• mister_monster@monero.town
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    6 months ago

    Quotes from in the article:

    They don’t like our decisions, and they don’t like how they anticipate we may decide some cases that are coming up. That’s the beginning of the end of it

    There are groups that are very well-funded by ideological groups that have spearheaded these attacks. That’s what it is.

  • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Aww poor baby. Whatcha gonna do about it, dismantle everyone’s rights or somethi-
    …fuck.

  • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    6 months ago

    My hot take is that a public life should mean a much reduced expectation of privacy. If you want to make decisions that affect millions (or billions) of people, those people should be able to see and hear everything you do outside of the most intimate necessities of life. E.G. you can poop without someone watching, but not much else. Don’t like it? Quit.

    • coyotino [he/him]@beehaw.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      6 months ago

      That’s a good hot take. Here’s another one: maybe the entire Supreme Court should be changed every year or two, with the bench randomly selected from the entire panel of federal judges that meet a certain minimum experience requirement. Hypothetically that should do something for these outrageous bribes and corruption.

      • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        6 months ago

        I like swapping them out but I wouldn’t do it all at once and I’d implement term limits that put them outside of a two-term president’s reach. I like 13 year Supreme Court terms because it’s a prime number and it would keep any one president from naming more than one or two justices.

  • Melllvar@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    6 months ago

    A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. This prohibition applies to both professional and personal conduct. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny and accept freely and willingly restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen.

    https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges

    Not that SCOTUS is held to the same code of conduct that all other federal judges are held to, of course.