By Andrew Chung WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court declined on Friday to let President Joe Biden's administration enforce a key part of a new rule protecting LGBT students from discrimination in schools and colleges based on gender identity i...
  • wowyoureallysaidthat@reddthat.comEnglish
    1·
    3 months ago

    Is that not what he’s trying to do, or did I miss something? I’m pretty sure he laid out a plan or reform. I think the issue would be getting the Republicans to agree to it though (considering their majority on the Supreme Court are the ones creating these catastrophes). I also feel like Biden is between a rock and a hard place. “Presidential immunity” but if Biden used that to his advantage he’d just be belittled by the Republicans. These new rules are for Republicans and the far right only.

    • GlueBear [they/them, comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
      5·
      3 months ago

      I’m pretty sure he laid out a plan or reform.

      So you’re not even sure? You’re literally telling people Biden/kamala have a plan for SC reform but you aren’t even sure if they even revealed one? If you don’t even know what the plan is (or if there even is one) then how can you convince other people to vote for this plan?

      I think the issue would be getting the Republicans to agree to it though (considering their majority on the Supreme Court are the ones creating these catastrophes). I also feel like Biden is between a rock and a hard place. “Presidential immunity” but if Biden used that to his advantage he’d just be belittled by the Republicans. These new rules are for Republicans and the far right only.

      This is an art form. Immediately after telling me about a supposed plan, you proceeded to engage in damage control for this plan.

      We have a plan laid out! But it probably won’t work because of Republicans!

      You aren’t even sure what the plan to reform the SC is (or even that it exists) but you definitely know that it will fail because of the Republicans.

      Insane.

      • wowyoureallysaidthat@reddthat.comEnglish
        11·
        3 months ago

        Why are you so angry and using ableist language against me? There is a plan, I felt I was being clear.

        Here it is: SCOTUS Reform

        “No president is above the law.” Obviously using presidential immunity as laid out by SCOTUS would go against this whole point. I agree, too, that he shouldn’t use it just because fascists want to. That would also make him a fascist.

        If you were not so hellbent on belittling my intelligence, you may understand that yes, there’s no way a Dem could use the rules the far right have created for themselves — it is for them, not others.

        • GlueBear [they/them, comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
          3·
          3 months ago

          What ableist language did I use? It’s ableist to call you out on your ignorance that you’re trying to spread to other people?

          So term limits for SC justices? How does that prevent people’s rights from being taken away? So Republican justice A is kicked out because they finished their term and Republican justice B takes their place but both want to overturn marriage equality. We’ve gotten nowhere.

          I agree, too, that he shouldn’t use it just because fascists want to. That would also make him a fascist.

          Using the rules everyone else uses is fascist?

          If you were not so hellbent on belittling my intelligence, you may understand that yes, there’s no way a Dem could use the rules the far right have created for themselves — it is for them, not others.

          calling someone out on their poor logic is “belittling their intelligence” and that makes me ableist???

          How is using rules fascist? What is fascist about Biden using the same rules that Republicans use?

          How is it not fascist to allow people to have their rights removed?

          • wowyoureallysaidthat@reddthat.comEnglish
            11·
            3 months ago

            You used the word “insane” in reference to my previous argument. In effect, you called my argument insane, thereby calling me insane. Therefore, you used ableist language. Perhaps you deem my logic as poor, but you’ll notice that I have not tried to demean what you have been saying (nor have you offered much in the way of solutions, either. Perhaps that’s spreading….nothing to other people?).

            I am in fact not ignorant and try to remain up to date on the current political landscape. This is evidenced by the fact I provided a link to Biden’s SCOTUS reform plan, which you did not comment on other than to say shorter term limits wouldn’t solve any problems. Maybe you’re right, I’m not an expert on that matter — I’m curious if you are.

            The rules the GOP are using are fascist in nature. They want ultimate power for the president, something that the founders (no matter how problematic they are) didn’t intend when they created checks and balances, considering they had just left a monarchist institution. Therefore, if he just used the power given to him through the SCOTUS ruling, he’s effectively no better than the GOP and is failing to adhere to the rules laid out in the Constitution. It seems to me Biden has been trying to keep rights for folks in place, maybe not to the level most people — even me — would like to see (barring his shit with Gaza right now which is just abysmal).

            You can continue to call me ignorant, I guess I could do the same to you. I guess I just don’t want to have an argument like that.