0
2

[–] Nosfewratsjews 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

The SCOTUS is our legal system's form of controlled opposition. For evidence of this, you really need to look no further than the ratio of representation, and who controls everything about the SCOTUS.

To put it simply, Article 3 created the SCOTUS in 1783. Congress also gave itself the ability to create the "lesser courts". This was the beginning of the current system where Congress directly controls both the SCOTUS and the lesser courts, effectively putting Congress in charge of the entire legal system we have today.

It's just a numbers game, stupid. In 1783 we had 4 million Americans, so each SCOTUS Justice effectively represented approximately 800,000 Americans. Today there 340,000,000+ Citizens with who knows how many illegals, and only 9 Justices. That's 1 Justice to 38 million people. Impossible to get representation anymore without millions of dollars, in an increasingly corrupt system of Politics.

Icing on the cake, because Congress can effectively Govern the proles by passing any law they desire and creating any lesser court to handle those laws, they really have no incentive to expand the SCOTUS. Why would Congress critters jeopardize their primary objective for being in Politics in the first place, being generating their own fortunes and wealth, by giving the only check and balance to their corruption the ability to do it's job?

@WolfShepherd

0
2

[–] 0369Retired 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

The SCOTUS is not supposed to represent citizens or, more importantly, political parties. It is supposed to preside over court cases referred from "lower" courts and apply the law to those cases as the highest judiciary body in the nation. In a nutshell, SCOTUS is supposed to impartially represent the law, not the people or political parties. As such, it has fallen well short of its intended purpose. As for this case, its a crap shoot as to what these 9 political hacks will do.

1
0

[–] Nosfewratsjews 1 point 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

The SCOTUS is not supposed to represent citizens

Bullshit. It's quite literally the last appeal a Citizen can make in our legal framework. It represents the ability for a Citizen to challenge the lesser courts breach of the Constitution, which happens fucking hourly at this point but most people are not rich enough to go through the song and dance hoops to get to the SCOTUS.

0
1

[–] BirthTheGirth 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Need to push the antidepressant companies to be sued.

0
1

[–] hildberht 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Stop and think. If they hear it now with a conservative majority (Roberts obviously an issue) and rule against it then its over, precedent created, no liability. Better they hear it then a left wing controlled cess pool SC.

0
0

[–] Foxygirl ago 

In WSJ. They won’t hear it!!

0
0

[–] brettco12 ago 

Can fuckfacedad be prosecuted for laughing about his recently deaded kid?

0
1

[–] GoodGodKirk 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

They should go after the pharmaceuticals who prescribed all the shooters with drugs that caused violent tendacies. The guns didn't tell these people to kill.

0
0

[–] lsdflkoi ago 

No, next will be an attack on the manufacturers of ammunition...

They are already making it difficult to get where I live since Wally World was one of the few places you could still purchase ammo.

Just wait, you'll see...

0
1

[–] nolocus2 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

'a weapon as dangerous as the Bushmaster AR-15'

It's not just Remington folks. Either it gets thrown or leads to a ban. I want one now.

0
0

[–] Anon331717 ago 

Go buy 5

load more comments ▼ (1 remaining)