this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2025
172 points (93.0% liked)

Ask Lemmy

34471 readers
1115 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I constantly see that the current US Supreme Court makes inconstitucional rulings like for example, allowing racial profiling.

For what little I've gathered due to separation of powers. The supreme court is just a designated authority. Why hasn't there been any movement that just aims to de-legitimize the current supreme Court?

Why can't a judge say "I denounce the Supreme courts authority for their failing to uphold the spirit of the law and now I shall follow this other courts rulings"?

(page 2) 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (18 children)

Because the Supreme Court and it's powers are defined in the Constitution itself, that's not possible. They are the highest court in the country.

[–] hector@lemmy.today 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You are absolutely allowed to criticize the highest court in the land what are you are you even trying to say here?

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

You can criticize, but that does absolutely nothing. The citizens have no power over the Supreme Court and you can't ignore their rulings.

load more comments (17 replies)
[–] rekabis@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (6 children)

The fact that Obama didn’t fill the position that Scalia opened when he died is probably one of the biggest missed opportunities in America’s recent history. Had his position been filled with a left-leaning Justice, especially a young one with many decades of life left, much of America’s Fascist changes could have been opposed.

As it is, the SC has become a rubber stamp for whatever the current Fascist/Authoritarianist regime wants.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago

Why can’t a judge say “I denounce the Supreme courts authority for their failing to uphold the spirit of the law and now I shall follow this other courts rulings”?

The constitution clearly says they can't, so if their notion of the law is claiming to be based in the constitution such a declaration would be obviously bullshit. If their notion of the law is not based on the constitution, that's an attempt to dissolve our government.

[–] hector@lemmy.today 0 points 2 days ago

Because for some reason we are still following the leadership of the establishment Democrats and that is anathema to them.

They were chosen to be weak, to play good cop to Republican bad cop, to not change back anything Republicans have done let alone improve things and threaten the privilege the rich have chiseled from us all.

The right wing has been doing that very thing with campaigns against activist judges for decades and it has been relatively successful along with stacking the courts with Federalist Society hacks chosen decide with the party over country, specifically to change the country old dynamic in the US where it does it did not matter what party nominated what judge, they would in their lifetime appointments represent the people and their interests not that party.

They probably have career ending blackmail that would force these guys to resign If released on top of choosing them to be hacks.

Without new leadership doing anything politically is a complete waste at best and often exposes you to the party machine in power for persecution while receiving no protection from dems.

Like voting officials in 2020. How are we still fighting under the edtablishment dems' banner?

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (4 children)

Hahahaha

Geez, man, read a book. Or even a Wikipedia page

You're advocating rule by mob over rule of law... You know, like the French Revolution

[–] Gonzako@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

I'll be honest man. I just don't see the people up there actually doing their job and conceding everything to trump. The separation of powers has long been corrupted and it's no longer actually doing its job.

I personally can't wait to see what comes out of America's disillusionment.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›