Milla Tennt-DeCenci
Heidi Li FeldmanOf course Smith will appeal Cannon’s lawless ruling. However the 11th Circuit decides such an appeal, that decision will go to the Supreme Court — which itself is a lawless court in the hands of a majority who cares not one whit for precedent and is stacked with appointees beholden to Trump and the organizations that fed him their resumes. Some have direct ties to his effort to overthrow the U.S. Constitution. 1/
The only way to salvage U.S. constitutional democracy and rule of law is to reform this Supreme Court. Practically, that can only happen if we make sure the Democrats hold the Senate, take the House, and win the WH. Moreover, Biden, our presumptive nominee, must be willing to throw his weight behind the effort. We must work to make all this happen. Some organizations working toward these goals include: 2/
Very smart people, laser-focused on Supreme Court reform: Take Back the Court at https://www.takebackthecourtfoundation.org/ 3/
The indefatigable Indivisible, a major player in grass roots mobilization. Here’s a recent blog post from them about what you can do to help make Supreme Court reform happen. https://indivisibleteam.medium.com/with-fear-for-our-democracy-a17b7402ad40 4/
Demand Justice is another group dedicated to Supreme Court reform. https://demandjustice.org/priorities/supreme-court-reform/ 5/
Do not decide that Supreme Court reform cannot happen. That defeatism only creates another obstacle to it. With a Dem trifecta at the federal level, it definitely can be done. 6/6
Dannyboyguyman@heidilifeldman I would like to see legislation codifying justices ride circuit one apiece, and then a framework defining how the federal circuits are are regularly re-districted to accommodate caseload.
Martin Vermeer (not Jesus)@heidilifeldman White House + senate would be enough to expand the court.
Riley S. Faelan@martinvermeer Probably, pragmatically speaking, yes.
There is, however, a statutory act that specifies the number of judges on SCOTUS, and a legalist argument could be made that this act should be changed before adding more judges. Changing a federal statute requires being able to pass an act through both houses of the Congress.
@heidilifeldman
sidb@heidilifeldman @clive Not sure we can get a Dem trifecta (or even bifecta) with this court in place. I’ll vote in November… and I fully expect SCOTUS to throw it out over bs “irregularities” and send it to the House, fully disenfranchising what token vote the electoral college had left me (I’m not in a swing state).
I expect success involves mass demonstration *outside* the electoral system. (I hope for that but don’t know how we get there.)
Lotus Blossom@heidilifeldman I agree with all of this. But IMO we need more. We need Fed and State justices to vociferously reject SCOTUS decisions because they are lawless and unconstitutional. We need new leaders who will stand up to these justices and say loudly and clearly “we wholly reject your partisan, illegitimate decisions.”
Sungjin 성진@heidilifeldman they have shown zero desire
Maier Amsden@heidilifeldman So the big solution to a "judicial coup" is "for Democrats to stiffen their spines?" Seriously?! They're not! They won't! They've repeatedly refused. We're so fucked if that's a requirement! Biden has already said (and shown) he's doing *none of those things (reform the filibuster or expand SCOTUS), and he and a significant portion of Democrats will continue to shout "unity, compromise, tradition, decorum," doing NOTHING to halt our steady march to fascism.
Ciggy Bringer of SmokeMaier, what are you worried about? We have the primary process that for the past 20 years has amply proven the capability to produce the legislative bench that has steadfastly prevented the rise of fascism...
@ciggysmokebringer @heidilifeldman And yet fascism rises.
1337 $#!+ I did that@heidilifeldman maybe the shark has been jumped
Steve@heidilifeldman Minor nit: Senate needs to more than hold, Dems need to have 67 seats. A hold will not help.
@devtrash 1. Filibuster reform can change that 2. Not all Supreme Court reforms require 2/3.
@heidilifeldman In theory. In actual practice? I have my doubts.
your auntifa liza 🇵🇷 🦛 🦦"Biden, our presumptive nominee, must be willing to throw his weight behind the effort."
but he is NOT.
there are two things that go hand-in-hand that Biden is against: getting rid of filibuster and expanding the courts.
Prof. Feldman: we need you and all USA lawyers to organize across every single state and be prepared to not only "flood the zone" in the courts but be able to represent protestors in droves.
we will have to elect Biden to protest him into doing what he wont
Diligence Jonesoof.
that's a big ass lift for the Dems.
Stargeezer Smith@heidilifeldman
It needs to be done none-the-less. Besides, the SC would have to do another round of obvious partisan wrangling because their "official acts" smoke screen would be rigorously tested.
Trump did all of the illegal and possibly treasonous document acts "after" he left the office. So they couldn't be official acts.