American Politics VIII: Dancin' with Manchin

[Kilobugya]

There is no legal "argument" SL because 6 unelected omnipotent legislators who are in office for life could use anything to outlaw anything.

If they had the balls and the brains they could outlaw congress and POTUS as institutions tomorrow and rule by decree.

At the end, the power of the government comes from two things : the fact that most people, even if reluctantly for some, accept their authority, and the strength of police and army (the less people accept the authority, the more of police and army you need). So if SCOTUS were to decide to outlaw congress and POTUS, it would depend if people accept that, and if the military does. It seems unlikely either of the two would in the current situation.

[The Jamesian Republic]

So this like a political lifecycle or is it like how a phoenix is reborn from its ashes? The old party dies and a new one takes its place and the other party reverts to as it was until it runs through the cycle

Things shift and evolve. The Republicans were formed as an abolitionist party and now they're the ones supporting people carrying the very flag they rallied against. Meanwhile it was the Democrats were so pro-slavery that a lot of them left the union to protect that peculiar institution. Right up to about the sixties the parties were more or less reversed, at least culturally. The Civil Rights Act caused a shift and the Republicans developed the Southern Strategy that they currently ride today. It took about a hundred years for the parties to fundementally shift from where they were at the civil war, we're sixty or so years out from that. That's why you should look askance at anyone trying to sell you 'as it was so shall it be' kinds of predictions. Over the course of the next forty years who the fuck knows what will happen. Since we'll be living in the full tilt dawn of a new global climate and I don't know...the Omega variant of COVID-19. I don't know. This time 2019 everyone was pretty sure how things were gonna go in 2020, guess how right they were?

I did read about the base shifting and at first it was kind of shocking but again I didn’t know it happened. I did read about southern strategy and it surprising made sense since I live in Alabama. As for the future who knows what will happen. They said by 2000 we will all be driving flying cars and yet here we are still on the ground.

[San Lumen]

No they cannot. This is pure nonsense.

So if they wanted to they could just say two branches of the government just no longer exist?

No they can’t.

[Kerwa]

At the end, the power of the government comes from two things : the fact that most people, even if reluctantly for some, accept their authority, and the strength of police and army (the less people accept the authority, the more of police and army you need). So if SCOTUS were to decide to outlaw congress and POTUS, it would depend if people accept that, and if the military does. It seems unlikely either of the two would in the current situation.

They really couldn’t. The court’s scope is not unlimited and it can’t really re-write the constitution that way. And as a practical matter outlawing the executive and legislature would disband the military and end the courts as well. So it wouldn’t happen. Also what kind of case presented would require that relief to be granted?

They could however overturn Marberry v Madison, which would be hilarious.

[The Jamesian Republic]

So if they wanted to they could just say two branches of the government just no longer exist?

No they can’t.

I guess that would make sense however we have other people saying they can though. But thing is though wouldn’t the court abolishing the legislative and executive branch be a breach of the checks and balances system in the constitution?

[San Lumen]

No they can’t.

I guess that would make sense however we have other people saying they can though. But thing is though wouldn’t the court abolishing the legislative and executive branch be a breach of the checks and balances system in the constitution?

Yes and I cannot foresee a case where they could make such a ruling.

[Cannot think of a name]

No they cannot. This is pure nonsense.

So if they wanted to they could just say two branches of the government just no longer exist?

Absolutely not. They are fucking with Lumen, one of this threads more tedious pastimes.

[Spirit of Hope]

I mean technically SCOTUS could rule whatever they want to as unconstitutional. However that would be a quick route to being reformed or ignored.

[Umeria]

I mean technically SCOTUS could rule whatever they want to as unconstitutional. However that would be a quick route to being reformed or ignored.

This actually happened, it was called the Lochner era.

[Cannot think of a name]

Things shift and evolve. The Republicans were formed as an abolitionist party and now they're the ones supporting people carrying the very flag they rallied against. Meanwhile it was the Democrats were so pro-slavery that a lot of them left the union to protect that peculiar institution. Right up to about the sixties the parties were more or less reversed, at least culturally. The Civil Rights Act caused a shift and the Republicans developed the Southern Strategy that they currently ride today. It took about a hundred years for the parties to fundementally shift from where they were at the civil war, we're sixty or so years out from that. That's why you should look askance at anyone trying to sell you 'as it was so shall it be' kinds of predictions. Over the course of the next forty years who the fuck knows what will happen. Since we'll be living in the full tilt dawn of a new global climate and I don't know...the Omega variant of COVID-19. I don't know. This time 2019 everyone was pretty sure how things were gonna go in 2020, guess how right they were?

I did read about the base shifting and at first it was kind of shocking but again I didn’t know it happened. I did read about southern strategy and it surprising made sense since I live in Alabama. As for the future who knows what will happen. They said by 2000 we will all be driving flying cars and yet here we are still on the ground.

Partially because flying cars are kinda stupid. But there are currently small capacity multirotor craft meant for travel within or between cities being tested right now that people call flying cars.

And technically there’s been cars that can fly since the mid thirties.

[Ifreann]

I did read about the base shifting and at first it was kind of shocking but again I didn’t know it happened. I did read about southern strategy and it surprising made sense since I live in Alabama. As for the future who knows what will happen. They said by 2000 we will all be driving flying cars and yet here we are still on the ground.

Partially because flying cars are kinda stupid. But there are currently small capacity multirotor craft meant for travel within or between cities being tested right now that people call flying cars.

And technically there’s been cars that can fly since the mid thirties.

What are passenger planes, if not cars/buses that fly?

[Cannot think of a name]

I mean technically SCOTUS could rule whatever they want to as unconstitutional. However that would be a quick route to being reformed or ignored.

There is no world where the question of the constitutionality of the executive and legislative branch becomes a question before the court.

[Cannot think of a name]

Partially because flying cars are kinda stupid. But there are currently small capacity multirotor craft meant for travel within or between cities being tested right now that people call flying cars.

And technically there’s been cars that can fly since the mid thirties.

What are passenger planes, if not cars/buses that fly?

I mean, Airbus…

[Zurkerx]

Another short-term spending bill has been reached. It is likely to pass the House quickly but will face some roadblocks in the Senate where some Republicans are demanding language be added that forbids the Biden Administration from requiring vaccine mandates on private employers. Unless those demands are dropped and the process expedited, we can expect a short-term shut down.

[The Jamesian Republic]

So if they wanted to they could just say two branches of the government just no longer exist?

Absolutely not. They are fucking with Lumen, one of this threads more tedious pastimes.

So just trolling for the sake of trolling.

[Vassenor]

Another short-term spending bill has been reached. It is likely to pass the House quickly but will face some roadblocks in the Senate where some Republicans are demanding language be added that forbids the Biden Administration from requiring vaccine mandates on private employers. Unless those demands are dropped and the process expedited, we can expect a short-term shut down.

How dare the Biden admin actually want this pandemic to end.

[The Jamesian Republic]

Another short-term spending bill has been reached. It is likely to pass the House quickly but will face some roadblocks in the Senate where some Republicans are demanding language be added that forbids the Biden Administration from requiring vaccine mandates on private employers. Unless those demands are dropped and the process expedited, we can expect a short-term shut down.

How dare the Biden admin actually want this pandemic to end.

Their argument is that businesses and people shouldn’t be forced to do something they don’t want to do ie the Coronavirus Vaccine

[Untecna]

How dare the Biden admin actually want this pandemic to end.

Their argument is that businesses and people shouldn’t be forced to do something they don’t want to do ie the Coronavirus Vaccine

Then I suppose they think pain, disease, and a slight chance of death is better?

[Spirit of Hope]

I mean technically SCOTUS could rule whatever they want to as unconstitutional. However that would be a quick route to being reformed or ignored.

There is no world where the question of the constitutionality of the executive and legislative branch becomes a question before the court.

In the last year we've had states sue to stop the election results. You aren't being creative enough if you can't come up with a scenario where one branch wants the other one called unconstitutional for some reason. Insane and unlikely, but totally within the insane timeline we are already living through.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

I guess that would make sense however we have other people saying they can though. But thing is though wouldn’t the court abolishing the legislative and executive branch be a breach of the checks and balances system in the constitution?

Yes and I cannot foresee a case where they could make such a ruling.

So about that time the Senate declared the President above the law after this year's coup attempt.

[Valrifall]

There is no world where the question of the constitutionality of the executive and legislative branch becomes a question before the court.

In the last year we've had states sue to stop the election results. You aren't being creative enough if you can't come up with a scenario where one branch wants the other one called unconstitutional for some reason. Insane and unlikely, but totally within the insane timeline we are already living through.

I mean other than the fact such a ruling would be literally unjustifiable no matter how hard you squint since the setup for the Presidency and Congress are literally written into the first two articles of the Constitution...

Sure, in principle nothing's stopping them from going "you guys are unconstitutional" but that'd be a biggest "the court has made their ruling, now let them enforce it" moment ever and would probably just make everyone very, very confused.

[San Lumen]

In the last year we've had states sue to stop the election results. You aren't being creative enough if you can't come up with a scenario where one branch wants the other one called unconstitutional for some reason. Insane and unlikely, but totally within the insane timeline we are already living through.

I mean other than the fact such a ruling would be literally unjustifiable no matter how hard you squint since the setup for the Presidency and Congress are literally written into the first two articles of the Constitution...

Sure, in principle nothing's stopping them from going "you guys are unconstitutional" but that'd be a biggest "the court has made their ruling, now let them enforce it" moment ever and would probably just make everyone very, very confused.

Not to mention the court would lose their legitimacy and those that made the ruling likely impeached and convicted.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Not to mention the court would lose their legitimacy and those that made the ruling likely impeached and convicted.

Idk how you can look at the past 4 years' experience and still say with a straight face that impeachment works.

[San Lumen]

Not to mention the court would lose their legitimacy and those that made the ruling likely impeached and convicted.

Idk how you can look at the past 4 years' experience and still say with a straight face that impeachment works.

I don’t think even Republicans would be ok with such a move by the court. There is also no world in which they could make such a ruling so why are we still discussing this?

[Ifreann]

Idk how you can look at the past 4 years' experience and still say with a straight face that impeachment works.

I don’t think even Republicans would be ok with such a move by the court. There is also no world in which they could make such a ruling so why are we still discussing this?

Probably because you spent five pages demanding that people tell you how the court could ban gay marriage.