894

Rep. Joseph Morelle of New York, the top Democrat on the House Administration Committee, sent a letter to colleagues informing them of his intent to file the resolution, which would kickstart what’s traditionally a cumbersome amendment process. 

“This amendment will do what SCOTUS failed to do — prioritize our democracy,” Morelle said in a statement to AP.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] kn33@lemmy.world 148 points 2 months ago

This is the only way to change that. I don't have much hope that it'll pass, though.

[-] Zachariah@lemmy.world 67 points 2 months ago

But SCOTUS can choose how to interpret this amendment however they choose.

[-] APassenger@lemmy.world 26 points 2 months ago

And a President can fire them. Or more. Because they said he could.

[-] Zachariah@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago

What’s he waiting for then?

[-] APassenger@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago

He's too virtuous. He hasn't processed that anything he does is legal.

So he leads be example. Or something.

Maybe someone should explain it to him before 4 PM?

[-] paddirn@lemmy.world 28 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It feels so Game of Thrones-ish. Democrats are going to act all high and mighty and virtuous, while Republicans are just going to be like Cersei Lannister, "Is this meant to be your shield, Lord Stark? A piece of paper?" Republicans will run them through and sleep well knowing they won, without a guilty conscience. The President should be acting now to protect the country, not waiting for the wolves to get into the hen house and then wringing their hands that there was nothing they could do about it.

[-] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

That's pretty much it. Republicans are bring out the spiked maces and Dems are just trying to fisticuff they're way out of it. Because virtue.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

Not even fisticuffs. They're filing a motion to discourage mace spikes over a certain length.

Pending the approval of some unelected clerk rando with only symbolic authority, of course.

After 11, but before 4, and not between 12:30 and 14:00 because that’s naptime

[-] UltraMagnus0001@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Obi Wan is our only hope 😔, and I think he has registered it yet.

[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 6 points 2 months ago

Being free from the consequences of your actions does not give you absolute power and authority. He can't fire them, because he never had that power. What he can do is have them swatted and kill them in official capacity, although he can still be impeached.

[-] APassenger@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

Trump signed an executive order and made much of the executive branch fire-able. Go far enough and that influence can turn into control over other parts of the government.

There's a path to effective termination.

[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Nah, that one only works because the executive branch belongs to the president. It's kind of like my boss saying there's a new rule at my work and he can fire you at will from your work.

It would be a really convenient way to go if it worked though...

[-] APassenger@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

If Trump wins, come back to this mid-2026?

[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Nah he's more of a send you to gitmo I put a bullet in your head kind of fella.

Under the new authority they’ve granted him, he can also “fire” them, if you get my meaning.

[-] Th3D3k0y@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

you mean set their homes ablaze while they sleep because of an alleged terrorist Hamas cell in the basement?

[-] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 months ago

As fucked up as the Gaza genocide is, it may surprise you to know that it’s not related to literally everything in the sphere of politics.

[-] fitjazz@lemmyf.uk 1 points 2 months ago

Out of a canon?

[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 1 points 2 months ago

Them actively denying legislature on a whim would be time consuming and bring us closer to congress impeaching the justices and removing them.

[-] Zachariah@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

They don’t seem to care.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago

Pass? The Republican controlled House won't even bring it up for a vote!

It’s the only legislative way to change that.

There is a way that Biden could change that completely unilaterally, but he’s not going to do it.

[-] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 months ago

Impeachment. Impeachment is easier, more direct, and since the justices can theoretically interpret the amendment any way they wish far more likely to be effective.

[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Yeah they've already wiped their asses with the spirit of the Constitution. There are currently in rules for the but not for me mode. It's still a good gesture.

this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2024
894 points (98.8% liked)

politics

18802 readers
4331 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS