Democrats and Maybe some Republicans in Congress Act to Rein in SCOTUS
Finally, some or most of Congress may do something to Rein in SCOTUS and the rogue Justices. The question here being can they nullify Congress’s act in some fashion.
No Kings Act
WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer introduced legislation Thursday reaffirming that presidents do not have immunity for criminal actions, an attempt to reverse the Supreme Court’s landmark decision last month.
Schumer’s No Kings Act would attempt to invalidate the decision by declaring that presidents are not immune from criminal law and clarifying that Congress, not the Supreme Court, determines to whom federal criminal law is applied.
The court’s conservative majority decided July 1 that presidents have broad immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken within their official duties. This, a decision throwing into doubt the Justice Department’s case against Republican former President Donald Trump for his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss.
Schumer, of New York, said that Congress has an obligation and the constitutional authority to check the Supreme Court on its decision.
”Given the dangerous and consequential implications of the court’s ruling, legislation would be the fastest and most efficient method to correcting the grave precedent the Trump ruling presented,” he said.
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar’s TAKE: The Supreme Court has such an enormous responsibility to protect our country’s political and moral values that anyone who is not legally brilliant, ethically responsible, and fully committed to the ideals of impartiality should be excluded—or fired. But the real world doesn’t work like that and so we sometimes can get political hacks who are not brilliant, ethical, or impartial. They push party agendas because that’s who gave them the job. They are either low-level thinkers like Clarence Thomas, whose opinions are muddled justifications for serving the GOP while enjoying his bribes/gifts, or they are Christian nationalists like Samuel Alito, whose opinions are based on personal faith rather than objectively weighing of facts.
In an interview with Fox News, Justice Neil Gorsuch warned reformers to “be careful”:
“I have one thought to add. It is that the independent judiciary—what does it mean to you as an American? It means that when you’re unpopular, you can get a fair hearing under the law and under the constitution,” Gorsuch said. “If you’re in the majority, you don’t need judges and juries to hear you and protect your rights. You’re popular. It’s there for the moments when the spotlight’s on you. When the government’s coming after you. And don’t you want a ferociously independent judge and a jury of your peers to make those decisions? Isn’t that your right as an American? And so I just say—be careful.”
What he fails to understand is that the reason people want to see reform in SCOTUS is that they don’t see the justices as being “ferociously independent” protectors, but rather robed tools of the rich and powerful or their own biases. A June AP/NORC poll showed that 70% of respondents believed that justices were “more likely to shape the law to fit their own ideologies.”
In the end, it may take an amandment.
In regards Alito and Dobbs (if that’s what Kareem is thinking of here) no way that decision conforms to his personal faith, at least as I understand it. He is an observant Catholic as far as I can tell. The Mississippi law upheld in Dobbs is a long way from what Catholic teaching allows. Had he somehow convinced 4 colleagues that a reverse Griswold-type ruling was made, where due to emanations and penumbras the pre-born had a firm right to life, or at least complete due process rights, then I might agree. But he didn’t. Dobbs permits laws that are unquestionably anathema to Catholic teaching to be enacted and enforced.
The doctrine of the Catholic is: human life begins at conception, and is sacred until natural death.
This is science. If you don’t abort the child that human will be an adult naturally.
Faith has less to do with deciding who is human and who is not.
@paddy,
Most human conceptions fail to reach birth. There’s your science. God is the greatest abortionist of all time.
I grew up Roman Catholic, and so am familiar with the church opposition to abortion and to the death penalty. Cafeteria Catholics observe the pro-forced birth teaching (which has no foundation in the teachings of Christ) but ignore the church opposition to capital punishment.
Faith has everything to do with deciding who is human and who is not, as the history of chattel slavery has shown.
Pro forced birth!
Interesting use of stereotype, ad hom!
I have been a lot of things in my life, yes an awful period of cafeteria Catholic, interspersed with totally long out of the swing. I am a returned Catholic, maybe as strict as new converts. A Knight of Columbus. We use education and support. I do not have a sword!
The morals not so hard to know: repent, and love your neighbor. The neighbor part is hard.
How you define neighbor is between you and God.
I conclude the zygote is my neighbor has the same spirit as me.
You may see me out at planning parent clinics occasionally.
I rather see it as encouraging live birth.
@paddy,
No stereotype, just calling ’em like I see ’em.
paddy it depends on what you mean by science. is something that everyoe has known since they figured out where babies come from science?
i suppose everyone has their own idea what faith is. for some it seems to mean something like trying very hard to believe something you don’t believe. i think it may mean two other things…one is trusting a friend not to betray you, and trusting yourself not to betray him, or it means just taking the next step in the direction you want to go.
very funny to me is that the current dem candidate for vp says “mind your own business” which i once tried to point out is pretty much what Jesus was trying to .teach us.
i don’t lie to myself about what abortion is, but i don’t give it that name. on the other hand i know that it’s none of my business, and none of yours unless you are thinking about having one.
Jesus seemed (to me) to be saying something like be careful what you put your faith in….but also saying something like “it’s no business of mine.” except of course to leave us some hints about what kinds of thoughts will lead to sanity and what kind will not.
some other things he said are worth thinking about. he told Peter “feed my sheep.” he also told him “what is that to thee?”
and he warned about false prophets “who will come in my name.”
I don’t think he said anything about deciding who is human. Paul said something about “if you are a slave, be a good slave.” which is good advice, not an approval of slavery…as a lot of Christians realized in the 17 and 18 hundreds.