“We don’t know if causing riots to stay in power - in which people died - at the government office where votes are certified counts as insurrection, so instead of paying some horrible price if we go forward and are wrong, let’s just pay the horrible price now and do nothing at all” …
… seems like acquiescence in advance. Your mileage may vary.
Ask yourself: if the court rules it’s just fine and dandy, what’s different than just doing nothing? How is an adverse ruling worse than what we already got?
Do you think he’d be scared to try it again when he wasn’t scared to do it already?
Because future courts are more likely to respect an established precedent than they are to rule blatantly against the clear and obvious intent of the law.
The current court is not normal, and, it may be hoped, that abnormality can be corrected, beginning in 4 years.
2 Likes
The entire system “was not ready” and remains as such and you’ll all pay the price for it because the event horizon has been crossed and there is no amount of strength that will move you to the ante status quo.
This is not doom-splaining. It’s collapse and that is what is occurring, even though we want to believe/insist otherwise. Climate change is the perfect metaphor for our continual inaction (i.e., it really is too late and we have lost what tenuous grasp we had) but let’s keep thinking with just one more electoral cycle, we can really fix it! This country couldn’t even bother to protect itself from the filth that is the Republican Party as incarnated in the Beast at its head, so who really thinks we’re truly going to round the corner on climate change?
Our entire system, exposed to be fundamentally weak, an edifice of sand and chicken wire dolled up with all the grandeur of a bleached Doric column. Entertainment to the last.
4 Likes
What? We all know they simply overturn past “wrong” decisions - see Roe v Wade.
There is exactly zero harm in trying now. There is also exactly zero benefit in waiting (acquiescing in advance).
No, this Court does that. Normally, the Court tends to respect precedent unless there’s some egregious harm going on. And absent another coup… there’s no case to revisit the ruling.
1 Like
Doing nothing? How about working, right now, in targeting vulnerable Republicans and taking back Congress? And how about forgoing another futile gesture, which fritters our energy away from what can actually be done, and diminishes our credibility? There can be no priority as high as taking back Congress.
Yeah, I sure that in four years, when Trump will have sat a minimum of 5 - if not 6 - of the 9, it’ll be totally different.
It’s telling that even when you’re looking long term… you’re looking short-term.
It took almost 250 years to get to this case. Having that precedent set would govern whether people even try to bring cases for the next hundred+ years.
1 Like
Honey, we already know that they won’t try. That’s the whole point!
Do keep up.
No, we very much don’t know that. With no precedent in place, it’s entirely possible they would, if someone tries this again in a generation or so. But put that precedent in place, and you guarantee they won’t.
If there is to be any hope for the future, it starts with not handing them more ways to lock in their power now.
1 Like
