559
submitted 5 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

President Joe Biden promised Black voters Wednesday that he would appoint progressives to the US Supreme Court if elected to a second term, suggesting he expects vacancies on the high court over the next four years.

“The next president, they’re going to be able to appoint a couple justices, and I’ll be damned — if in fact we’re able to change some of the justices when they retire and put in really progressive judges like we’ve always had, tell me that won’t change your life,” he said during a campaign rally in Philadelphia.

It was as explicit a warning as Biden could offer about the stakes of the upcoming election, and a clear reminder that some of the nine justices have entered their seventies.

Clarence Thomas is 75 and Samuel Alito is 74; both are conservative and appointed by Republican presidents. Sonia Sotomayor, a liberal who was nominated by President Barack Obama, turns 70 next month.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 218 points 5 months ago

Biden's going to need everyone's help. Turn the Senate and the House super Blue. Even if you hate Biden because of Israeli support, vote for your Rep and Senator that can deal with this corruption. Add to the bench until the traitors Thomas and Alito become irrelevant. Revise the number of Senate and House seats.

[-] PseudorandomNoise@lemmy.world 79 points 5 months ago

Even if you hate Biden because of Israeli support

i.e. don't be a single-issue voter.

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 10 points 5 months ago

I'm a single issue voter and my single issue is proportional representation - I'll be voting for Biden but if a major party candidate did genuinely advocate for voting reform they'd probably have me.

[-] Hugin@lemmy.world 32 points 5 months ago

I hate most of the Democratic party. I fear the Republican party. So yeah I'll be holding my nose and voting D.

[-] tacosplease@lemmy.world 19 points 5 months ago

That would be a decent protest. Have all the frustrated D voters wear a clothespin on their nose when they go to vote for the lesser evil.

Could actually get more people off the couch. Frustrated progressive voters would want to increase the ratio of "nose plug voters" to more effectively send their message to Biden while also helping kick out the Republicans.

[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I really like this idea! If enough people did it the media would absolutely pick up on it and amplify it.

Of course that does put people in red states in danger as they're announcing to everyone who can see them who they're voting for. :(

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] venusaur@lemmy.world 26 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Hijacking this comment thread to promote Ranked Choice Voting.

[-] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 12 points 5 months ago

And theres only one party that has outlawed RCV in certain areas. We aren't getting RCV without 2 things:

-Primary moderates and elect progressive Democrats at every level we can -A Democratic supermajority in Congress

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago

RCV, Approval, and STAR my beloved

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] sgtgig@lemmy.world 26 points 5 months ago

I just want the GOP to get absolutely pummeled for once so we can move the overton window back in the right direction. No I don't like the dems. Yes I will vote for them every time as they represent the closest to what I want.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] venusaur@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago

Biden should be scared of losing his job or he has no incentive to do what the people want.

[-] HawlSera@lemm.ee 10 points 5 months ago

People need to remember that Biden merely supports Israel, Trump would have nuked Palestine off the face of the Earth by now.

[-] venusaur@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

You have a list of senators and house reps that will keep Biden and potentially Trump in check?

[-] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_members_of_the_Congressional_Progressive_Caucus

In terms of which progressive candidates are running to beat incumbents that varies from state to state.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] hark@lemmy.world 87 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Actually progressive or "biden is the most progressive president in recent US history" progressive? I'll take either over the alternative, but I'd love it if it was more than former than the latter.

[-] HawlSera@lemm.ee 8 points 5 months ago

Cmon, you know it's the latter.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] retrospectology@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

I'll take anyone who isn't a corporate careerist at this point. The people sitting on the supreme court shouldn't be expecting to leverage it to make an exhorbitant amount of money.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 67 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

"Just as soon as the court decides that the President is immune from prosecution, I expect there will be six vacancies soon after." wink

[-] restingboredface@sh.itjust.works 67 points 5 months ago

He should pull an FDR and try to get the court expanded to 12.

[-] cogman@lemmy.world 83 points 5 months ago

11 or 13. You don't do even numbers on the SC so there aren't voting ties.

[-] ImADifferentBird 77 points 5 months ago

13 makes the most sense. There are 13 circuits, why not 13 Supreme Court justices?

[-] Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee 14 points 5 months ago

…and the district judges themselves elect/appoint their representatives to SCotUS. Get political appointees out of the top bench, I’ll take an unelected meritocracy over cronyism and patronage any day.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] restingboredface@sh.itjust.works 13 points 5 months ago

Yeah agreed. I never quite understood FDRs thinking on putting an even number of people in the court. We have so many 5-4 decisions now an even court would be chaos.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] dhork@lemmy.world 36 points 5 months ago

13 is a better number, it matches the number of Federal Appelate Courts.

If Democrats manage to take both houses of Congress and the Presidency, I would advocate for immediately passing a law to increase the size of the SC to 13, effective for the start of the SC's 2026 term.

Then, Democrats and Republicans should go to work to enact a Constitutional Amendment for term limits on the SC. Republicans would finally have incentive to do it quickly, or else Biden would name 4 young Liberals to the SC who will be there 40+ years without term limits.

[-] ares35@kbin.social 13 points 5 months ago

also 13 original colonies.. 13 stripes on the flag.

some magahead: so that means 1.2..3..4.....7 republicans........ and 1..2....6 confederates?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] cm0002@lemmy.world 12 points 5 months ago

I think a better solution should tie SC seats to the number of federal district courts. That way, should the number grow in the future, SC seats will be added automatically

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] BertramDitore@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago

I wish he would. The only thing stopping him, ironically, is his fear of appearing partisan (and angering “moderate” republicans, if they even exist anymore), despite the fact that that’s exactly what this would be attempting to remedy.

I’d love to be wrong, but he’ll never do it. He’s barely even willing to talk about the supreme court’s corruption and blatant bias. I think he’s allergic to that much institutional change.

[-] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 8 points 5 months ago

He called Trump semi-fascist in 2022 and backed off since. Biden does not push the limits of any power he wields.

You'll note there has been an endless amount of arguments about Biden's limitations to his ability and power to effect change, but never that he is pushed up against those limits.

Biden was most popular when he was fighting for Green New Deal and BBB. But his inability to whip his party into voting for the platform the Democratic party ran on was disappointing and he has never recovered.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] PseudorandomNoise@lemmy.world 41 points 5 months ago

It's very likely the GOP will win control of the Senate, and if they do McConnell would sooner die than let Biden even consider nominating someone.

Still gonna vote for Biden though, because if Trump wins the Conservative justices will all retire at once and they'll nominate 30-year-olds to fill in. I don't want 60+ more years of a Conservative court majority!

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

McConnell has already said he would step down from Senate leadership, so some other guy would get the task of impeding everything Biden does.

However, things are looking better than they used to that Democrats will at least be able to hold the Senate to a 50/50 split, and possibly also pick off Ted Cruz in Texas. Democrats who are not fond of Biden don't seem to be taking it out on their Senate candidates. There are several states where Biden is trailing, yet the incumbant Democratic Senator still has a good lead.

[-] PseudorandomNoise@lemmy.world 18 points 5 months ago

McConnell has already said

Let me stop you right there, because this man has already shown his word doesn't mean anything. It shifts with the political winds.

Democrats have to win in a lot of red states this time around. I'd be over the moon if that happened, but maybe we should have a backup plan in case Democrats lose in Ohio, Montana and Texas.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] verdantbanana@lemmy.world 23 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

so now on top of not being that other he is saying he will be a better president in the next four years because he thinks people might die

he is really grasping at straws at this point

executive order abortion rights in, legalize cannabis, and raise the minimum wage a lot

that alone would guarantee him this next election no debates or speeches or anything else would be needed

[-] lapping6596@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago

Is executive order enough to raise the minimum wage?

I guess he could order all federal agencies will only work with companies that pay some new minimum.

Feels like abortion would get destroyed by the 5th circuit and the supreme court just like many of the other things they've tried to do

[-] frezik@midwest.social 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Unlike what most people think, executive orders aren't magic documents that lets the President legislate whatever they want on a whim. There are limits. They've grown a lot in scope over the decades, and if anything they need to be pulled back, but there are still limits.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 18 points 5 months ago

While it's POSSIBLE there will be vacancies in the next presidential term, the two oldest, Thomas and Alito, will still be younger in 2028 than Biden is now.

So I wouldn't exactly hold my breath on Biden getting the picks.

Whoever serves from '28 to '32 will likely get to replace both Thomas and Alito, then the next two oldest are Roberts and Sotomayor.

[-] tacosplease@lemmy.world 28 points 5 months ago

According to Trump's lawyers, Biden could use Seal Team Six to ... create some vacancies.

Clearly never going to happen, but it's too silly of an actual legal argument to ignore.

[-] psvrh@lemmy.ca 16 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

This had better not be a “well, we waited to fill these until the election year so that we can use it to mobilize the base”.

One, because it’s terribly cynical and self serving.

Two, because it doesn’t work on progressives nearly as well as they think. It runs the risk of alienating voters because they don’t feel respected for 3.5 years out of 4.

[-] mynachmadarch@kbin.social 20 points 5 months ago

I don't think it is (though Dems seem to pull that often). Supreme Court Justices seem to have a very hard time letting go of the power, even on the more progressive side (Notorious R.B.G. being the most recent example). There's basically no way to remove a supreme court justice, impeachment will pretty much never happen. I think it's more recognizing that multiple who are 75 years old in a stressful job and being targeted by the public more and more is likely to lead to at least one of them leaving, be it death or retirement.

[-] wanderer@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago

Or he expects there to be no vacancies, giving him the option to say whatever he thinks might get him votes without ever having to follow through on his promises.

[-] Natanael@slrpnk.net 8 points 5 months ago

Or expanding the court is on the table, also a way to create vacancies

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] qevlarr@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago

He won't. They'll be centrist/liberals at best

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 10 points 5 months ago

Doubt any would retire willingly. It's a sad state of affairs that judges will go until death before allowing the other side replace them.

[-] mlg@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago

Not sure whether to poke at the fact that there probably won't be any vacancies or that he would actually choose a progressive considering people are resigning from his administration every week over Gaza.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 30 May 2024
559 points (100.0% liked)

News

23259 readers
2998 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS