Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

In reply to the discussion: Mr. Smith [View all]

malthaussen

(18,637 posts)
23. I have no fear of the USSC in this case.
Thu Dec 14, 2023, 01:11 PM
Dec 2023

It is simply not within their interests or their agenda to give Mr Trump what he wants. The Court and the GOP have separate interests, which often align, but are occasionally at cross-purposes, and in no case of that nature will the Court give the RW maniacs what they're hoping for. They certainly will never rule in a fashion which might come back and limit their own authority or privilege later on.

The RW desires a dictatorial government with themselves in the driver's seat. The USSC does not, they desire something that makes them the lynchpin of the law. Essential to such a position is that the law continues to be of some importance. A Party or person ruling by fiat would not accomplish this.

The people on the USSC owe nobody anything, except the billionaires who keep giving them gifts. They are appointed for life and cannot be touched by any mere politician, however powerful, however much of a nasty, mean-spirited so-and-so he may be. When it comes to leverage to get the Court to do their bidding, the MAGA crowd got nothin'. With neither aligned interests, nor any leverage, the MAGAs haven't got a chance. The only question is whether one or two justices might dissent out of sheer bloody-mindedness or instructions from someone who does have leverage.

-- Mal

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Mr. Smith [View all] H2O Man Dec 2023 OP
Yes, yes, yes! Thank you, my dear H20 Man. CaliforniaPeggy Dec 2023 #1
Thank you. H2O Man Dec 2023 #11
THIS malaise Dec 2023 #19
Thanks for this encouragement Easterncedar Dec 2023 #2
And thank you! H2O Man Dec 2023 #13
The winner is the one standing when the bell rings. jaxexpat Dec 2023 #25
Mr. Smith is a bad ass. paleotn Dec 2023 #3
I agree. H2O Man Dec 2023 #14
With this SCOTUS hurple Dec 2023 #4
100% H2O Man Dec 2023 #10
Why would they do this? malthaussen Dec 2023 #24
Well... hurple Dec 2023 #28
The Congress critters are politicians. malthaussen Dec 2023 #33
When I hear about justice delayed... SleeplessinSoCal Dec 2023 #5
Glad Mr. Smith is on the hunt and with a plan. PufPuf23 Dec 2023 #6
K&R Blue Owl Dec 2023 #7
K&R spanone Dec 2023 #8
K & R Ohio Joe Dec 2023 #9
I am damn glad this Mr. Smith went to Washington...... lastlib Dec 2023 #12
I love the legal strategy of it all.. cilla4progress Dec 2023 #15
From your lips to God's ears, H2O Man Hekate Dec 2023 #16
I don't trust the current USSC to honor precedent, but... Martin Eden Dec 2023 #17
A fabulous OP malaise Dec 2023 #18
TY H2 - read your OP and actually enjoying my coffee vs the usual fuming. NoMoreRepugs Dec 2023 #20
KnR...nt MiHale Dec 2023 #21
Well, that was a reassuring way to start my day. Thanks for the reminder that there are reasons KPN Dec 2023 #22
I have no fear of the USSC in this case. malthaussen Dec 2023 #23
I certainly hope that you are right Bundbuster Dec 2023 #26
Thanks for this; so much. twodogsbarking Dec 2023 #27
Let's keep Biden and Harris in the White House and win the senate and house (and all down the line!) usonian Dec 2023 #29
From now on I am always calling him "the defendant ". LakeArenal Dec 2023 #30
Thank you for your well-informed, calm discussion Wild blueberry Dec 2023 #31
He's being very agressive Saoirse9 Dec 2023 #32
At the risk of being accused of excessive pedantry, there's something I feel compelled to point out. ShazzieB Dec 2023 #34
Thanks for this. ShazzieB Dec 2023 #35
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Mr. Smith»Reply #23