@jeffw@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world • 10 months ago'Thanks to Citizens United': 50 Megadonors Have Put Over $1.5 Billion Into 2024 Electionwww.commondreams.orgexternal-linkmessage-square43fedilinkarrow-up1488arrow-down10
arrow-up1488arrow-down1external-link'Thanks to Citizens United': 50 Megadonors Have Put Over $1.5 Billion Into 2024 Electionwww.commondreams.org@jeffw@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world • 10 months agomessage-square43fedilink
minus-square@Ensign_Crab@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglish14•10 months agoRepublicans don’t want to get rid of it because it helps them against Democrats. Democrats don’t want to get rid of it because it helps them lock out progressives. We’re stuck with it.
minus-square@aubeynarf@lemmynsfw.comlinkfedilink2•10 months agoHow would the Democrats “get rid of” a supreme court decision? Proponents of which party brought the case? Appointees of which party were in the deciding majority on the court?
minus-square@Ensign_Crab@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglish1•10 months ago How would the Democrats “get rid of” a supreme court decision? Stacking the courts and bringing another case. Or an amendment. So like I said, we’re stuck with it.
minus-square@Maggoty@lemmy.worldlinkfedilink3•10 months agoSCOTUS does not need a case to reverse itself or review a law. In fact there’re startlingly few rules around SCOTUS.
Republicans don’t want to get rid of it because it helps them against Democrats. Democrats don’t want to get rid of it because it helps them lock out progressives. We’re stuck with it.
How would the Democrats “get rid of” a supreme court decision?
Proponents of which party brought the case? Appointees of which party were in the deciding majority on the court?
Stacking the courts and bringing another case. Or an amendment.
So like I said, we’re stuck with it.
SCOTUS does not need a case to reverse itself or review a law. In fact there’re startlingly few rules around SCOTUS.
add more justices