They absolutely have no legal basis, my only worry is that they have activists in SCOTUS which showed us multiple times that they don't care what the Constitution says.
this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2024
511 points (98.3% liked)
News
23627 readers
2503 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Exactly.
It used to be the case that sane people with a modicum of understanding of our government/legal system, or even the ability to do a bit of research, they could just laugh this off.
But uh, nope, now we live in corrupt/activist Supreme Court era, which throws out decades of precedent and functionally invents new laws as it pleases.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Historically speaking, we Americans usually ignore what the SCOTUS says. Virginia was practically segregated into the early 1970s, for example, well over a decade after Brown v Board of Education.
That's the hilarious part of the SCOTUS. They kind of don't matter.
The response to an unjust SCOTUS is to ignore them. Like what are they actually gonna do about it?
Only works if everyone ignores them, don't see that happening
Step 1 of the plan is to at least make people aware of the plan.
There's more options available than expanding the court or whatever. Ultimately, the reigns of power largely rest in Congress and the President. Supreme Court is the moral center, they're only effective if people believe their judgements to be moral and just. Otherwise, their statements are just fancy words on a piece of obscure paper.
Supreme Court has no ability to write laws or enforce them.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
GOP: but it was our only strategy!
Threatening to sue over spurious, trumped up claims has been a Trump strategy for half a century now.
load more comments
(1 replies)
They already made it public that they will do everything to invalidate democrat votes and that they won't accept any outcome that isn't a Trump win.
It's going to be Jan 2021 but worse again.
Friendly reminder to check your voter registration. Many states are un-registering voters for dumb reasons.
Why is this even a thing in the USA? In Belgium, everyone over the age of 18 just gets a letter in the mail. Making people go for tedious registration and what not sounds very undemocratic to me.
That's because it is! Just one of the thousands of many little ways the American Republicans have made life worse for everyone, including their own. Gerrymandering and tampering with voter registration are historically Republican strategies that serve no purpose other than voter disenfranchisement. They can't win a popular vote and they know it, so their best strategy is to prevent people from voting in the first place. Hence their history of arcane voter registration rules, disgustingly absurd gerrymandered districts, removal or last-minute changing of acceptable voting locations in Democratic areas, voter intimidation, even active voter endangerment via refusal of water bottles during summer heat - not as in they wouldn't give you water at the voting lcoation - no, you aren't allowed to have water, even if you brought your own, even if someone showed up and tried to donate water to you. They took it right out of our hands. Meanwhile we were standing in a line in a parking lot with no shade in 96F weather for multiple hours because local republican leadership also shut down all other democratic voting locations within an hour's drive.
It is disgustingly undemocratic, dangerous, abusive and frankly it's embarrassing. These are not politicians, these are spoiled little children stamping their feat and screaming "no, I get to be king, and you have to go home!" They actively will not associate with the word "democracy" anymore because it's too close to accidentally being called a Democrat.
If you've noticed Americans being a little more pissy than usual recently in the last several years, it's largely because people are starting to open their eyes to this truth. It's nothing new, but it is starting to get noticed. Trump flipped over a big ol' rock and suddenly everyone saw all the worms and slugs squirming underneath.
I actually caught myself mouthing "What the fuck" at the water part of your comment. That's some third world country shit. Everyone's entitled to water, it's the most basic human right. How would one argue that a ruling like that benefits the people?
Their argument, such that it is, argues that Democrats are running the country into the ground and that they cannot be allowed to make decisions for other people. Not that the people should be allowed to govern themselves, no, the people should only be allowed to vote for things that are "in their best interest" as defined by Republicans.
Which is, obviously, horseshit. But a semi-significant percentage of our population eats up the anti-Democrat messaging and keeps enough of them in office that they can continue fucking with human rights without retribution.
"ThEy'Re BuYiNg VoTeS wItH wAtEr!"
I've never heard about not being allowed to bring water, but I've definitely read about not being allowed to hand out water/sell water.
There is no legitimate reason, only excuses to cover for their bullshit.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The GOP is very undemocratic
On the surface, it's not bad. If, for example, you move from one state to another, your previous state may not know you don't live there anymore. So if they see you haven't voted in that state for a while, they'll assume you don't live there and remove your name from their registration.
The problem is, as usual, how it gives conservatives in the US cover to remove legitimate voters. If you haven't moved but also haven't voted for the last several election cycles, you might get removed even if you intend to vote in this election. And you can see how that's a short jump to "Oh no, we accidentally removed a whole bunch of people who were going to vote against us and darn it, wouldn't you know there's no way to fix this in time!"
If, for example, you move from one state to another, your previous state may not know you don't live there anymore. So if they see you haven't voted in that state for a while, they'll assume you don't live there and remove your name from their registration.
They always know, especially if you’re paying your taxes correctly. Try moving to Colorado. You’ll get registered immediately without doing anything and your ballot will be mailed to you. You don’t ever have to do anything in person.
There’s no reason to unregister someone from voting. In any state.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(17 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
You can bet the National Guard would be deployed if a similar coup attempt is planned this time around.
I would have bet on a more drastic response to a mob attacking an official building in the first place. But that didn't happen either.
That's for sure. Every one of those fuckers should have gone directly to jail that night. If that had been a George Floyd protest they would have just opened fire.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Donald Trump controlled the DC National Guard on January 6th 2021. Joe Biden (or maybe Kamala Harris, if Joe steps down early) will control the DC National Guard in 2025.
It's stupid enough that Ohio demands that the nominee be on the ballot before the convention and even they give a deadline after August.
You know as they say: if it looks ridiculous and sounds ridiculous, it's most likely the GOP.
If it walks like a moron, talks like a moron...
…yep, it’s the GOP.
The Supreme Court call that "compelling"
Right? I used to think it would be ridiculous for a former president to foment a violent insurrection of their own government and not be held accountable for their words and actions.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Just like all of Trump’s election fraud cases (over 60 of them), this will be immediately thrown out as superfluous and/or for inability to provide any evidence.
Dems haven’t even held the convention to nominate yet, so GOP can keep cryin’ until November.
I'm just waiting for SCOTUS to declare a winner again. I doubt that will go over as smoothly as it did in 2000.
That didn't go over very smoothly. Bush II was extremely unpopular until 9/11 bailed him out.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Given the bizzaro timeline we're in it would not surprise me to get a crazy outcome:
- GOP lawsuit wins, forcing the ballot to be Biden
- Biden wins the general election, immediately resigns and...
- Harris is the President.
What would be really hilarious is, I think that would allow her to serve two more 4 year terms after her 2025-2029 term ends because she would not have run as President the first time.
What would be really hilarious is, I think that would allow her to serve two more 4 year terms after her 2025-2029 term ends because she would not have run as President the first time.
That's incorrect. The 22nd amendment states: "no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once". So unless Biden would wait for at least two years before stepping down, Harris could only be elected for one more term.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
it's hilarious that they're proving in real time just how pants-shittingly scared of harris they are.
"keep the old man in!!! we don't want to go up against a younger woman whom we can't publicly criticize for not being white!"
... whom we can't stop ourselves from publicly criticizing for not being white!
FTFY
"DEI" is the new codeword for the "n-word" so they say it all day every day...
Imagine thinking you're being "smart" by not being openly racist, by being openly racist in your accusation that "this person couldn't possibly get here by their merits, they're here because of their skin color."
...yep still racist there little buddy...
load more comments
(1 replies)
They’re already publicly criticizing her for not being white…
let's see how the bLaCkPpLbAd strategy pays off...
SCOTUS - Something, something, this is illegal however only when Democrats do it.
Maybe we can get a class action together for their lies and misinformation?
load more comments
(1 replies)
They should have been running on a platform instead of grievance politics. Then it wouldn't matter who they were running against.
Maybe don't have a platform where the only thing you do is shit on the other person and call them kindergarten level nicknames? What a bunch of snowflakes.
More idiocy from the idiot party.
view more: next ›