484
It is scary that the last line of defense against authoritarianism is the judicial system.
Yep, because the Tribunal of Six is the final (legal) court of appeal in the country.
The checks are fraudulent and the balances have been tampered with.
No the last line is the citizens but they seem content to sit back and watch their democracy collapse.
People aren't just sitting back though. The world literally just watched someone intentionally kill Charlie Kirk in a public setting, in front of thousands of people.
He wasn't defending democracy. He shot him because he wasn't fascist enough
That's speculation at best. The kid they apprehended hasn't confessed to anything.
Dont listen to the pundits. For anything. As someone recently suggested, pundits are just the court jesters keeping us divided.
I’ll take the win, regardless
That was MAGA on MAGA gang violence
Again - speculation. Kid is only a suspect at the moment, hasn't confessed to anything, yet the ~~court jesters~~ pundits are going absolutely hogwild over "what ifs" and assumptions based on absolutely nothing.
If it comes to the citizens, we're all gonna have a bad time.
There are some people doing some stuff. But definitely not at the scale nor intensity required.
Easy to say behind a keyboard. If you live in the US and know your communities, it's not as easy as you all make it seem.
Oh, it's hard? Sorry, I didn't realize defending your democracy would be inconvenient for you. Oh well, nothing you can do then.
"There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order"
There's another line after that, but people don't like talking about it.
More scary that it's down to lawyers. Not the judges.
I get what you are saying and totally empathize with the sentiment given a modern context, but that is the purpose of judiciaries and why the US federal goverment structure was designed the way it was.
What's surprising is not that it's the last line of defense, it's that we've been pushed to the fucking brink.
USA fell off the brink last November. Everything going on now is the falling down bit while people hope someone else is stacking pillows at the bottom. But pillows got real expensive lately and a new Trump headline just dropped.
It's always been the judicial system. In Nazi Germany, the courts were incredibly close to blocking the concentration camps. If they had, we'd have had a very different history
Good thing conservatives haven't packed the courts. Oh wait.
Total concentration camp casualties were about 13 million. (about half of that jews, but we almost don't talk about the rest, Israel makes sure the focus is on jews). Mind bogglingingly horrible.
But total WWII casualties were something like 80 million.
Would history be different? Sure. Amongst other things, Zionists wouldn't be able to weaponize guilt.
Probably AI generated
And why they didn’t just use an AI to summarize all the key points in just as much time as it took to write is beyond me lol.
"Since you didn't bother to write it, I didn't bother to read it."
A judge can’t really do that. At a minimum he needs human staff to do that.
Oof yeah I didn’t really think of that, I guess I was thinking this was the oppositions lawyer we were speaking about.
"As every lawyer knows (or is presumed to know), a complaint is not a public forum for vituperation and invective -- not a protected platform to rage against an adversary."
You have to be a really shit lawyer to work for Trump.
It would be great if the lawyers actually faced consequences for such blatant abuses of their profession. Lawyers are supposed to have standards they adhere to which are obviously not being followed. These lawyers know what they are doing is wrong and are doing it intentionally, their Bar association really should not tolerate this behavior.
They can, and many of Trump's lawyers have. It's a process though.
They should be figuring out ways to expedite that process because any semblance of respect for our legal system is vaporizing by the hour.
Sure the average person always had mistrust of it, but when you have the important people in the industry say it, you know it's fucked because part of their job is to try to retain respect for the institution.
They should be figuring out ways to expedite that process because any semblance of respect for our legal system is vaporizing by the hour.
That cuts both ways - you want a process that is diligent and non-reactionary. Trump will always find more stupid lawyers willing to fall on their sword for him anyway.
Yeah but the bar will drop low. He will have lawyers so stupid they are completely ineffectual.
I loved that quote! 😄
And this was a court they cherrypicked for presumed favorability.
I love that we still get some moments like this.
The judge gave them a page limit, too.
It's almost like it was frivolous.
He has admitted doing it because it drains their resources.
We need slap laws everywhere.
Some people reading your comment might take it as an exaggeration, but it was LITERALLY as frivolous as it could be. The judge who dismissed it said it contained repetitive praise for the president without establishing properly their reasons for legal action.
Headline tomorrow: "Trump appeals decision against New York Times, suit remains."
Well that was fast
Stormy Daniels: "I've seen faster."
Always good to see the Orange Nazi lose.
nazi rapist. Don't forget the rape. He's trying to make it go away, so don't forget it!
The paint of the suit was the damage caused by it. Not winning.
Hey if we never do anything about it they know they can keep doing it.
Well the judge threw it out at lightspeed, that's something
😆
this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2025
484 points (100.0% liked)
News
32565 readers
2772 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. 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS