this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2025
333 points (100.0% liked)

politics

23387 readers
3841 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SuspiciousCatThing@pawb.social 42 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Doesn't Harvard have an entire law school? I hope a case they make would be pretty tight.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 26 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I'm seeing different percentages, but the circuit court judges in DC, about half, or a little less of the federal judges are harvard law school graduates.

also Harvard's law school is one of the most respected law schools in the country. They're not producing ambulance chasers... and they have a 50 billion dollar endowment they don't necessarily need to tap because they have some pretty awesome lawyers already on retainer.

basically, better lawyers, and better funding than the feds... at least as far as this one issue is concerned.

(edit to correct a number.)

[–] AmidFuror@fedia.io 9 points 2 weeks ago

What they don't have is the Supreme Court in their pocket. Amy and John will need to show some principles for justice to have any chance.

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The problem isn't litigation. The problem is that we have a fucking monkey at the wheel of the government that doesn't believe the law applies to them.

I don't care if every court case against this administration is successful: we need to see enforcement of judgements, by force if necessary.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Judges have the authority to deputize people to carry out their orders. I have a feeling that may have to start happening if the Justice Department refuses to do it.

And the first time bullets fly in the resulting conflict, things will get very, very ugly.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Judges have the authority to deputize people to carry out their orders.

And they won't. Anyone who isn't a republican fascist shitstreak is utterly terrified of wielding any power they have.

[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

Yes and their endowment isn’t the same as regular colleges and universities. For one thing, they own lots of Boston properties and priceless paintings that probably aren’t really priced correctly. So, reported value it really an underestimate. But they also have nigh unlimited alumni who donate in the millions because it’s pocket change but they would/could donate a lot more if you pissed them off.

Trump and Elon Musk are rich to us but Harvard (and Yale and a few others) have alumni who don’t donate “a lot” to the school each year but they have a money cannon ready and can refill the coffers. Stupid mafia tactics aren’t going to work. They will win and you might die.

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Harvard has a serious law school, but they got some big names in private practice to rep on this litigation. That's probably a good move for them.

[–] Kekzkrieger@feddit.org 12 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Can anyone explain to me why POTUS has so much power in the US rather than being held in check by all other institutions, it seems like a single bad apple can ruin the whole country and the system should be able to prevent this? Like why do institutions ignore what SCOTUS rules, just because POTUS says so?

[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 24 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Trump is a Republican.

Congress is controlled by Republicans.

The Supreme Court is majority Republican.

The other branches of government could stop this but they're all enabling this to happen.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

He’s ignoring the Supreme Court

[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

It's not so much that the Supreme Court is being ignored as much as it is that they refuse to do anything about it. They'll offer some occasional platitudes by ruling against Trump to make the public think that the system is still working as designed, but stop just short of actually enforcing those rulings.

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago

Republicans are corrupt, spineless bastards with lots of money who corrupt everything they touch.

[–] _wizard@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] FreshLight@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Wdym with 'helps' when it describes it in your stead?

[–] _wizard@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I didn't copy/paste the exact part of the quote I'd have used in my response. That said, you provided a better choice of words. Thank you.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Fight fiercely, Harvard.

[–] dan00@lemm.ee 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Nice one Harvard, the champion of morality and fairness. It would have be nice if you also didn’t employ teachers working with the CIA to lab test students and make them terrorist or serial killers.

Source