Congressional Democrats have pushed for ethics reform legislation, efforts publicly rejected by Samuel Alito

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    173
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    They can call for him to resign all they want. He won’t. And he doesn’t have to. We have a SCOTUS who is accountable to no one and can get away with anything. They’re like the Mullahs of Iran.

    • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      2 years ago

      I’m not American, so maybe that’s a stupid question, but is there really nothing the rest of the government can do about it?

        • kescusay@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          59
          ·
          2 years ago

          Bingo. Each branch is supposed to act as a check on the power of the other two, but the current Congress would rather use its impeachment power to go after Hunter Biden - excuse me, Joe Biden - for being a Democrat.

          By all rights, Thomas should have earned immediate impeachment and removal the moment his frequent acceptance of bribes came to light. But bribery is no scandal for Republicans anymore. For most of their supporters, literally the only crime a Republican can commit is agreeing with a Democrat on anything.

        • evatronic@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 years ago

          Not as long as Democrats’ voters stay home because “both parties are the same” and Republicans ’ voters turn out in droves.

          Stop electing Republicans and you’ll see a lot of problems solved.

          • PreachHard@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            I think you really overestimate the “both parties are the same” group/impact. The Dems need to do more to capture and inspire votes. Stop blaming people for not voting for them. You’re supposed to earn their vote with good policy. It’s not good enough to just be not as shite as the republicans.

            • whofearsthenight@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              I don’t think they are under-estimating, or even close. It’s like taking a solid b student and grading them next to the kid eating paint chips and torturing small animals and pretending it’s the same. Even in modern times, look at economic accomplishments of this admin, legislative accomplishments, etc. Fighting for things like a higher min wage (though it failed.)

              Stop blaming people for not voting for them.

              Fuck no. Every time in my life we’ve voted in Republicans it’s led to one catastrophe or another. Sure you can make an argument that Dems need to be pushed to the left, but the choices are between:

              a) the party who isn’t improving your life fast enough
              b) the party these days that are literal fascists responsible for multiple financial collapses at this point, millions dead from wars they start, failure to manage a pandemic, extreme wealth concentration, that is looking at our planet on fire and still doesn’t meaningfully acknowledge that our policy is causing it. Book bans, loss of bodily autonomy for half of the country, destroying education, ensuring discrimination in law, bringing back child labor.

              If you’re voting republican in 2023 or not voting democrat, you’re a sociopath, billionaire (whoops said the same thing twice), or a fucking moron*. There is no path to a more progressive country that comes through allowing fascists to burn it all down.

              * I suppose I could more charitably say “extremely, profoundly ignorant in a way that almost has to be a choice at this point.”

            • evatronic@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              Okay.

              How do you propose Democrats accomplish things while stonewalled by Republicans?

            • Dee@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              Looking at what a fully Democratic state government has done in Michigan already from a single election cycle, I think you’re wrong. As soon as Republicans get out of office good things can start to happen.

      • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Ironically, in an attempt to make SCOTUS as non-political as possible, our Constitution sets a very high threshhold for removal of a sitting federal judge. You need 67 out of 100 Senators to vote for removal. Our senate is roughly 50/50 split, give or take a couple of people, divided almost evenly between the two parties. And those parties are so deeply divided that it’s all but impossible to get up to the 67 people needed to remove a judge, making the threat of impeachment toothless. Any Republican right now who would side with Democrats to remove a Republican judge would be committing political suicide.

        In other words, yes, Clarence Thomas can continue to receive bribes with literal impunity. The only other non-partisan methods of removing him are referral to our Department of Justice for a criminal inquiry. But our current leader of the DOJ is a spineless coward afraid of his own shadow, and even if he were to act, the entire process of investigation, charges, trial, impeachment, and removal would take so long that he’d likely be dead of old age before he was removed.

        • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          27
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          to make SCOTUS as non-political as possible

          The most ironic thing about this phrase is the fact that judges have to say which party they root for.

      • IdleSheep@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        In theory they can do something about it but because in America there’s only 2 parties in power, with one parry’s identity being “opposing the other party no matter what” rather than serving the people of the country, they’ll never reach the consensus necessary to actually remove the judge.

        In most countries there’s multiple parties in power so negotiation is typically mandatory and a consensus for action can often be found. In the US that’s virtually impossible because the 2 parties hate each other and there’s no other alternative.

      • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Congress could impeach him in a hot second, if most of them weren’t either on his side, or doing the same thing.

    • mookulator@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 years ago

      They have to expand and term limit SCOTUS. Dilute his power, incentivize good behavior and force him out eventually

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      You might be underselling Iran. Even the Supreme Leader can theoretically be removed from office, in the same sense that Thomas can theoretically be removed.