President Trump promised to fill the appeals courts with “my judges.” They have formed a nearly united phalanx to defend his agenda from legal challenges.

  • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    5 hours ago

    When you see a breakdown like this it makes it clear that judges are just a different form of politician and the law is nearly entirely corrupted.

    • Whostosay@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I think by now we ran the test of people being impartial, and it didn’t fucking work. Time to make all judges elected only.

      • bearboiblake@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 hour ago

        yeah elections have been proven to be tremendously successful in getting great politicians into office! /s

        Just skip the repeated failures to reform these doomed institutions and abolish all of this shit

        • Whostosay@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 minutes ago

          Lol I wish we could have one centralized authority that would unilaterally make all of the decisions for us. I think the executive branch would be the best place to start, and instead of voting, we can just let the current guy decide what he feels best.

          • bearboiblake@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            19 minutes ago

            here’s a crazy idea but what if nobody is in charge and we all just collectively decide what we want through a system of consensus?

  • Ech@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    Should just say “11 to 1”, or “over 11 to 1”. That mess of a ratio isn’t worth the fraction of accuracy it represents.

    • MrQuallzin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      The president’s appointees voted to allow his policies to take effect 133 times and voted against them only 12 times.

      They’re using the actual numbers, why would they reduce?

      • Ech@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Ratios (eg ‘x to y’) are used to simplify data. If they’re just going to use the numbers as they are, then just say 133 out of 145. As is, it’s just a mess that most people won’t bother trying to figure out or internalize.

        • bearboiblake@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 hour ago

          it’s not a ratio, though, it’s like when they say a supreme court decision passed “5 to 4”, it means five in favor, four against

  • lubashumanum@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    7 hours ago
    1. it’s “their agenda” not just trumps. This will outlast him.

    2. this is also why martial law will have no troubles.