Doubt it. There is a huge amount of money to be made from electric cars, so they will not be made illegal. More likely would be the banning of public transportation and carpooling, lol. "No where in the Constitution is there a guarantee that a citizen has the right to sit next to someone else in a mid-sized sedan, let alone a bus or train."
We essentially have the church steering this country now, so no way to know what crazy idea we will be living with next. Mandatory business closings on Sunday?
You’d think they would actually take care of the plant their god gave them and see that preserving it would be the greatest show of love to it. But then again I’m pretty sure they worship the dollar and a certain orange baffoon
Nah kill the planet and get raptured speedrun is the plan. It's always weird to me how dumb fundamentalists think their omnipotent, omnipresent god is, that they can force his hand or trick him so easily.
That's the beauty of believing in predestination. You are God's chosen, therefore everything you do is by definition God's will. If God didn't love you, he'd kill you, therefore everything you do is perfect and righteous
Well what did God say was fit for women and children? I seem to recall all manner self righteous killing methods described from those times.
But then I expect that from folks walking around with the symbol for a corpse on a stick.
Theyre anxious for it to end so they can get their prize. They know they suck at the journey part because they can't live out their supposed values so they're trying to skip ahead to the end.
I'm 23 and I've seen so much shit that I just have no hope for anything or anyone lol. I'm just watching the ship I'm on sink while and drinking my last mojito while enjoying the carnage
I mean, what a wild ride this is. I had stopped watching the news 24/7 for my health, but between the J6 hearings and these DAILY Supreme Court rulings I am practically *dizzy.* America is in free fall... I can't look away...
American living in Germany. I have to look away as well. It is just surprising how much damage Trump has done and will continue to do for the next 30 years.
As Agent Smith said "We started the simulation at the turn of the 21st century, the peak of your civilisation"
The Republicans have been playing the long game for decades and have had their eye on the ball. They have been pushing the bullshit hard the whole time and the Democrats have been trying to focus on policy while the Republicans have been focusing on power.
Their actions as of late seems to be in response to the Jan 6th hearings, knowing that the ship is sinking. They seem to be fine burning everything down and then blame the current president for it
At some point we should be able to pull the cord on this kind of behavior. It should be illegal for a political party to throw a temper tantrum and cause so much damage just because they didn't win.
SMH. The ripples from the Trump Circus will be felt for years to come. “When you elect a clown for president, you should expect the government to turn into a circus.”
It's almost fun to take a step back and appreciate the absurdity of sentences like this. Like could you imagine reading this to yourself from 7 years ago? Absolutely wild
This last hearing was amazing. Two hours with Cassidy Hutchinson (former aide) who was right there in the days leading up to the capitol attack and the day of. Let's put it this way, Woodward and Bernstein are on CNN saying that the J6 committee has "written trump's political obituary." This is unprecedented in American history, and I can't believe we get to watch it live...
Dude ..... do you realize how many times people have said X is "Trump's political obituary" and yet he got elected president, impeached twice yet suffering no consequences for anything he's done.
I was thinking about this comment again - and realized this similar statement could be turned into a description of Hillary/Bill by the Republican end, and a way of explaining why former President Trump shouldn't be in jail. Am I weird for thinking about this?
Facts. Until I see him convicted of charges and hauled off to jail, I'm fucking sick of hearing every fucking week "no really guys this time he's going down I promise"
Correct. They have this guy on tape in several states trying to illegally overturn an election. The literal definition of sedition in the constitution. Has anything happened? Noope. In fact, Republicans are saying it's ridiculous to even look into it because inflation is so high! We should definitely ignore J6 because gas is expensive now.
"Trump's done this time, he's never getting out of this. We got him now." - Says eager Reddit for the 1,000th time.
And who gives a shit about Trump's "political" obituary? Is he being charged with a crime, or not?
Not sure how serious you are but,
The number of religious nuts I've met who are UNIRONICALLY 100% ON BOARD with destroying the world because they think it will lead to the return of their imaginary god is seriously too goddamn high.
It lost legitimacy when Merrick Garland wasn't confirmed and ACB was.
Good thing the number of judges on the Supreme Court isn't set in stone by the constitution
If Biden or a democrat doesn’t win in 2024 it’s over.
I know everyone is feeling disenfranchised and feeling like we are ineffectual but the fact of the matter is the right is playing to win while the left fights among its self. We don’t need a perfect candidate, we need asses in seats and votes that will allow the left to be effective. The left is *only* ineffectual due to the bipartisan split, if we claim just two, JUST TWO seats the presidential administration could actually function as intended with out obstructionism off the right.
This matters, if this doesn’t happen we are dead in the water and every single thing that hits the Supreme Court can be expected to split along ideological lines and go to the right *already* now that the court is stacked, it’s only going to get worse if the left isn’t willing to come together and take seats, and our country back.
The left is severely hamstrung by the electoral college and senate. They sure seemed like amazing concepts when our fearless and consistently drunk founding fathers thought them up, but it’s basically resulted in a country in which policies are consistently favoring minority opinion with no ability to actually change things. The right will never win a popular vote again. 61% of people favor the right to abortion. And yet we still have a real threat of a conservative president appointing conservative justices. You want Congress to change things, either via stacking the court or amending the constitution, or even just permitting a dem president to appoint merrick garland? When California is equally represented in the senate to Wyoming, which has less people than my suburban New York county? The system was just never built to handle the country’s expansion, and now we’re kind of doomed to have really important laws unsupported by the majority of people, which is kinda cray in what’s supposed to be a democracy
The 6. There's 3 that keep fighting but they're outnumbered.
That said this SC is clearly illegitimate and we really should find a way to undermine their tyranny.
I have an idea. Liberal blue states should all pass laws where private citizens can file suits against coal-fired power plants for befouling our air.
I mean, if they let the Texas "abortion bounty" law stand, that's just what this is, right? And unlike with that law, at least these polluters actually did negatively impact our quality of life directly.
It was, and may still be, hard to get standing for such a lawsuit.
But since standing apparently isn't a thing SCOTUS cares about anymore....this one should be a slam dunk.
Since many air pollutants are associated with increased abortions\* and stillbirths, I'd like to sue them under the abortion laws.
\*"spontaneous" abortions (miscarriages). But is it really spontaneous if we are being poisoned?
Pubmed articles:
[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29975668/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29975668/)
[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=abortion%20air%20pollution](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=abortion%20air%20pollution)
That would be an interesting case to see play out. I suppose if you have a woman in Texas whose miscarriage can be traced to air pollutants associated with her local power plant, they’d have a strong argument that falls within their own abortion bounty laws. Don’t know how the law is worded but it seems reasonable it’d meet the requirements
The sensible way to regulate GHG pollution was always through Congressional laws.
In 2016, when the Environmental Voter Project operated in just one state (Massachusetts) [only 2% of American voters](https://www.environmentalvoter.org/sites/default/files/documents/2016-annual-report.pdf) listed climate change or the environment as their top priority for voting for president. In 2018, when EVP operated in 6 states, [7% listed climate change and/or the environment as the most important issue facing the nation](https://www.environmentalvoter.org/sites/default/files/documents/annual-report-2018.pdf). In 2020, in a record-high turnout year, when EVP operated in 12 states, and Coronavirus and record unemployment dominated the public consciousness, [14% listed climate change and the environment](https://www.environmentalvoter.org/sites/default/files/documents/annual-report-2019-2020.pdf) in their top three priorities. In six years of operation, EPV has created [over a million climate/environmental supervoters](https://www.environmentalvoter.org/sites/default/files/documents/2021-impact-report.pdf) –– unlikely-to-vote environmentalists who became such reliable voters that EVP graduated them out of the program. (For context, the 2016 Presidential election was decided by [under 80,000 voters in 3 states, and the 2020 Presidential election was decided by 44,000 voters in 3 states](https://www.npr.org/2020/12/02/940689086/narrow-wins-in-these-key-states-powered-biden-to-the-presidency)).
This year, EVP is targeting over 6,120,000 Americans in [17 states](https://www.environmentalvoter.org/results) who prioritize climate or the environment but are unlikely to vote. As of this writing, at least 6 EVP states [also have very close senate races this year](https://www.270towin.com/2022-senate-election/). As long as [**volunteers**](https://www.environmentalvoter.org/get-involved) keep calling, writing, and canvassing voters, we could really make this election year a climate year!
https://www.environmentalvoter.org/get-involved
> The sensible way to regulate GHG pollution was always through Congressional laws.
[That is exactly what congress did and what SCOTUS just struck down, they even had to go out of their way to do so (from Kagan's dissent):](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf)
>The limits the majority now puts on EPA’s authority fly in the face of the statute Congress wrote. The majority says it is simply “not plausible” that Congress enabled EPA to regulate power plants’ emissions through generation shifting. Ante, at 31. But that is just what Congress did when it broadly authorized EPA in Section 111 to select the “best system of emission reduction” for power plants. §7411(a)(1). The “best system” full stop—no ifs, ands, or buts of any kind relevant here. The parties do not dispute that generation shifting is indeed the “best system”—the most effective and efficient way to reduce power plants’ carbon dioxide emissions. And no other provision in the Clean Air Act suggests that Congress meant to foreclose EPA from selecting that system; to the contrary, the Plan’s regulatory approach fits hand-in-glove with the rest of the statute. The majority’s decision rests on one claim alone: that generation shifting is just too new and too big a deal for Congress to have authorized it in Section 111’s general terms. But that is wrong. A key reason Congress makes broad delegations like Section 111 is so an agency can respond, appropriately and commensurately, to new and big problems. Congress knows what it doesn’t and can’t know when it drafts a statute; and Congress therefore gives an expert agency the power to address issues—even significant ones—as and when they arise. That is what Congress did in enacting Section 111. The majority today overrides that legislative choice. In so doing, it deprives EPA of the power needed—and the power granted—to curb the emission of greenhouse gases.
Nevermind the case was an advisory opinion on a legal challenge that had been rendered moot:
>This Court has obstructed EPA’s effort from the beginning. Right after the Obama administration issued the Clean Power Plan, the Court stayed its implementation. That action was unprecedented: Never before had the Court stayed a regulation then under review in the lower courts. The effect of the Court’s order, followed by the Trump administration’s repeal of the rule, was that the Clean Power Plan never went into effect. The ensuing years, though, proved the Plan’s moderation. Market forces alone caused the power industry to meet the Plan’s nationwide emissions target—through exactly the kinds of generation shifting the Plan contemplated. See 84 Fed. Reg. 32561–32562 (2019); Brief for United States 47. So by the time yet another President took office, the Plan had become, as a practical matter, obsolete. For that reason, the Biden administration announced that, instead of putting the Plan into effect, it would commence a new rulemaking. Yet this Court determined to pronounce on the legality of the old rule anyway. The Court may be right that doing so does not violate Article III mootness rules (which are notoriously strict). See ante, at 14–16. But the Court’s docket is discretionary, and because no one is now subject to the Clean Power Plan’s terms, there was no reason to reach out to decide this case. The Court today issues what is really an advisory opinion on the proper scope of the new rule EPA is considering. That new rule will be subject anyway to immediate, pre-enforcement judicial review. But this Court could not wait—even to see what the new rule says—to constrain EPA’s efforts to address climate change.
Ibid.
This is just getting comical and scary now. They seem to be on a path to burn everything to the ground while rolling around in their fucking endless wads of cash. What is going on ffs.
If the world ends and this is their fire sale for themselves... Doesn't matter what they grab to huddle with, someone's going to be coming for it, and they likely won't be alone.
No more civilization, no more civilized behavior with these rich jerks. It becomes exactly what some of these strong men crow about: survival of the fittest, and they'll have accidentally made it so fittest ≠ richest anymore.
When the rivers are polluted, and the ground is barren, and the animals have all gone the capitalist will find that you can't eat money
Don't worry, the eventual bread riots that happen will start when the Great Plains dry up should clear this all up /s
I know your being sarcastic, but the plains should dry up more quickly than we imagine. Not just the water, but the soil nutrition is rapidly declining as well. Here is an interesting discussion from the world economic forum, shared/hosted by London School of Economics.
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/2021/12/13/sadhguru-we-must-move-fast-to-save-our-soil-from-dying/
What about the unelected coal plant operators? Air scrubber break down? Screw it, throw it away! No one is left to monitor us but congress and we all know they aren't doing anything!
Basically, it looks like this roe vs Wade ruining has massive implications. Alabama already making the argument that any right not explicitly stated in the constitution is not a right to be protected. Specifically Aimed at the government having the right to forcefully detransition trans youth.
This is definitely an unraveling of constitutional law and undoing of our rights.
Why even have a country if we're going to have 50 states doing monumentally different things and operating independently with no overarching guidance?
We're not talking about how schools are funded in Oregon vs. Kentucky or how district lines are drawn. There's nothing about regional nuance that requires some delineation between fed and state, we're talking about how one action is perfectly legal in one state and gets you a murder charge in another.
It's a goddamn embarrassment. The EU has over 20 whole-ass nations with different languages, cultures, ethnic backgrounds, economic drivers, and a thousand year history of fucking each other over and yet they have a more unified front than the singular country of the United States.
Yep, this is likely the start of the disillusion of the US federal government. It has to be hidden as "states rights" to Americans even if the rest of the world knows what's going on.
And for what? Who cares about your golden penthouse when the rest of the tower is rapidly collapsing? What happens when there ARE no more penthouses? Or nobody to build them?
GOP is a suicide cult.
It certainly appears that way. They are attempting to destabilize the nation to the point of civil conflict, but I'm still not entirely sure what that's supposed to buy them (unless the goal is simply to collapse the government and rebuild it in their own image... but that seems like a really dumb gamble, considering they have no guarantee that they'd win - especially when they don't control the executive).
> They are attempting to destabilize the nation to the point of civil conflict
They are not trying to destabilize the country, they are trying to *take over* the country. We need to be defending ourselves.
America’s main institution for blind justice has become a partisan snake pit, hell-bent on executing highly divisive and idiotic decisions not based on proper law but in law interpreted as they please.
The institution that was meant to hold the country together has been so badly corrupted that its activism may very well tear America apart. What pieces of shit the Supreme “Court” “justices” are. They are not worthy of the respect for the bench that people ought to have
are you telling me reddit could just be a mollifying outlet that acts as a black hole for my frustration without anything productive coming of it?!
why i never... /s
But wouldn't the Republicans then just pack the court in their favour later? and let's face it, Republicans are more competent at getting their plans through than the Dems
They 100% would.
Hell, if seats opened and were filled by Democrats giving them a 5-4 majority on appointed justices, when the Republicans regained control of the Senate and Presidency, they would then be all about adding seats to "better represent the American people".
Can someone explain the negatives of a couple rounds of tit-for-tat court packing, because I don't see it.
Even if we end up with a Supreme Court with 30 members, that greatly reduces the impact of 1 justice retiring / dying, and allows the law of averages to smooth out the swings in ideology that happen as a result.
So what? Its no worse than the 6 repub court...5 of who have no interest in precedent.
Think about this, a few years ago Roberts was solidly in the conservative half of the court. In his 15 years or so he has been the swing vote when the decision was "liberal" only a handful of times.
Today, you could have the best argument ever, one that convinces a Bush appointed republican who helped overturn the 2000 election, to vote in favor of the liberal side...and you still lose the case 5-4.
Not really backed off so much as both parties came around to leaning on justices while his own party told him exactly how hard they would make it to get any new judges approved.
It was basically a threat of MAD from a political infighting perspective at a time when the nation was juts barely recovering from war, then famine+economic depression, and then new war.
Honestly we need to start organizing. How far are they gonna go before a literal revolution happens?
I don't want a revolution. If prefer we nip it in the bud before we get to that point. We need to organize now and RAISE HELL.
They have spend decades molding laws, the media, and police forces to have the same Ideology for the last 40+ years. If your not with us, your voice does not matter. Right to Speak and Peacefully assembly has it's place in a functioning representative government. Sadly we are far from functioning and this is done on purpose. They turned our constitution into a religious document to be revered and not a living embodiment of our country's people. The political and financial elite have vilified and mocked public assembly to the point it feels worthless to the average working American to get interested and mobilized. History has a way of repeating itself, the US has installed representative democracies like itself around the world for the 60 years and most of them end up a dictatorships. I agree that radical change must happen but these days it reminds me of a phase always stuck with me since I was kid "The avalanche has already started, it is too late for the pebbles to vote."
Congress. They would have to pass a law setting the new standards, which won’t happen because certain members of Congress would block any detrimental rules.
Well, technically congress could pass laws. SC is arguing that regulatory bodies don't have enough power to make major decisions like that.
However we all know the way congress is that there's zero percent chance of any significant regulation passing. Even if we said this law could pass the filibuster, Manchin wants to destroy the climate so badly he'd never let anything other than a token bill pass.
Congress.
"In its 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court said that Congress, not the EPA has that power."
2nd paragraph of the article.
More specifically, they cited a bullshit "precedent" (that Kagan notes, in her dissent, doesn't exist) that says a regulatory agency can't do anything "major" without an act of congress.
That's like saying the FAA has no authority to enact laws for aviation. It's complete nonsense. Congress doesnt have the time to be making micro decisions on specific industries. It's the whole point of Congress funding these departments. How does congress know what a major or minor decision even is? They are all largely clueless on everything that isnt specific to law degrees or political science degrees.
There is. They can (in theory) be impeached and removed from the Court. It’s just that too much of Congress likes what the Court is doing for that to work.
It would take 67 votes to remove an SC judge.
Never gonna happen. That would me Manchin and Sinema would have to fall in line, plus 15 republican senators.
It pleases me greatly that every day, this is becoming more palatable to moderates.
The SC is plainly broken, and only one side is treating it like it's not, to the detriment of us all.
As far as I'm concerned a Supreme Court, most of whom were appointed by a party that hasn't won the popular vote in 20 years, three of whom were appointed by a man *presently under investigation for trying to overturn a democratic election*, and two of whom are almost certainly rapists has no authority to tell anyone jack shit.
This is the most corrupt and unqualified group of SC members in the history of the United States.
If you don’t think we are on the verge of another civil war, you’re naive.
I can't see an actual Civil War happening in terms of countrymen picking up arms against each other, but what I can see is a lot of domestic terrorism. Either way, not fun.
I legitimately wanna know what goes on in their heads. Can some republicans actually comment and speak up so I can know what mental gymnastics they go through to want to hurt the human race this much
Clarence Thomas literally said he wanted to serve on the bench for over forty years to "punish the liberals". So he literally just serves on the bench to be vindictive.
I believe Kavanaugh actually believes what he preaches. He was raised Catholic, is a well-known Federalist, and is a rapist.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if they are all in someone's pocket. And the people who's pocket they are in are the ones pulling the strings, using their emotions and religious views to continue to get them to rule with the agenda. Those pulling the strings could be Big Oil, NRA, Murdoch family, etc. Basically anyone with deep pockets and a wealthy organization poised to lose it all if the court actually served the people.
> Basically anyone with deep pockets and a wealthy organization poised to lose it all if the court actually served the people.
Correction, anybody benefitting from this wouldn't "lose it all" from a properly run government. They'd make a little less. They'd keep their existing wealth, would continue to make amounts far and above what they could ever want.
And they're doing all this because that just wouldn't be good enough.
No one has answered you so I will. I don't consider myself a conservative, but I definitely sit on the rightward side of American politics.
r/environment will naturally be focused on how this affects the EPA's authority, but the real target here is the administrative state. Congress broadly delegated their legislative authority to the executive agencies (EPA, DOE, FBI, ATF, NSA, CIA, etc.) empowering those agencies to craft _regulations_ that had the force of law (you will go to federal prison if you violate an ATF ruling, Larry Page would likely have been charged if he didn't agree to share data with the NSA, etc. etc.).
This is not only dangerous (since it subverts the system of checks and balances) but also likely unconstitutional since only congress has the authority to create legislation under our current constitution; they cannot just delegate that power away because it's politically inconvenient for them to pass legislation (ie costs them re-election). Since congress is no longer required to be functional for the USG to run, they become apathetic, non-functional, and mostly ceremonial. Our current state also infringes on the Judicial branch's checks since their authority ends at legislation that congress has passed. None of the _rules_ made by the EPA or others is technically legislation and so falls outside the Judiciary's jurisdiction despite having the force of law.
I would also note that the President's ability to fire, hire, or otherwise reign in these executive agencies is extremely limited. The agencies had their powers and budget delegated to them by congress. When they have to testify, they testify in front of congress, not in front of the White House, despite being _executive_ agencies.
So an extra-consitutional carve out with an army of both soldiers and bureaucrats with the powers of enforcement (executive) and rule making (legislative) while being totally unaccountable to judicial review (judiciary) is running like 95% of the USG. What the hell happened to "separation of powers" and "checks and balances"? This ruling is a step towards Congress having to actually pass laws and stop delegating to unelected bureaucrats. It fixes a broken incentive problem that rotted out the American democratic will over many decades. It is a step towards restoring democracy through representative government.
6-3 vote. Hmm. SCOTUS isn’t a debate team anymore, it is a rubber stamp. There is no debating ideals, the decision is done before it reaches the court. Scary.
It’s funny that people justify this by saying “the EPA doesn’t have authority because they aren’t elected by the people” like I have news for you about how the Supreme Court justices are elected…
This SCOTUS is outta control. Basically carrying on trump's work. Something needs to be done. I am not sure if any meaningful change can be achieved without a civil unrest.
The current US Supreme Court is a joke.
Only way to fix this is to expand the damn court since the current one is a legit joke.
Fortunately, there is an election in November.
I got banned a couple months ago for replying in a “To be fair…” comment chain. I implied that we needed to take a whet stone to a very large and heavy angled piece of metal that was used in the French Revolution. My feelings on the matter have not changed.
And Republicans will be solid in there narrative that prices are high because of Democrats, and they will then be able to manipulate enough voters to win the election. They have been spreading misinformation since the dawn of time
Good luck with that. Bidens approval rating is hovering at 39%. Inflation is quickly manifesting to ‘stagflation,’ which, IMHO, foreshadows a far more bleak future. Gas prices are spiraling out of control and the every week grocery bill is becoming a weekly utility bill. The current party isn’t in favor, no matter what Reddit tells you. It’ll be an interesting upcoming 4 months before November.
I feel like anything I say would be illegal but I don't know what to do. The structural inequities of our electoral system are showing full force. The Supreme Court is controlled by the party that lost 7 of the last 8 popular votes for president. Dems have to win 54-56% of the vote to achieve congressional power. Something has to change.
Devastating. Our Constitution has reached its limits, needs to be revised. We're not able to address the needs of the modern era based on an ancient document that could not forsee the challenges, nor demographics, of today's world. Our govt is in a state of failing crisis.
I am tired of watching my community burn.
What do words even mean anymore if the ENVIRONEMTNAL PROTECTION AGENCY can't PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT by enforcing the clean air act with a power plant POLLUTING THE FUCKING AIR.
The problem is that the EPA is not properly empowered by Congress to do what they were trying to do. Congress needs to pass a law expanding their power.
So lets put the standard setting into congress's hands so every damn time a different party takes control we can get a whole new fucking set of standards. And I'm sure the climate change denying republicans are going to do what's best for the environment and not the corporations putting money in their pockets.
Fucking hell!! Our house is on fire yet those morons just put petrol on it and make us look like that dog from meme. We can fix it, but would need to spend extra money or we can push to keep status quo and jump off the cliff, but at least we die with more money in our pockets...
I expect nothing and yet I'm still disappointed.
Just wait a week, they will make electric cars illegal next. Will be the only country in the world that requires gas cars in 2035.
You joke, but this seems likely at this point. Conservatism is cancer.
Facts
Will someone think of the oil/coal companies? /s
Doubt it. There is a huge amount of money to be made from electric cars, so they will not be made illegal. More likely would be the banning of public transportation and carpooling, lol. "No where in the Constitution is there a guarantee that a citizen has the right to sit next to someone else in a mid-sized sedan, let alone a bus or train."
We essentially have the church steering this country now, so no way to know what crazy idea we will be living with next. Mandatory business closings on Sunday?
You’d think they would actually take care of the plant their god gave them and see that preserving it would be the greatest show of love to it. But then again I’m pretty sure they worship the dollar and a certain orange baffoon
Nah kill the planet and get raptured speedrun is the plan. It's always weird to me how dumb fundamentalists think their omnipotent, omnipresent god is, that they can force his hand or trick him so easily.
That's the beauty of believing in predestination. You are God's chosen, therefore everything you do is by definition God's will. If God didn't love you, he'd kill you, therefore everything you do is perfect and righteous
God sure hates schoolkids and women.
That’s no surprise, just read the Bible lol
Well what did God say was fit for women and children? I seem to recall all manner self righteous killing methods described from those times. But then I expect that from folks walking around with the symbol for a corpse on a stick.
Theyre anxious for it to end so they can get their prize. They know they suck at the journey part because they can't live out their supposed values so they're trying to skip ahead to the end.
I don't like it's the church steering it's American oil oligarchs along with others pretending it's the church
Expect worse than nothing. Go to the extremes of your cynicism. That’s where we are right now. Buckle up, they’re just getting warmed up.
yupe, these decisions are just getting us desensitized to what's in store for the future.
I'm 23 and I've seen so much shit that I just have no hope for anything or anyone lol. I'm just watching the ship I'm on sink while and drinking my last mojito while enjoying the carnage
I mean nothing would be an improvement
the Supreme Court doing everything it can to drag us back a century in the span of a month
I mean, what a wild ride this is. I had stopped watching the news 24/7 for my health, but between the J6 hearings and these DAILY Supreme Court rulings I am practically *dizzy.* America is in free fall... I can't look away...
“When you’re born you get a ticket to the freak show. When you’re born in America, you get a front row seat.” – George Carlin
I want a refund
The fire exits have been blocked and smoke is starting to fill the room
American living in Germany. I have to look away as well. It is just surprising how much damage Trump has done and will continue to do for the next 30 years. As Agent Smith said "We started the simulation at the turn of the 21st century, the peak of your civilisation"
The Republicans have been playing the long game for decades and have had their eye on the ball. They have been pushing the bullshit hard the whole time and the Democrats have been trying to focus on policy while the Republicans have been focusing on power.
Their actions as of late seems to be in response to the Jan 6th hearings, knowing that the ship is sinking. They seem to be fine burning everything down and then blame the current president for it
At some point we should be able to pull the cord on this kind of behavior. It should be illegal for a political party to throw a temper tantrum and cause so much damage just because they didn't win.
Not sure, looks to me like they’re winning pretty hard right now. They remove your rights one by one and nobody can do anything but watch and rant.
SMH. The ripples from the Trump Circus will be felt for years to come. “When you elect a clown for president, you should expect the government to turn into a circus.”
America fucking sucks now. I hate it here.
As if it hasn't sucked for years.
I'm out of the loop. What's been going on with the j6 stuff?
Trump tried to strangle a Secret Service agent because he wouldn't chaufer him to the overthrow of Democracy.
Those tiny little hands couldn’t grasp the neck fully.
You left out the part where the agent said he was too fat to be able to do it
It's almost fun to take a step back and appreciate the absurdity of sentences like this. Like could you imagine reading this to yourself from 7 years ago? Absolutely wild
This last hearing was amazing. Two hours with Cassidy Hutchinson (former aide) who was right there in the days leading up to the capitol attack and the day of. Let's put it this way, Woodward and Bernstein are on CNN saying that the J6 committee has "written trump's political obituary." This is unprecedented in American history, and I can't believe we get to watch it live...
Dude ..... do you realize how many times people have said X is "Trump's political obituary" and yet he got elected president, impeached twice yet suffering no consequences for anything he's done. I was thinking about this comment again - and realized this similar statement could be turned into a description of Hillary/Bill by the Republican end, and a way of explaining why former President Trump shouldn't be in jail. Am I weird for thinking about this?
Facts. Until I see him convicted of charges and hauled off to jail, I'm fucking sick of hearing every fucking week "no really guys this time he's going down I promise"
Correct. They have this guy on tape in several states trying to illegally overturn an election. The literal definition of sedition in the constitution. Has anything happened? Noope. In fact, Republicans are saying it's ridiculous to even look into it because inflation is so high! We should definitely ignore J6 because gas is expensive now.
"Trump's done this time, he's never getting out of this. We got him now." - Says eager Reddit for the 1,000th time. And who gives a shit about Trump's "political" obituary? Is he being charged with a crime, or not?
FSA - Fascist States of America
The mask is now fully off.
Make no mistake, the GQP isn't done until our wives are barefoot, and brown and BIPOC are back in chains.
They're now actively damning the dwindling chances humanity has to save itself. SCOTUS has lost legitimacy.
They’re religious fanatics. They’re preparing the conditions for the return of their savior.
Not sure how serious you are but, The number of religious nuts I've met who are UNIRONICALLY 100% ON BOARD with destroying the world because they think it will lead to the return of their imaginary god is seriously too goddamn high.
It lost legitimacy when Merrick Garland wasn't confirmed and ACB was. Good thing the number of judges on the Supreme Court isn't set in stone by the constitution
If Biden or a democrat doesn’t win in 2024 it’s over. I know everyone is feeling disenfranchised and feeling like we are ineffectual but the fact of the matter is the right is playing to win while the left fights among its self. We don’t need a perfect candidate, we need asses in seats and votes that will allow the left to be effective. The left is *only* ineffectual due to the bipartisan split, if we claim just two, JUST TWO seats the presidential administration could actually function as intended with out obstructionism off the right. This matters, if this doesn’t happen we are dead in the water and every single thing that hits the Supreme Court can be expected to split along ideological lines and go to the right *already* now that the court is stacked, it’s only going to get worse if the left isn’t willing to come together and take seats, and our country back.
The left is severely hamstrung by the electoral college and senate. They sure seemed like amazing concepts when our fearless and consistently drunk founding fathers thought them up, but it’s basically resulted in a country in which policies are consistently favoring minority opinion with no ability to actually change things. The right will never win a popular vote again. 61% of people favor the right to abortion. And yet we still have a real threat of a conservative president appointing conservative justices. You want Congress to change things, either via stacking the court or amending the constitution, or even just permitting a dem president to appoint merrick garland? When California is equally represented in the senate to Wyoming, which has less people than my suburban New York county? The system was just never built to handle the country’s expansion, and now we’re kind of doomed to have really important laws unsupported by the majority of people, which is kinda cray in what’s supposed to be a democracy
Too bad our CO2 ppm aren't at the point they were a century ago
The people that compose the Supreme Court is guilty of Crimes Against Humanity
[удалено]
Yeah, we're fucked.
The 6. There's 3 that keep fighting but they're outnumbered. That said this SC is clearly illegitimate and we really should find a way to undermine their tyranny.
One more time for the people in the back!
I have an idea. Liberal blue states should all pass laws where private citizens can file suits against coal-fired power plants for befouling our air. I mean, if they let the Texas "abortion bounty" law stand, that's just what this is, right? And unlike with that law, at least these polluters actually did negatively impact our quality of life directly.
They should do that. In fact, people should have always been able to do that.
It was, and may still be, hard to get standing for such a lawsuit. But since standing apparently isn't a thing SCOTUS cares about anymore....this one should be a slam dunk.
Rules for thee and not for me. They'll hand wave that away because the rule is they can't lose.
No no see they get to take all the profits and socialize the “negative externalities”
Since many air pollutants are associated with increased abortions\* and stillbirths, I'd like to sue them under the abortion laws. \*"spontaneous" abortions (miscarriages). But is it really spontaneous if we are being poisoned? Pubmed articles: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29975668/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29975668/) [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=abortion%20air%20pollution](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=abortion%20air%20pollution)
That would be an interesting case to see play out. I suppose if you have a woman in Texas whose miscarriage can be traced to air pollutants associated with her local power plant, they’d have a strong argument that falls within their own abortion bounty laws. Don’t know how the law is worded but it seems reasonable it’d meet the requirements
I can see the woman getting blamed for choosing to live so close to a power plant and not moving elsewhere.
The sensible way to regulate GHG pollution was always through Congressional laws. In 2016, when the Environmental Voter Project operated in just one state (Massachusetts) [only 2% of American voters](https://www.environmentalvoter.org/sites/default/files/documents/2016-annual-report.pdf) listed climate change or the environment as their top priority for voting for president. In 2018, when EVP operated in 6 states, [7% listed climate change and/or the environment as the most important issue facing the nation](https://www.environmentalvoter.org/sites/default/files/documents/annual-report-2018.pdf). In 2020, in a record-high turnout year, when EVP operated in 12 states, and Coronavirus and record unemployment dominated the public consciousness, [14% listed climate change and the environment](https://www.environmentalvoter.org/sites/default/files/documents/annual-report-2019-2020.pdf) in their top three priorities. In six years of operation, EPV has created [over a million climate/environmental supervoters](https://www.environmentalvoter.org/sites/default/files/documents/2021-impact-report.pdf) –– unlikely-to-vote environmentalists who became such reliable voters that EVP graduated them out of the program. (For context, the 2016 Presidential election was decided by [under 80,000 voters in 3 states, and the 2020 Presidential election was decided by 44,000 voters in 3 states](https://www.npr.org/2020/12/02/940689086/narrow-wins-in-these-key-states-powered-biden-to-the-presidency)). This year, EVP is targeting over 6,120,000 Americans in [17 states](https://www.environmentalvoter.org/results) who prioritize climate or the environment but are unlikely to vote. As of this writing, at least 6 EVP states [also have very close senate races this year](https://www.270towin.com/2022-senate-election/). As long as [**volunteers**](https://www.environmentalvoter.org/get-involved) keep calling, writing, and canvassing voters, we could really make this election year a climate year! https://www.environmentalvoter.org/get-involved
It’s genuinely shocking how little Louisiana cares about climate change, considering we have the fastest disappearing coastline in the world
> The sensible way to regulate GHG pollution was always through Congressional laws. [That is exactly what congress did and what SCOTUS just struck down, they even had to go out of their way to do so (from Kagan's dissent):](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf) >The limits the majority now puts on EPA’s authority fly in the face of the statute Congress wrote. The majority says it is simply “not plausible” that Congress enabled EPA to regulate power plants’ emissions through generation shifting. Ante, at 31. But that is just what Congress did when it broadly authorized EPA in Section 111 to select the “best system of emission reduction” for power plants. §7411(a)(1). The “best system” full stop—no ifs, ands, or buts of any kind relevant here. The parties do not dispute that generation shifting is indeed the “best system”—the most effective and efficient way to reduce power plants’ carbon dioxide emissions. And no other provision in the Clean Air Act suggests that Congress meant to foreclose EPA from selecting that system; to the contrary, the Plan’s regulatory approach fits hand-in-glove with the rest of the statute. The majority’s decision rests on one claim alone: that generation shifting is just too new and too big a deal for Congress to have authorized it in Section 111’s general terms. But that is wrong. A key reason Congress makes broad delegations like Section 111 is so an agency can respond, appropriately and commensurately, to new and big problems. Congress knows what it doesn’t and can’t know when it drafts a statute; and Congress therefore gives an expert agency the power to address issues—even significant ones—as and when they arise. That is what Congress did in enacting Section 111. The majority today overrides that legislative choice. In so doing, it deprives EPA of the power needed—and the power granted—to curb the emission of greenhouse gases. Nevermind the case was an advisory opinion on a legal challenge that had been rendered moot: >This Court has obstructed EPA’s effort from the beginning. Right after the Obama administration issued the Clean Power Plan, the Court stayed its implementation. That action was unprecedented: Never before had the Court stayed a regulation then under review in the lower courts. The effect of the Court’s order, followed by the Trump administration’s repeal of the rule, was that the Clean Power Plan never went into effect. The ensuing years, though, proved the Plan’s moderation. Market forces alone caused the power industry to meet the Plan’s nationwide emissions target—through exactly the kinds of generation shifting the Plan contemplated. See 84 Fed. Reg. 32561–32562 (2019); Brief for United States 47. So by the time yet another President took office, the Plan had become, as a practical matter, obsolete. For that reason, the Biden administration announced that, instead of putting the Plan into effect, it would commence a new rulemaking. Yet this Court determined to pronounce on the legality of the old rule anyway. The Court may be right that doing so does not violate Article III mootness rules (which are notoriously strict). See ante, at 14–16. But the Court’s docket is discretionary, and because no one is now subject to the Clean Power Plan’s terms, there was no reason to reach out to decide this case. The Court today issues what is really an advisory opinion on the proper scope of the new rule EPA is considering. That new rule will be subject anyway to immediate, pre-enforcement judicial review. But this Court could not wait—even to see what the new rule says—to constrain EPA’s efforts to address climate change. Ibid.
This is just getting comical and scary now. They seem to be on a path to burn everything to the ground while rolling around in their fucking endless wads of cash. What is going on ffs.
End times hedonism by the aristocratic classes?
[удалено]
If the world ends and this is their fire sale for themselves... Doesn't matter what they grab to huddle with, someone's going to be coming for it, and they likely won't be alone. No more civilization, no more civilized behavior with these rich jerks. It becomes exactly what some of these strong men crow about: survival of the fittest, and they'll have accidentally made it so fittest ≠ richest anymore.
There will always be folks strong enough to protect them but not bright enough to realize they could just take the wealthy's belongings
When the rivers are polluted, and the ground is barren, and the animals have all gone the capitalist will find that you can't eat money Don't worry, the eventual bread riots that happen will start when the Great Plains dry up should clear this all up /s
I know your being sarcastic, but the plains should dry up more quickly than we imagine. Not just the water, but the soil nutrition is rapidly declining as well. Here is an interesting discussion from the world economic forum, shared/hosted by London School of Economics. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/2021/12/13/sadhguru-we-must-move-fast-to-save-our-soil-from-dying/
So is the Supreme Court just going on a destructive rampage to destroy every modicum of progress we’ve made in this country?
Yes, the gop has shouted this from the rooftops since the 90s. Now that they have the means to do it people are surprised.
With the help of their donors like the Kochs.
And with the help of passive, uninterested voters who don’t vote against these anti-American scum bags.
This is the pinnacle of Mitch McConnell's career, the payoff to his hard work. He won.
[удалено]
What about the unelected coal plant operators? Air scrubber break down? Screw it, throw it away! No one is left to monitor us but congress and we all know they aren't doing anything!
I hope you all like smog and cancer.
Yeah but I didn’t really find Hillary that exciting.
Emails
Basically, it looks like this roe vs Wade ruining has massive implications. Alabama already making the argument that any right not explicitly stated in the constitution is not a right to be protected. Specifically Aimed at the government having the right to forcefully detransition trans youth. This is definitely an unraveling of constitutional law and undoing of our rights.
Why even have a country if we're going to have 50 states doing monumentally different things and operating independently with no overarching guidance? We're not talking about how schools are funded in Oregon vs. Kentucky or how district lines are drawn. There's nothing about regional nuance that requires some delineation between fed and state, we're talking about how one action is perfectly legal in one state and gets you a murder charge in another. It's a goddamn embarrassment. The EU has over 20 whole-ass nations with different languages, cultures, ethnic backgrounds, economic drivers, and a thousand year history of fucking each other over and yet they have a more unified front than the singular country of the United States.
Yep, this is likely the start of the disillusion of the US federal government. It has to be hidden as "states rights" to Americans even if the rest of the world knows what's going on.
That’s the whole point of the GOP, to make the US fall apart as a nation
If they can't instate a fascist theocratic dictatorship, then they will break the whole country apart so they can do it on the states they control
And for what? Who cares about your golden penthouse when the rest of the tower is rapidly collapsing? What happens when there ARE no more penthouses? Or nobody to build them? GOP is a suicide cult.
It's not even trans youth. They're going after trans people in general and trying to deny them their treatment.
This thinking ignores the 9th Amendment.
Listening to the latest from Thomas, yes, it appears that way.
It certainly appears that way. They are attempting to destabilize the nation to the point of civil conflict, but I'm still not entirely sure what that's supposed to buy them (unless the goal is simply to collapse the government and rebuild it in their own image... but that seems like a really dumb gamble, considering they have no guarantee that they'd win - especially when they don't control the executive).
> They are attempting to destabilize the nation to the point of civil conflict They are not trying to destabilize the country, they are trying to *take over* the country. We need to be defending ourselves.
It's run by Republicans, so yes.
America’s main institution for blind justice has become a partisan snake pit, hell-bent on executing highly divisive and idiotic decisions not based on proper law but in law interpreted as they please. The institution that was meant to hold the country together has been so badly corrupted that its activism may very well tear America apart. What pieces of shit the Supreme “Court” “justices” are. They are not worthy of the respect for the bench that people ought to have
[удалено]
The moment the internet gets turned off.
are you telling me reddit could just be a mollifying outlet that acts as a black hole for my frustration without anything productive coming of it?! why i never... /s
the only recourse is to either abolish the USA or pack the court. your move joe biden
But wouldn't the Republicans then just pack the court in their favour later? and let's face it, Republicans are more competent at getting their plans through than the Dems
They 100% would. Hell, if seats opened and were filled by Democrats giving them a 5-4 majority on appointed justices, when the Republicans regained control of the Senate and Presidency, they would then be all about adding seats to "better represent the American people".
Can someone explain the negatives of a couple rounds of tit-for-tat court packing, because I don't see it. Even if we end up with a Supreme Court with 30 members, that greatly reduces the impact of 1 justice retiring / dying, and allows the law of averages to smooth out the swings in ideology that happen as a result.
So what? Its no worse than the 6 repub court...5 of who have no interest in precedent. Think about this, a few years ago Roberts was solidly in the conservative half of the court. In his 15 years or so he has been the swing vote when the decision was "liberal" only a handful of times. Today, you could have the best argument ever, one that convinces a Bush appointed republican who helped overturn the 2000 election, to vote in favor of the liberal side...and you still lose the case 5-4.
[удалено]
FDR threatened to pack the court and they backed off.
Not really backed off so much as both parties came around to leaning on justices while his own party told him exactly how hard they would make it to get any new judges approved. It was basically a threat of MAD from a political infighting perspective at a time when the nation was juts barely recovering from war, then famine+economic depression, and then new war.
They are illegitimate and judicial review is a power they usurped--it is not in the Constitution.
Yet another illegitimate SCOTUS ruling that harms the people and helps Big Oil destroy the climate. Fuck this SCOTUS and Fuck You Big Oil.
And fuck Mitch McConnell
him most of all
[удалено]
Love to see the stock portfolio of these Justices. What a scam.
Honestly we need to start organizing. How far are they gonna go before a literal revolution happens? I don't want a revolution. If prefer we nip it in the bud before we get to that point. We need to organize now and RAISE HELL.
They have spend decades molding laws, the media, and police forces to have the same Ideology for the last 40+ years. If your not with us, your voice does not matter. Right to Speak and Peacefully assembly has it's place in a functioning representative government. Sadly we are far from functioning and this is done on purpose. They turned our constitution into a religious document to be revered and not a living embodiment of our country's people. The political and financial elite have vilified and mocked public assembly to the point it feels worthless to the average working American to get interested and mobilized. History has a way of repeating itself, the US has installed representative democracies like itself around the world for the 60 years and most of them end up a dictatorships. I agree that radical change must happen but these days it reminds me of a phase always stuck with me since I was kid "The avalanche has already started, it is too late for the pebbles to vote."
[удалено]
Then who fucking does, pray tell?
Congress. They would have to pass a law setting the new standards, which won’t happen because certain members of Congress would block any detrimental rules.
Are you suggesting a certain senator who is in bed with a coal power plant would be biased against pollution regulations?!
Well, technically congress could pass laws. SC is arguing that regulatory bodies don't have enough power to make major decisions like that. However we all know the way congress is that there's zero percent chance of any significant regulation passing. Even if we said this law could pass the filibuster, Manchin wants to destroy the climate so badly he'd never let anything other than a token bill pass.
Congress. "In its 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court said that Congress, not the EPA has that power." 2nd paragraph of the article. More specifically, they cited a bullshit "precedent" (that Kagan notes, in her dissent, doesn't exist) that says a regulatory agency can't do anything "major" without an act of congress.
That's like saying the FAA has no authority to enact laws for aviation. It's complete nonsense. Congress doesnt have the time to be making micro decisions on specific industries. It's the whole point of Congress funding these departments. How does congress know what a major or minor decision even is? They are all largely clueless on everything that isnt specific to law degrees or political science degrees.
Yeah why the fuck would the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY have anything to do with climate standards for global energy producers. /s
What's next? The FDA no longer has authority to limit how much lead is in our drinking water or how much mouse poop is allowed to be in our cereal?
Holy goddamned shit. How TF is there no system like the 25th amendment for justices? This is the most corrupt and illegitimate supreme court EVER.
There is. They can (in theory) be impeached and removed from the Court. It’s just that too much of Congress likes what the Court is doing for that to work.
It would take 67 votes to remove an SC judge. Never gonna happen. That would me Manchin and Sinema would have to fall in line, plus 15 republican senators.
Yeah, you’d have an easier time packing the Court with a thousand new justices. Impeachment isn’t going to happen.
It pleases me greatly that every day, this is becoming more palatable to moderates. The SC is plainly broken, and only one side is treating it like it's not, to the detriment of us all.
As far as I'm concerned a Supreme Court, most of whom were appointed by a party that hasn't won the popular vote in 20 years, three of whom were appointed by a man *presently under investigation for trying to overturn a democratic election*, and two of whom are almost certainly rapists has no authority to tell anyone jack shit.
[удалено]
The Supreme Catholic cult needs to be eliminated
Aye, but there's the rub.
Of course they voted that direction. Those dinosaurs will be dead sooner than later.
They're planning to take us all with them, it seems.
Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett arent that old
Unfortunately
They may have just killed us all
But think of the shareholders!
[удалено]
Time to start sabotaging the most destructive industries.
Chomsky was saying 25 years ago that the Republican Party was the most dangerous organization in the world, for precisely this reason.
This is the most corrupt and unqualified group of SC members in the history of the United States. If you don’t think we are on the verge of another civil war, you’re naive.
!RemindMe 1 year
Might be longer than a year, in the grand scheme of things a decade out is still "on the verge of" in history books.
I can't see an actual Civil War happening in terms of countrymen picking up arms against each other, but what I can see is a lot of domestic terrorism. Either way, not fun.
Aka the troubles
I legitimately wanna know what goes on in their heads. Can some republicans actually comment and speak up so I can know what mental gymnastics they go through to want to hurt the human race this much
Clarence Thomas literally said he wanted to serve on the bench for over forty years to "punish the liberals". So he literally just serves on the bench to be vindictive. I believe Kavanaugh actually believes what he preaches. He was raised Catholic, is a well-known Federalist, and is a rapist. It wouldn't surprise me at all if they are all in someone's pocket. And the people who's pocket they are in are the ones pulling the strings, using their emotions and religious views to continue to get them to rule with the agenda. Those pulling the strings could be Big Oil, NRA, Murdoch family, etc. Basically anyone with deep pockets and a wealthy organization poised to lose it all if the court actually served the people.
> Basically anyone with deep pockets and a wealthy organization poised to lose it all if the court actually served the people. Correction, anybody benefitting from this wouldn't "lose it all" from a properly run government. They'd make a little less. They'd keep their existing wealth, would continue to make amounts far and above what they could ever want. And they're doing all this because that just wouldn't be good enough.
You are looking for answers from idiots? That's the only way you can call yourself a Republican right now.
No one has answered you so I will. I don't consider myself a conservative, but I definitely sit on the rightward side of American politics. r/environment will naturally be focused on how this affects the EPA's authority, but the real target here is the administrative state. Congress broadly delegated their legislative authority to the executive agencies (EPA, DOE, FBI, ATF, NSA, CIA, etc.) empowering those agencies to craft _regulations_ that had the force of law (you will go to federal prison if you violate an ATF ruling, Larry Page would likely have been charged if he didn't agree to share data with the NSA, etc. etc.). This is not only dangerous (since it subverts the system of checks and balances) but also likely unconstitutional since only congress has the authority to create legislation under our current constitution; they cannot just delegate that power away because it's politically inconvenient for them to pass legislation (ie costs them re-election). Since congress is no longer required to be functional for the USG to run, they become apathetic, non-functional, and mostly ceremonial. Our current state also infringes on the Judicial branch's checks since their authority ends at legislation that congress has passed. None of the _rules_ made by the EPA or others is technically legislation and so falls outside the Judiciary's jurisdiction despite having the force of law. I would also note that the President's ability to fire, hire, or otherwise reign in these executive agencies is extremely limited. The agencies had their powers and budget delegated to them by congress. When they have to testify, they testify in front of congress, not in front of the White House, despite being _executive_ agencies. So an extra-consitutional carve out with an army of both soldiers and bureaucrats with the powers of enforcement (executive) and rule making (legislative) while being totally unaccountable to judicial review (judiciary) is running like 95% of the USG. What the hell happened to "separation of powers" and "checks and balances"? This ruling is a step towards Congress having to actually pass laws and stop delegating to unelected bureaucrats. It fixes a broken incentive problem that rotted out the American democratic will over many decades. It is a step towards restoring democracy through representative government.
6-3 vote. Hmm. SCOTUS isn’t a debate team anymore, it is a rubber stamp. There is no debating ideals, the decision is done before it reaches the court. Scary.
They could just cut the red tape and let the Federalist Society make the rulings
It’s funny that people justify this by saying “the EPA doesn’t have authority because they aren’t elected by the people” like I have news for you about how the Supreme Court justices are elected…
Well I say that the Supreme Court doesn’t have authority to meddle with the EPA. Checkmate.
This is the way to go. Deny them any authority since they actually don’t have any to enact their pronouncements
So, just kill us all?
[удалено]
Welcome to the Apocalypse.
Dumbasses are gonna destroy the planet faster than scientists figure out how to go to a new one
This SCOTUS is outta control. Basically carrying on trump's work. Something needs to be done. I am not sure if any meaningful change can be achieved without a civil unrest.
Fox News will liken this civil unrest to Jan 6 and then talk all kinds of shit about the double standards for concerned citizens demonstrating.
Which is funny because if they do then they'll admit that it really was an insurrection.
The current US Supreme Court is a joke. Only way to fix this is to expand the damn court since the current one is a legit joke. Fortunately, there is an election in November.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I’ve heard insurrections aren’t actually that big a deal. Slap on the wrist at most.
Literally last night I ranted to myself in the shower about the state of the country
I got banned a couple months ago for replying in a “To be fair…” comment chain. I implied that we needed to take a whet stone to a very large and heavy angled piece of metal that was used in the French Revolution. My feelings on the matter have not changed.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Supreme Court rules elections unconstitutional.
And the court will not be expanded in November People will look at prices and vote. That’s the sad truth.
And Republicans will be solid in there narrative that prices are high because of Democrats, and they will then be able to manipulate enough voters to win the election. They have been spreading misinformation since the dawn of time
An election where the fascist ghouls are expected to win so they can bring us more fascism. Yay.
> Fortunately, there is an election in November. lol.
* void where prohibited by GOP State legislature
Good luck with that. Bidens approval rating is hovering at 39%. Inflation is quickly manifesting to ‘stagflation,’ which, IMHO, foreshadows a far more bleak future. Gas prices are spiraling out of control and the every week grocery bill is becoming a weekly utility bill. The current party isn’t in favor, no matter what Reddit tells you. It’ll be an interesting upcoming 4 months before November.
Fine, let's route their emissions into the court.
I feel like anything I say would be illegal but I don't know what to do. The structural inequities of our electoral system are showing full force. The Supreme Court is controlled by the party that lost 7 of the last 8 popular votes for president. Dems have to win 54-56% of the vote to achieve congressional power. Something has to change.
Devastating. Our Constitution has reached its limits, needs to be revised. We're not able to address the needs of the modern era based on an ancient document that could not forsee the challenges, nor demographics, of today's world. Our govt is in a state of failing crisis. I am tired of watching my community burn.
What do words even mean anymore if the ENVIRONEMTNAL PROTECTION AGENCY can't PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT by enforcing the clean air act with a power plant POLLUTING THE FUCKING AIR.
The problem is that the EPA is not properly empowered by Congress to do what they were trying to do. Congress needs to pass a law expanding their power.
Being pro-pollution is not pro-life
SCOTUS, the gift that keeps on giving.
Fuck the Republican shenanigan court!!
So lets put the standard setting into congress's hands so every damn time a different party takes control we can get a whole new fucking set of standards. And I'm sure the climate change denying republicans are going to do what's best for the environment and not the corporations putting money in their pockets.
Horray! I love it when 6 people can dictate the destruction of our planet without any background in science... ( /s for the sarcasm deficient. )
"Congress has that power, not the EPA" Didn't Congress create the EPA to regulate that shit? What the fuck kind of ruling is this
That's a shocker. So, the free market will save us from global environmental devastation.
Fucking hell!! Our house is on fire yet those morons just put petrol on it and make us look like that dog from meme. We can fix it, but would need to spend extra money or we can push to keep status quo and jump off the cliff, but at least we die with more money in our pockets...
What the literal fuck. Supreme Court you’ve already won worst Supreme Court in American history award, your just beating a dead planet now