He has something of a history of flying flags in support of the insurrection.

  • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    77
    ·
    5 months ago

    So Alito can’t tell his wife not to fly offensive flags. But he can tell women how they must take care of their healthcare needs?

  • Nougat@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    71
    ·
    5 months ago

    Alito is either a traitor or too stupid to recognize what would make him appear to be a traitor. In either case, unfit to serve in any office, let alone sit on SCOTUS.

    • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      52
      ·
      5 months ago

      if there are no teeth in the apparatus to remove him, it doesnt matter what it looks like.

      the corrupt congress has led to a corrupt supreme court.

      • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        That’s not entirely fair, there’s a lot more the executive branch could be doing to try to fix this too

        Of course, Justices Alito and Thomas could choose to recuse themselves — wouldn’t that be nice? But begging them to do the right thing misses a far more effective course of action.

        The U.S. Department of Justice — including the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, an appointed U.S. special counsel and the solicitor general, all of whom were involved in different ways in the criminal prosecutions underlying these cases and are opposing Mr. Trump’s constitutional and statutory claims — can petition the other seven justices to require Justices Alito and Thomas to recuse themselves not as a matter of grace but as a matter of law.

        The Justice Department and Attorney General Merrick Garland can invoke two powerful textual authorities for this motion: the Constitution of the United States, specifically the due process clause, and the federal statute mandating judicial disqualification for questionable impartiality, 28 U.S.C. Section 455. The Constitution has come into play in several recent Supreme Court decisions striking down rulings by stubborn judges in lower courts whose political impartiality has been reasonably questioned but who threw caution to the wind to hear a case anyway. This statute requires potentially biased judges throughout the federal system to recuse themselves at the start of the process to avoid judicial unfairness and embarrassing controversies and reversals.

          • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Yep, but I don’t know if they’re complicit because they genuinely like the way things are heading or complicit because they worry if they push back at all our society could totally break down into factions and they’re not sure which side the cops and soldiers will choose, and those are two very different reasons for going along with things

            Also, regardless of all of this - just by virtue of the fact that the Democratic party at the very least has to keep up the appearance of opposing the Republicans, we’re all a lot better off with them winning elections, so I do recommend voting for them whenever you get the chance, just realize that’s only step 1

            e; words is hard sometimes

            • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              14
              ·
              5 months ago

              agreed. the people yelling ‘both sides’ are ignoring the fact that only one side has been actively interfering with peoples ability to vote for decades now… you may not like the democrats, but at least they arent attempting to remove your ability to vote

      • Nougat@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Let’s be perfectly clear here: Mitch McConnell has led to a corrupt SCOTUS, not Congress.

        • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          congress could remove alito today, if they wanted.

          so, why havent they? oh yeah, a huge percent of them are his corrupt allies.

          annnnnnd its well known that mcconnel was just the front man taking the heat for our shitty congress . he wasnt working alone, in a vacuum. he took the brunt of the bad because there are so many incredibly stupid people in the his home state as to make he re-election a given.

          • Nougat@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            You’re using the word “Congress” to refer to Congressional Republicans, and it’s disingenuous.

            • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              5 months ago

              naw. i meant what i said. dems are complicit here.

              hell, the if dems had any testicles they would remove the filibuster and get on with actual governing.

              • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                hell, the if dems had any testicles they would remove the filibuster and get on with actual governing.

                They did… That’s why McConnell was able to get the current picks in. SCOTUS picks just need a simple majority in the Senate.

                • Johnny5@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Dems removed filibuster for all appointment except scotus in 2013 then R’s removed for scotus in 2017. Now republicans could have done it anyway on 2017 even without precedent, and Democrats could have forced merick garland in if they had gone fully nuclear. I’d call it equally shared

      • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        5 months ago

        the only method to prevent him from playing the stupid card would take a coordinated effort from congress, who have proven themselves non-coordinate-able

  • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    5 months ago

    Did anyone expect anything different? Motherfucker is the one flying the flag of insurrection. Why would he voluntarily abandon the power he has?

  • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    5 months ago

    Well then, it’s time to start impeachment proceedings. I know we wouldn’t actually succeed at impeaching him, but it’s still a fight worth having. As of now, only a few dems have spoken out about this with any passion or substance. Their lack of urgency is incredibly frustrating.

    They can’t use the “impeachment would be a partisan issue” excuse. It’s nonpartisan to want our Supreme Court to be nonpartisan.

    You can’t win a fight if you never start it.

    • silence7@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Impeachment would need to start in the House, which has a Republican majority. If they had any honor, they’d move to impeach, but they don’t.

    • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      Dems can make noise about it, but Mike Johnson ain’t bringing that to the floor. People need to vote in more Dems in the house while also holding the senate and the executive.