Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Display Order:

Fox News anchor Maria Bartiromo pressed House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) on Sunday about the lack of headway in House Republicans’
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 29, 2024 9:23 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (1 comments) [99 views]

Former GOP congressman David Jolley: even among Republicans puppies have a high favorability rating
Pets by Curt_Anderson     April 29, 2024 9:38 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [26 views]

"Let me start off with two words:" I support Biden. I support Biden.
Politics by HatetheSwamp     April 29, 2024 7:36 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [29 views]

Another dire 2024 poll for Joe Biden: Trump widens his lead over the President to 6% with just six months left to Election Day
Politics by HatetheSwamp     April 29, 2024 3:49 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [18 views]

Anonymous comments regarding the Presidential Candidate Selector
President by Curt_Anderson     March 19, 2024 10:10 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Curt_Anderson (26 comments) [1323 views]

The silent Trump voter
Politics by HatetheSwamp     April 28, 2024 7:28 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (3 comments) [106 views]

Republicans: Do you know where your political donations are?
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 6:12 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (13 comments) [456 views]

James Comer hopes for divine intervention to save him from embarrassing impeachment fiasco.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 7:05 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (5 comments) [144 views]

pb's Legal Goobers #s 2 & 3: The NY v Trump case is collapsing
Law by HatetheSwamp     April 26, 2024 3:43 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (6 comments) [56 views]

The Oval Office Oaf calls for "Four more years. Pause."
Entertainment by HatetheSwamp     April 24, 2024 2:56 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (6 comments) [112 views]

Government selectors, pages, etc.
Democrats balk at Alito assertion that Congress has ‘no authority’ over Supreme Court
By HatetheSwamp
July 31, 2023 3:51 am
Category: Government

(0.0 from 0 votes)
Rules of the Post
SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com


Rate this article
5 Stars
4 Stars
3 Stars
2 Stars
1 Star
0 Stars
(5=best, 0=poor)

As Bugs'd say, "What maroons!"

Democratic lawmakers are criticizing Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s recent interview with The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) in which he stated “no provision” in the Constitution allows Congress to regulate the Supreme Court.

“I know this is a controversial view, but I’m willing to say it,” Alito said Friday, referencing Congressional Democrats’ recent efforts to mandate stronger ethics rules. “No provision in the Constitution gives them the authority to regulate the Supreme Court — period.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) claimed the Supreme Court should be the “most scrutinized” because of its power.

It's time that congressional Dems be offered a Constitution 101 course. Idjuts! Baha.

Cited and related links:

  1. thehill.com

Comments Start Below


The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.
Comments on "Democrats balk at Alito assertion that Congress has ‘no authority’ over Supreme Court":

  1. by Donna on July 31, 2023 6:40 am

    Another huge mistake by America's founders.

  2. by Indy! on July 31, 2023 7:37 am

    The more sketchy decisions they make, the more people will ignore them. They’re already a joke.

  3. by oldedude on July 31, 2023 8:43 am
    Donna,
    If it were not like it is, we would have a "common law" like the brits and their lackies. As the Canadian (can't remember his name) made a point of many times, common law allows for a more flexible change. Our constitution allows for a slower change. Good and bad in both. The founders were extremely afraid of masses overthrowing the Union and starting a civil war. Our constitution makes that harder, but change goes back to the states to start.

  4. by Ponderer on July 31, 2023 10:11 am

    "HAHAHAHA!!!! I can be as corrupt and
    immoral as I wanna be, BITCHES!
    And you can't do a damned thing about it!
    HAH HAHA!!! HAHAHA!!! HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!"

  5. by oldedude on July 31, 2023 10:19 am
    You can never surprise me... very predictable...

    Supreme Court justices serve for life, unless they resign or are impeached and removed from office. The reason for their lifetime tenure is ostensibly to enable them to make decisions free from any pressure by the executive or legislative branches of government. Since the Supreme Court first convened in 1790, there have been more than one hundred justices—and only one has ever been impeached. And then acquitted.

    So it can happen. Or make sure you change our laws regarding this.

    The GOP is going to get pedojoe out of the way first. While the dims are getting trumpster, so both dance cards are a little full right now. And God forbid they do two things at once (either side).
    history.com

  6. by Ponderer on July 31, 2023 10:31 am

    "The reason for their lifetime tenure is ostensibly to enable them to make decisions free from any pressure by the executive or legislative branches of government." -od's link


    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAH!!!!!!


    "...But they are completely free to make decisions fully based on being pressured by corporate leaders in the private sector with unlimited funds to bribe the livingshit out of them with."


    Boy, did the founders ever fuckup on that one!!!

  7. by HatetheSwamp on July 31, 2023 11:23 am

    HAHAHAHA!!!! I can be as corrupt and
    immoral as I wanna be, BITCHES!
    And you can't do a damned thing about it!
    HAH HAHA!!! HAHAHA!!! HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!"

    From the first post we exchanged, you've always lived in denial of the Separation of Powers when the existence of three separate, equal branches of government hinders a woke, limousine lib lynch mob.

    Why do you even want to be an American?

  8. by Ponderer on July 31, 2023 12:32 pm

    "Why do you even want to be an American?" -Hate

    Bill, are you asserting that part of being an American is being perfectly fine and accepting about a Supreme Court Justice, who for many years was being treated like visiting royalty by a multi billionaire with business before the court...? We're against Separation of Powers if we think such a thing should be corrected and made to never be allowed to happen again...?

    Why is it that conservatives looooooooooove their corruption so much? They love it in others they admire. They never hold corruption against any GOP conservative politician ever.

    And they launch asinine excuses like you are now, Bill.

    I mean here you are actually suggesting that somehow, because of "Separation of Powers", Supreme Court justices are allowed to accept any gifts, worth any amount, from anybody, anytime, and for any length of time that they ever want to and they don't even have to tell anyone about any of it.

    Seriously, Bill. That is precisely what you appear to be defending here.

  9. by HatetheSwamp on July 31, 2023 12:38 pm

    Bill, are you asserting that part of being an American is being perfectly fine and accepting about a Supreme Court Justice, who for many years was being treated like visiting royalty by a multi billionaire with business before the court...?

    No

    ...are actually suggesting that somehow, because of "Separation of Powers", Supreme Court justices are allowed to accept any gifts, worth any amount, from anybody, anytime, and for any length of time that they ever want to and they don't even have to tell anyone about any of it.

    No.

    I'm suggesting that Congress has no authority to regulate the activities of members of the Supreme Court.

  10. by Donna on July 31, 2023 12:48 pm

    We also have a system of checks and balances, which is what keeps one branch from running roughshod over the others. IMO that system needs to be expanded to include the Supremes.

  11. by HatetheSwamp on July 31, 2023 12:53 pm

    po's the one here who claims to be a constitutional scholar so, po can correct me if I'm wrong. Congress can impeach a Supreme Court Justice. Ain't?

  12. by Donna on July 31, 2023 12:58 pm

    Yeah, but the parties are so polarized now that it'll probably be a very long time until an impeachment results in a conviction. So like it or not, we're gonna have to put up with a hopelessly corrupt Supreme Court.


  13. by islander on July 31, 2023 1:18 pm

    "Democrats balk at Alito assertion that Congress has ‘no authority’ over Supreme Court". The Democrat's position is in line with the position of our nation's founders, So of course congress has the authority and duty to exercise authority over the Supreme court in certain matters (such as ethics).


    Congress’s mandate to “make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution [its enumerated] Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States” implicitly grants Congress the authority to enact a wide range of legislation to facilitate the exercise of judicial power. This includes ethics legislation, which safeguards the legitimacy of the Court by protecting the quality of its decision-making. Moreover, Congress has the ultimate power to impeach and remove justices for bad behavior, which justifies regulation to ensure good behavior. 

    For example, Ever since since 1948, Congress has required the justices to recuse themselves from cases in certain circumstances, including in any proceeding in which their impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
    Congress has played a central role in regulating the ethical conduct of the justices since the founding of our nation. Congress has required the Supreme Court Justices to take an oath that was written by Congress. Congress also sets the terms by which federal judges, including Supreme Court justices, retire and how they are compensated.  

    Our government is established by free choice of the people. Transparency in government is an absolute necessity if we are to have a government that derives its power from the the people.

    Congress has enacted ethics laws that apply to another coequal branch of government, the executive branch. These guardrails against corruption and abuse of power in coequal branches of government comport with the principle of checks and balances fundamental to our constitutional system.

    

A government like ours is based on consent of the people and this means “informed consent” especially in matters of ethics and abuse of power.



    brennancenter.org

  14. by oldedude on July 31, 2023 1:31 pm
    So you're agreeing with me. Well done! welldone.

    Supreme Court justices serve for life, unless they resign or are impeached and removed from office. The reason for their lifetime tenure is ostensibly to enable them to make decisions free from any pressure by the executive or legislative branches of government. Since the Supreme Court first convened in 1790, there have been more than one hundred justices—and only one has ever been impeached. And then acquitted.

    So it can happen.

    Real life: The GOP is going to get pedojoe out of the way first. While the dims are getting trumpster, so both dance cards are a little full right now. And God forbid they do two things at once (either side).

  15. by islander on July 31, 2023 2:02 pm

    Od wrote: So you're agreeing with me. Well done!

    I agree with you only if you are agreeing with me that Alito wrong wrong and Hate is wrong when he said, "I'm suggesting that Congress has no authority to regulate the activities of members of the Supreme Court."

    So...Do you still agree with me?

  16. by oldedude on July 31, 2023 2:09 pm
    I think this is an important part of our laws. For making decisions you don't agree with? NO.

    In the case of bribery and corruption, MAJOR financial crime, absolutely. I don't understand why a SCOTUS judge would need this.... but here it is...

    So then, I'm now agreeing with indy.

Go To Top

Comment on: "Democrats balk at Alito assertion that Congress has ‘no authority’ over Supreme Court"


* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com
Report spam & abuse
 SelectSmart.com home page