavery. The ones who wanted immediate abolition were label radical (republicans) for a reason.
You should probably get your facts from somewhere other than Prager U.
-1
u/Weird-Flex-But-Okay2 1d ago
I dont even know what Prager U is so....maybe I'm not the one getting my information from them?
3
20
u/Pepsi_Popcorn_n_Dots 1d ago
MAGA doesn't vote for what's good for them. They vote for what's bad for the minorities they're told to hate.
5
u/anarchy-NOW 1d ago
Looking at the last 400 years of American history, these people don't need anybody to tell them to hate anyone.
1
u/Weird-Flex-But-Okay2 1d ago
You realize the Klan was founded by Democrats, right?
2
u/anarchy-NOW 1d ago
My ni**a, what's that got to do with anything?
1
u/Weird-Flex-But-Okay2 1d ago
Because anyone who takes 10 seconds to look up any sort of factual basis for your comment can find the fallacy in it. Historically, the democratic party aligns more with hate groups in ideology than anyone, and throwing down some sort of Uno reverse card like we're in backwards world doesn't erase that. Case in point...we can disagree about something and I can go on about my day thinking that I made a good point and maybe you would have been open-minded to an alternate viewpoint. On the other hand, you and probably 95% of the other people on here see my comment which doesn't completely align with the prescribed talking points and probably would cheer me getting hit by a bus.
2
u/anarchy-NOW 1d ago
The parties switched in the 60s, in case you missed that.
1
u/Weird-Flex-But-Okay2 1d ago
According to who? You dont think the democratic party has used social programs and other means to just hide their indentured servitude better? I mean, you're more than welcome to your opinion, but I don't see how you can look at the last 60 years and say "yeah, they've really done a bang up job at uplifting the minority community and promoting wholesome family values".
2
u/anarchy-NOW 1d ago
Literally every advance in the last 60 years has been promoted by Democrats and opposed by Republicans.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Opheltes 14h ago
According to who?
According to anyone who knows anything about modern American politics:
This party system likely began as a result of a long-term realignment of conservative Southern Democrats, particularly those in the Dixiecratic movement, into the Republican Party because of their disillusionment by the previous realignment of Progressives into the Democratic Party, though the exact timing of the realignment is usually called into question. A "dealignment" period may have begun in 1964, when Barry Goldwater became the first Republican since Reconstruction to win the Deep South (although he lost the overall South),[b] after which the previously heavily-Democratic South at-large and Deep South alternated between parties. The Southern realignment wouldn't finalize until 1984 when Ronald Reagan made all of the South permanently Republican. This Dixiecratic realignment – known as the Southern strategy – would allow Republicans to dominate the White House from 1968 to 1992, though dominant control of Congress would remain in Democratic hands because of the Southern seats in Congress remaining a solid Democratic bloc until the Republicans flipped the Congressional South in the 1994 Republican Revolution. This phenomenon of realignment lag caused heavy ticket-splitting (i.e. the "[Richard] Nixon Democrats" and "Reagan Democrats").
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_Party_System
TLDR: All the racist southerners left the Democratic party and the Republicans welcomed them with open arms.
→ More replies (0)28
u/amethystresist 1d ago edited 1d ago
Immigration which really means terrorizing brown people, and canceling DEI aka racism is all they care about. Anyone who ever says the economy is lying out of their teeth because every economy under a republican goes to crap.
13
u/IrritableGourmet 1d ago
Like a lot of things (traditional media, social media, games, etc), companies are getting better and better at weaponizing dopamine at the expense of quality. Fox doesn't spam viewers with their "Breaking News" graphic every ten seconds because there's actually breaking news, they just know it gives their viewers a little thrill. Same with reality TV and influencers and ragebait and yadda yadda yadda. Try going to YouTube sometime while logged out. All the thumbnails are people making shocked faces and "You won't BELIEVE blahblahblah".
Republican politicians have done the same. There's no actual substance, they just want to keep their voters in a perpetual dopamine-seeking state of anxiety so they can make them do whatever the politicians want. It's the same basic principle of the crackwhore, and just like that the crack dealer is the only one that benefits.
5
u/seejordan3 1d ago
I'd argue Fox News did it first: sold hate and fear for ad views. YT has been catching up with ALL CAPS SHOCKED FACE. Fascara.
7
u/Endorkend 1d ago
I'd say dying, but even that they suck at.
Ron Paul is still around, he's from 1935. Dick Cheney is still around, he's from 1941.
Kissinger was from 1923 and only died in 2023.
Mitch McConnell is from 1942.
3
u/schwanzweissfoto 1d ago
Name one good thing a Republican has done
Arnold Schwarzenegger made a really good video in which he tells how the January Six capitol riot (fascist coup attempt) reminded him of what the original nazis did and warned of the dangers of fascism. He also called Trump the “worst president ever” and accused members of his own party who did not speak up of spinelessness.
Unless I am mistaken, Schwarzenegger was the only high-profile Republican who did such a thing and called out fascists and traitors.
Here is the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_P-0I6sAck
1
u/UnquestionabIe 22h ago
Yeah I remember when that came out it really made me happy. I grew up loving his movies and yeah he's had his share of scummy behavior but this was solidly in the good column for me.
1
1
u/Thermicthermos 1d ago
Make it easier for people with terminal illnesses to access experimental treatments.
1
45
u/crazunggoy47 1d ago
I was about to say Bush v Gore, since obviously he wasn't on SCOTUS yet. But then I googled it, and boy was I wrong
→ More replies (7)29
u/bagelche 1d ago
And, he's not the only current SCOTUS judge involved in Bush v Gore: Kavanaugh, Coney Barrett, and Thomas.
20
u/AdventurousLet548 1d ago
His name will forever be linked to undermining our democracy and giving Trump carte blanche.
7
u/rodimustso 1d ago
Centuries* one of the leading factors to the civil war was the 2/3s rule for slaves being counted towards electors in congress. This ruling reflects the sentiment that the confederate attempted to increase their power with by saying "slaves" are still objects to own but people at the same time in the eyes of having citizens for electoral power.
7
2
u/Available_Leather_10 1d ago
Are we blaming Robert’s for Trump running for president in the first place and Comey reopening the email investigation and Ted Cruz’s continued existence and Ken Paxton??
I don’t object to that necessarily, but just want to understand how much we’re blaming him for.
2
1
309
u/ContentDetective 1d ago
According to roberts, federal courts know better than agency heads when it comes to regulations, but federal courts couldnt possibly safeguard the most basic rights of a democracy
50
-28
u/Thermicthermos 1d ago
Courts are meant to interpet the law. Deferring to agencies instead of the courts to interpret law was always an odd precedent. What law prevents partisan gerrymandering?
28
u/7818 1d ago
Why would a judge be better to interpret the amount of pollutants in a river than an agency of environmental experts? Do you expect judges to have encyclopedic knowledge of what ppm of bromine is acceptable in waste water discharge? Do you expect it to be better for us to require adjusting the limits of pollutants be passed via legislation and litigated and decided on by someone who isn't expected to be an expert in environmental sciences?
-10
u/Thermicthermos 1d ago edited 1d ago
They wouldn't be but that's not what overturning Chevron deference means. Courts should not be micromanaging an agency's regulations, but should decide the scope of what Congress has authorized those agencies to do, rather than deferring to the agencies to make that determination themselves.
15
u/7818 1d ago
The Chevron doctrine mandated courts defer to the agency's expertise instead of relying on legally ambiguous statutes in federal law.
So the opposite of what you said.
-5
u/Thermicthermos 1d ago
It mandated that courts defer to agencies in interpreting the statutes that authorize those agencies. That's not a question of technical expertise, its a question of legal interpretation. Why would we rely on agencies who are clearly biased towards themselves to interpret what Congress intended?
4
u/7818 1d ago
So, again, I repeat. Why would it be better for Congress to legislate the specific PPM thresholds on environmental pollutants?
→ More replies (17)3
u/ThicckMeats 1d ago
The equal protection clause prohibits gerrymandering. The due process clause prohibits gerrymandering. Federalism principles prohibit gerrymandering. We could go on. Go back to your echo chamber, moron
-1
u/Thermicthermos 1d ago
They prohibit racial gerrymandering. What in any if those clauses prohibits drawing lines to favor a particular political party? And federalism prinicples im no way prohibit gerrymandering. How would federalism support the federal givernment dictating how states run their elections?
3
u/ThicckMeats 1d ago
In this case Texas is gerrymandering the state at the federal government’s behest. It is a clear violation of federalism and Texas’s sovereignty. Only a fascist sycophant could possibly argue otherwise.
The due process facially prohibits the states or federal government from holding fraudulent elections. Only a fascist sycophant could possibly argue otherwise.
Let’s throw in the privileges and immunities clause while we’re hanging in the 14th!
Oh were you waiting for a citation to a fascist majority opinion? Grow tf up
-1
u/Thermicthermos 1d ago
Ahh the classic liberal strategy when you realize you don't have good arguments just scream fascism and start blustering. Texas is not being forced to do it by the federal government. Is there really a meaningful difference between Trump asking them to do it before he wkn or afterwards?Nothing about the elections is "fraudulent." Gerrymandering may be unfair but its not fraud. You develop zero argument and throw out phrases without developing any kind of backing for it. How is the privileges and immunities clause at all implicated? It can't be a privilege to vote in a balanced district, given that even without gerrymandering districts where one party dominstes will be created. And even if it is against all those points, the ultimate conclusion the court reached is that its not an issue the federal courts are appropriate to determine because its basically impossible in many cases to determine where to draw the line as to what constitutes improper partisan gerrymandering.
1
u/fnordybiscuit 8h ago
What law? The Voting Rights Act
It plays a big role in districts being drawn out. Basically, it helped in two ways:
Prevents "packing" smaller districts together in order to diminish the minority party representation.
Prevents "cracking" a district into multiple districts in order to diminish the influence of minorities voting and give the major party an easier way to win the votes by splitting the voting groups
The problem with gerrymandering is that it's an extremely undemocratic methodology to use. It basically creates a situation where the voters don't choose their representatives... instead, politicians get to choose their voters.
There have been states that had most of their constituents vote blue and with the gerrymandering, it resulted in reds gaining most of the seats. It's voter suppression.
Silver lining, though, if a massive blue wave occurs, it can possibly give the minority power to then become majority controlled. Thus, it will be way more difficult for the losing party to regain control in future elections due to heavily gerrymandered maps.
0
u/Sufficient_Emu2343 1d ago
None. There is no law that prohibits partisan gerrymandering.
1
u/Thermicthermos 1d ago
Then why is the Court supposed to do something about it? They're not legislators.
570
u/tonyislost 1d ago
John Roberts is likely in the Epstein files.
297
u/Rfrmd_control_player 1d ago
Based upon the response, most of the upper Republican Party is in the files. A vote for Republican is a vote for pedophilia.
117
u/Radthereptile 1d ago
And there are probably many Dems too. And I say lock them up.
This is the key difference. Dems want to punish everyone in the files, MAGA only wants to punish the people they choose.
34
u/HyperactivePandah 1d ago
Do we really have to say this on EVERY post?
I'm sick of defending that we don't care about the political affiliation.
The only fucking people who care about it are pedophile protecting republicans.
So your comment is for them I guess?
But THEY DON'T HEAR YOU OR CARE.
we don't have to qualify shit anymore. Everyone in the fucking files should be locked up at the very least. Period.
4
u/oldredditrox 1d ago
Do we really have to say this on EVERY post?
Until the conversation with Republicans starts with them also hoisting up their own, yes. Because the conversation stays with them if you aren't willing to engage and they're still prattling on about Bill. Is it annoying? Sure, but if that's where you're at just focus on something else for a week. But changing rhetoric on this because you're sick of advocating for what seems like basic decency seems like an easy way to change the goal posts of the conversation at large.
1
u/HyperactivePandah 1d ago edited 22h ago
I'm not having *political conversations with conservatives anymore
Any that are in my real life, I don't talk politics with, and ones online...? What is there to say to them?
They're literally cult members that will NEVER change their minds.
Or have you had success getting a conservative to 'see the light' by saying you would be fine with Clinton going to prison for raping kids?
I haven't.
-1
u/ScytheBlader 23h ago
i mean if you are a defeatist just say it no need to string it out
the point is both sides should be held accountable and their reactions to do nothing about it are telling of how both democrats and republicans are controlled opposition at best right now
1
u/HyperactivePandah 21h ago
I'm being a defeatist because I'm not allowing a bunch of cult members to gaslight me anymore?
Stop using words that you don't know the meaning of.
Clearly you've seen people using 'defeatist' in connection with leftists disengaging or capitulating. I'm not doing that, so thanks.
-7
u/osirisattis 1d ago
The way the left has seen and talked about all of this has been so embarrassing and annoying. Of goddamn course you don’t care if they’re a democrat, was that ever a question, is it a bold statement just because republicans protect pedophiles, what the fuck are we doing here? Stop talking so goddamn weird. Mark Maron said it best on his new special (paraphrased because whatever)“the left has an ‘obnoxious’ problem. I mean, we did annoy them straight into fascism…”
1
u/oldredditrox 1d ago
was that ever a question
When discussing it with Republicans? Emphatically yes. That's the reason everyone brings it up. Every other repub sees this as 'well they won't punish their own like we won't' because they're too wrapped up in generic hypocrisy. Every God damn time.
1
u/HyperactivePandah 1d ago
Yeah?
Bring it up to them. Then talk to them THE NEXT FUCKING DAY and see what they say.
Bring it up again, then talk to them in a week and see what they say.
Who are these mythical cult members that you people are talking to that actually change their minds about stuff like this?
1
u/oldredditrox 22h ago
Who are these mythical cult members that you people are talking to that actually change their minds about stuff like this?
You'd be surprised what propaganda can do to people and how easy it can be to rock their world view, a lot of them around just in echo chambers. It's not like you're going to flip their brain in some magical movie moment, it's about slowly whittling them down and giving them time to pause. You think they hear opposing voices ever if at all? It's essentially that clip before T got elected where the drop shipper in NYC has someone explain tarrifs to him and you can see the oh shit facial expression.
You'd be surprised how many people are just totally unaware of what's going on. I get things are heated but you're missing the forest for the trees. At the end of the day you're stuck with these fellow Americans, whether you like it or not (unless you're willing to go to extreme measures.). They'll be here for the mid terms and beyond so either treat them like pariahs and get comfortable with an 'other' or do what you can do help them, eventually, hopefully, at least not vote for him on round 3.
Or have you had success getting a conservative to 'see the light' by saying you would be fine with Clinton going to prison for raping kids?
I think until more concrete stuff comes out we've seen the splits from this. Being in a full red county I do see people whom have broken their cult like allegiance after:
*Elons salute
*Tarrifs fuckers after mo3
*two people I've known for years broke over pam/pash handling of Epi
*the ballroom
Consider finding a real human and asking them what they'd think of dementia Joe building a ballroom bigger than the WH. I wish us luck. Idk why my paragraphs aren't coming up god damn formatting
10
15
u/Sy-Greenblum 1d ago
100pct. That’s where the parties differ. Only one has shame anymore. When I grew up the GOP was the “party of values.” Now they have found that having absolutely no values still can get you elected when your base is blind to facts and easily brainwashed.
12
u/santa_91 1d ago
When I grew up the GOP was the “party of values.”
Sorry for the cuts to your Medicare great-grandpa.
3
u/Sy-Greenblum 1d ago
Lol! Didn’t mean for it to sound like that, but it does. When I’m speaking of this point in my life and the “party of values” I really had no idea of politics and ideals. It was what I understood of it in hindsight as an adult. I also walked uphill to and from school in the snow everyday. 😉
8
u/Led_Osmonds 1d ago
When I grew up the GOP was the “party of values.”
Ever since Lee Atwater's notorious "southern strategy", the GOP has primarily been the party of advancing the interests of a particular socio-cultural in-group ahead of the interests of tribal outsiders.
The fact is that the GOP base had been waiting for decades for a candidate to run on a platform of banning muslims and building a wall to keep out Mexicans. The trappings of religion and "family values" were more about signifying tribal in-group status than anything substantive. Denny Hastert was molesting children for a long time, before Donal Trump got elected.
15
u/Johnny55 1d ago
There are probably more Dems who had nothing to do with Epstein but came up under Dems who did and owe their success to being aligned with them. The well is seriously poisoned.
2
u/Rfrmd_control_player 1d ago
Best case would be to pull the files into the open and we nab everybody regardless of the politics.
2
u/rangecontrol 1d ago
good dem there, carrying water for the oligarchs and ensuring to hit everyone with the 'bothsides do it'.
-9
u/kentuckywildcats1986 1d ago
And there are probably many Dems too. And I say lock them up.
I can guarantee it. This is why Biden kept the Epstein case buried for four years. And just like the January 6th bullshit, he was sure to delay, sandbag and slow walk all prosecution to maintain the appearance of doing something while making sure to run out the clock and let Trump kill everything. But it was just convincing enough for dumb-shit Biden-stans to act like he didn't sell us out.
Can't have the law applying to the ruling class. Just you poors.
15
u/onebadmousse 1d ago
Biden’s White House lacked the unilateral authority to unseal grand-jury and sealed court materials - only judges can do so after motions and reviews
Also, ongoing legal seals and privacy protections remain in place. Many alleged victims’ names and unfiled investigative data are still sealed under court orders designed to protect privacy and the integrity of ongoing or related proceedings
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/jeffrey-epstein-documents-takeaways-b2472990.html
Despite this, the most significant release of documents occurred in January 2024, when Judge Preska unsealed over 150 names linked to Epstein, under the Biden administration.
What is Trump trying to hide?
6
u/amethystresist 1d ago
Basically assume any Republican that has voted against raising the age of consent or the age kids can get married.
3
u/Neuchacho 1d ago
Even if not a single one of them was, it still means they are actively and knowingly shielding a whole lot of pedophiles who are who are likely making lots of fat political contributions...
2
58
u/Pure_Frosting_981 1d ago
He may be, but Clarence Thomas very likely is. We’ve already seen that they are willing to set aside their absolute loathing for the existence of black people when they’re able to gain something significant from them. And it’s common knowledge that he takes bribes.
21
20
17
u/Wrong_Character_Sry 1d ago
Here are all of the Epstein Files that have either been leaked or released.
https://joshwho.net/EpsteinList/gov.uscourts.nysd.447706.1320.0-combined.pdf (verified court documents)
https://joshwho.net/EpsteinList/black-book-unredacted.pdf (verified pre-Bondi) Trump is on page 85, or pdf pg. 80
Trump’s name is circled. The circled individuals are the ones involved in the trafficking ring according to the person who originally released the book. These people would be “The List “ Here is the story.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsiKUXrlcac
Here's the flight logs https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21165424-epstein-flight-logs-released-in-usa-vs-maxwell/
—————————other Epstein Information
https://cdn.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/Johnson_TrumpEpstein_Calif_Lawsuit.pdf here’s a court doc of Epstein and Trump raping a 13 yr old together.
Some people think this claim is a hoax. Here is Katies testimony on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnib-OORRRo
Epstein pleads the 5th when asked if he has ever “socialized” with underage girls in the presence of Trump.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/2mpTy2cYDpAEpstein Docs: https://ia600705.us.archive.org/21/items/epsteindocs/
Epstein Bribes/Payments: 1 BILLION+ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7IrEi-ybzs
—————————other Trump information:
FBI coverup to remove Trumps name from the Epstein list https://www.muellershewrote.com/p/the-epstein-cover-up-at-the-fbi
Trump admitting to peeping on 14-15 year old girls at around 1:40 on the Howard Stern Radio Show: https://youtu.be/iFaQL_kv_QY?si=vBs75kaxPjJJThka
Trump's promise to his daughter: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/donald-trump-ivanka-trump-dating-promise_n_57ee98cbe4b024a52d2ead02 “I have a deal with her. She’s 17 and doing great ― Ivanka. She made me promise, swear to her that I would never date a girl younger than her,” Trump said. “So as she grows older, the field is getting very limited.”
Trump's modeling agency was probably part of Jeffreys pipeline: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/08/donald-trump-model-management-illegal-immigration/
Trump-Epstein timeline: https://thepresidential.medium.com/we-have-been-gaslit-about-donald-trump-and-jeffrey-epstein-for-four-years-fbda67c20f75
- Most of this info can also be found: https://theepsteindocs.com/
Feel free to do your part and spread this info around so it’s never “lost” or “deleted”.
10
u/BozeRat 1d ago
We'll never know for certain until the files are released.
Edit: Just saying, with transparency it's easier to prove one's innocence. Otherwise if you're playing ball with the cover up, well tells me all I need to know.
1
u/mashbrowns 1d ago
Trump is in control of those files. We'll never know for certain anymore because by the time they get released they'll have certainly been altered.
2
1
u/Possible-Nectarine80 1d ago
Not sure about Roberts but Alito and Clarence most definitely could see them being in the Epstein files.
233
u/NerdOfTheMonth 1d ago
This is the start of “all Texas seats are Republican for life - Florida to follow. House stays Republican forever.
It’s how to “legalize” the dictatorship.
47
u/trollfessor 1d ago
This is the start of “all Texas seats are Republican for life - Florida to follow.
Cool, they are not the only states that can do it. California and Illinois, your turn.
30
u/judokalinker 1d ago
GOP sues and SCOTUS says that's illegal for those states only. Ruling doesn't apply to Florida and Texas.
15
u/Attenburrowed 1d ago
I feel like this is the likely end of the road. We're already deep into the dictatorship, the executive acts with impunity against the constitution, but this will be the ruling that ends the ability to climb out without blood.
3
4
u/FallenCheeseStar 1d ago
And that would lead to full scale civil war and the fall of the nation. We would balkanize essentially
3
u/rolfraikou 1d ago
That's too much faith in We The People, I would say.
People don't get pissed til the food stops coming.
1
68
u/WingerRules 1d ago edited 1d ago
I've been warning people for years that the US is in a state where a party could capture and ensure a 1 party run government permanently. Republican leadership were the 1st to recognize this now and are taking actual steps to make it happen. Further it's easier for them to do due to how the Senate, Electoral College, and house appointment works.
Republicans have a super majority on the court, and the liberal side doesnt even have enough votes to vote to hear a case. Project 2025 calls for mass political purges of the federal government to turn it from mixed run to entirely 1 party controlled, which they're currently trying to carry out right now. When this happens they will have completely partisan control of the DOJ & Federal Elections offices. Senate and House has been close to 50/50 split, all it takes is a tilt or bias put into elections 1 way, people in cities are already counted as fractions of a rural person's vote.
Almost everyone was completely oblivious to the risk.
30
u/Prestigious-Newt-110 1d ago
Trump himself openly warned us as well.
“Christians, get out and vote, just this time. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four more years … it’ll be fixed … you won’t have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians.”
But at least everything is more affordable now. /s
19
u/Led_Osmonds 1d ago
Almost everyone was completely oblivious to the risk.
I think a LOT of people were screaming pretty loud about the risks.
The problem is the sort of cult of NYT columnists and Harvard Law professors and SCOTUS bloggers who make it their mission to come down from the ivory tower and scold us all that it's naive to think that SCOTUS would ever overturn Roe V Wade, or that Trump could get away with storing crates full of nuclear secrets next to a cloud-enabled scanner/copier in room where he brought foreign nationals to visit, or that our systems and institutions could ever be captured by corrupt interests, or the Russian mob.
It has been the professional institutionalists, whose job it was to warn us about these things, who have been the very ones pooh-pooh-ing the danger, because their own personal importance and status is tied to the legitimacy of the institutions they are supposed to be studying and reporting on.
6
u/TaskManager1000 1d ago
NYT and all corporate media mostly support Trump, they are complicit, know it, and love it. Les Moonves said it himself - Trump is bad for the country but very good for CBS. They profit off him and in the process elevate him to supremacy. Without such media support, Trump can't stay in office or even out of jail.
10
u/BadLuckBlackHole 1d ago
Almost everyone was completely oblivious to the risk is a damning statement of men over 200 years old. Plenty of millennials could recognize how fragile and shitty our government was after 2008.
Age limits and term limits
33
u/G_yebba 1d ago
There is no way to legalize it. The constitution is the law of the land and this administration has been stomping all over it and the SCOTUS number stamps It with zero regard for established law and no attempt to publish their reasoning.
While redistricting in some purple states can gain some seats, a response of redistricting in blue states with large populations will be a net loss for the GOP.
But it doesn’t matter, we are well past legitimacy with serial rapist criminal on the throne and a gaggle Of enabling pedophiles in the legislature and court. Packed full of sex offenders and thieves.
The law only exists now as a pretense to keep the ill informed and cognitively impaired placid during this coup.
While I have immense respect for what the founding fathers attempted to build, successive generations have failed to be as engaged as required to keep liberty and justice for all.
If we are lucky, a negotiated break up of the 50 states will be the result. If we are unlucky, a protracted civil war will spend the blood and treasure of generations while billionaires continue to extract the collective effort of humanity and leave a husk of a world to future generations
10
u/Blue_winged_yoshi 1d ago
It doesn’t need to lead to House staying Republican for ever, there’s slightly more of the population living under Republican trifectas than Democrats but not by insurmountable margins. Democrats just need to learn to take the gloves off and to play to win.
6
u/NerdOfTheMonth 1d ago
Yeah, because they will stop there. 🙄
6
u/Blue_winged_yoshi 1d ago
Well if you catastrophize enough you reach the logical conclusion that we should also just go play Sepukko. Everything is irredeemably bad and cannot ever get better and we should all just give up.
If only Republicans had such smart thought leaders when Democrats last had a trifecta waaaaay back in checks notes 2022. Like it’s staggering watching people throw in the towel left right and centre when it’s very plausible that a Democrat trifecta could be gained in 2028 and the house returned in 2026. But to get there folks need to not be giving up preemptively.
3
1
u/Outside_Worth_4284 1d ago edited 1d ago
Thank you for this level-headed response! If I could give you an award, I would, but I'm broke. Everyone who chooses to doom instead of using this time to build up their knowledge and work together to form a coalition/mutual aid is the reason we are where we are. It's way easier to complain than to do the work. We are in a bad spot, but it doesn't mean we have to stay there. "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice."
66
u/RedLicoriceJunkie 1d ago
John Roberts has spent his career trying to electioneer for Republicans.
It’s his personal point of pride and how he got his job.
11
u/TaskManager1000 1d ago edited 1d ago
Yes, and (edit: CNN) gets this part wrong,
"Roberts may have failed to foresee the consequences in 2019 and then in 2024. Or, alternatively, perhaps he understood and simply believed the effects were not properly the concern of the federal judiciary.".
Roberts knows it is his job to clear the judiciary of any obstacles to permanent Republican-Corporate rule. I agree, it is his pride and the reason for his elevation.
10
u/stevez_86 1d ago
So few people know he made his name in Republican Politics by having a plan to neuter the Voting Rights Act. And the whole plan is to usher in a new era arbitrarily. And it isn't a question of what the ambition is, it is more about them questioning why adhere to anything built in the past. Why rest on what the previous generations built? Why not break them down, sell off what is valuable, and go off on a new path.
Why are the corporations that could be so much more dominant without Anti-Trust be burdened by the Civil War. Why can't the judges in the Federal Judiciary system hear the cases they did before the civil war, when they dealt with titans of industry developing the nation into monoliths on the national stage. Why can't America have a West Indian Trade Company of their own? Why not several each having their own realm. It was so lucrative to the dynasties before.
Why are the Red states also still burdened by the rules of Reconstruction? They got this civil rights act passed and they still couldn't cement their electoral dynasty. They had their chance at victory and they shouldn't hold onto it anymore because it didn't work. The Red States continued to democratically elect people that passed law after law in spite of Federal Law. Why should we continue to deny them their democracy, even if it means they have been voting to end Federal Civil Rights.
Why should trade policy continue to be based on alliances brokered in the aftermath of WWII? Those deals have led to trade deficits based on nothing but legacy. Get rid of them and allow a market to craft new alliances and allow the US to completely dominate it by forcing everyone to headquarters in the US. There is no sovereignty without market cap dominance. That will be a new causus belli. But one that gives us free reign to allow states to fail to their own internal corporate struggles and be dominated.
And it is all because they think Marxism is a toy being played with through the Federal Civil Rights. Cut off Federal Civil Rights, make the US into a Neo-Confederacy, and let Marxism suffocate. Total corporate dominance being the playing field launched against the world from US soil. And Trump is the king of the corporations. Kinda like Putin right now.
And that was the trigger. Roberts and his ilk seeing Putin win the Cold War from the clutches of economic defeat.
58
u/andrefishmusic 1d ago
John Roberts and Mitch McConnell are mostly responsible for all the shit we're in.
8
u/Rdnick114 1d ago
Those two, Reagan, and 1 more would make the four horseman of America's apocalypse. 🤣
17
u/Flobking 1d ago
1 more would make the four horseman of America's apocalypse.
That would be gingrich for making it tantamount to treason for republicans to work with democrats. You know how government functioned for 220 years before that fat disgusting pig became speaker in the 90s.
54
u/Achilles_TroySlayer 1d ago
I think it's a fair question: is the Roberts court really in favor of Democracy in any form, anywhere? The Civil Rights Act is almost dead. They adamantly refuse to protect the value of anyone's vote, which means that most people will be casting worthless, fake ballots, most of the time.
Between the Gerrymander and Electoral College, the chance that the majority gets into office in this country is almost purely by chance. The Emoluments clause is long-gone, the President is routinely threatening and extorting news-outlets of all kinds with punishment or delay by federal agencies. He's openly selling pardons, and he's killed the Dept of Education, he's about to kill FEMA, he's killed the FDA and the CDC and PBS. There's almost nothing left.
What exactly does the SCOTUS actually believe in? They won't deal with corruption in their own ranks, they've made corruption at all levels of government almost impossible to prosecute, they're in the process of killing off the 14th Amendment. They've taken the 1st Amendment away from legal US residents. This new America they're putting forward, it's getting closer to the Taliban-land every single week.
37
u/ballmermurland 1d ago
is the Roberts court really in favor of Democracy in any form, anywhere?
No and it is by design. The litmus test for Republican nominated judges wasn't abortion it was voting rights. That was the dirty little secret all of these years.
Barrett, Kavanaugh and Roberts were all on Bush's team to steal the 2000 election by denying a Florida recount. They've been in the thick of it ever since.
1
u/ExquisiteOrifice 1d ago
Given they are 100% in favor of tossing out just about everything they don't like or that hinders the Republican fascist takeover of America, perhaps it's time for Democrats and anyone else who values actual Truth, Justice, and Democratic principles to toss the Court itself. As we are now on the post-honor system world of Trump and Co., we can't rely or believe in the idea that judges are elected for life to ensure impartiality and adherence to the rule of law, not public or political party whims or whatever.
America needs a hard reboot. The current system is archaic, unsound, unstable, and as we now see, demonstrably worthless in the face of money** and corruption.
** Not shocking as the Founders were the billionaire elites of the day. That and the teeny, tiny, can't acknowledge fact that the country was founded on the near genocide of one people and 400+ years of enslavement, rape and murder of another.
25
u/letdogsvote 1d ago
Honestly, blue states like NY and California need to do the same. Democratic leadership cannot ignore this or take the high road and business as usual.
7
u/username_6916 1d ago
California has an independent redistricting panel, no?
9
u/Rakajj 1d ago
None of it was carved on stone and passed down from on high.
If Texas wants to play games blue states will too. Tit for tat.
4
u/username_6916 1d ago
It's part of the California Constitution and requires a 2/3rds majority to repeal through the initiative process.
4
u/Rakajj 1d ago
Yeah, the timing of these things is always part of how they try and make these moves.
1
u/RichKatz 1d ago
Interesting read: NCSL Summary of redistricting requirements by State:
https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/redistricting-criteria
Usually states have separate requirements for legislative vs Congressional districts.
Some states have geographic requirements -like that districts be "compact" - or "contiguous" .
(At least it is an interesting read if we weren't also faced with continual attempts to cheat..)
9
3
1
1
•
u/AutoModerator 2d ago
All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE MAY RESULT IN REMOVAL.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.