Then arrest them. Or in Garland's DOJ is it ok to just get away with anything simply because you're a Republican?
this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2023
405 points (98.3% liked)
politics
18672 readers
2760 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Garland is spineless, the Right Wing's current talking points are constantly about the weaponization of the DoJ, but that's just for two reasons, making the Biden admin look like they're "the big gubment coming to get conservatives" and normalizing what Trump and DeSantis and too many other Republican candidates want to actually do once they get control of the country back. Once that happens you will see useless hearings like the Hillary Benghazi hearings or worse, much worse.
Garland should fucking be removed from the GOP if he refuses to do his fucking job. He never should have been appointed. He is a Republican that will allow them to do whatever they want.
Garland should fucking be removed from the GOP if he refuses to do his fucking job.
Firstly the GOP stands for "Grand old party" aka the Republicans of the American Right wing. I believe you mean the DoJ, the Department of Justice.
He is a Republican that will allow them to do whatever they want.
Secondly he is not a Republican, he has worked with every democratic administration since Clinton's, I cannot find his political affiliation but he's well known as a Centrist.
With that being said, Centrist and conservative Germans enabled Hitler's rise, so him being a centrist obviously doesn't mean he's not on the Republicans side, I'm just stating that he works almost exclusively with Democratic administrations and attempts to bring the aisle and work with both parties. However working what he seems to fail to realize is that working with the current Republican party means that he isn't working with other centrists anymore, since they are mostly extremists now.
I wish that Merrick Garland was my uncle or something so that I could call him up and ask him off the record how he thinks about all of this stuff.
He clearly wants to avoid looking political and as such rarely shares any comments on all of this fuckery. The problem, which all of us here I think are fairly clear on, his lack of calling out this bullshit is not only dangerous, but does a disservice to justice.
I would love to be able to hear his off-the-record reasoning as to why he isn't speaking up, and be able to challenge him in real time. Due to the political landscape, this could never be public as it would immediately be weaponized, as we can all probably predict.
Still, it sucks. The inaction is just as bad as taking a stance that isn't popular with the fascist party we call Republicans.
He isn't a part of the GOP, but he might as well be a moderate one that disagrees with Trump and his foam-at-the-mouth idiot sheep sycophants, not unlike someone like Romney or Cheney (although she voted with Trump 90% or more of the time IIRC). The effect of silence is almost the same as a plant that looks the other way.
Our political system pisses me the fuck off. It's depressing watching this happen in real time.
I absolutely agree, it's been like watching a slow motion train wreck, except for the fact that we're all passengers on that train.
Yes memt DOJ and I heard he is a Republican.
I cannot find his political affiliation
did you check under "spineless bitch"?
Garland is not in the GOP?
It would be the courts responsibility to enforce the court order, not Garland's. They need to issue a contempt of court ruling against the state.
arrest them and form a completely redrawn map.
fuck them at this point. like “aha! we refuse! checkMATE!”? bitch please.
republicans seem to think they can just shout "NO!" at any part of democracy they don't care for and it's about time someone did something.
Why hasn't it happened? This is blatant at this point. Why are they not behind bars????
Because for some bonkers reason the Supreme Court has no enforcement powers for their decisions.
More than 60 years after George Wallace and things appear unchanged in Alabama. Not that anyone expected much better from Alabama.
That's a feature not a bug to these people, conservatism is all about resisting progress even at their very own detriment.
Congressional boundaries need to be drawn by a neutral party, not the political party which happens to be in power.
Maybe that's a potential use for generative AI?
"Draw up a congressional boundary map for Alabama being sure to allocate each of the seven districts with an equal population and with two of the seven being a majority of African Americans."
Shortest straight line method is perfectly fair, non-partisan, and super easy to implement with basic GIS tools and a free map from the census bureau. It wouls take literally minutes to determine every congressional district in the country, and every 10 years you could spend 30 seconds importing the new numbers to get new maps.
Yes, sometimes the lines separate neighbors. So what?
I don't care if my neighbor is in a different congressional district.
I mean, the line has to fall somewhere and there are neighbors in different towns and cities and even states in some places, what's the big deal about a district?
One obvious downside to this approach is that it ignores natural and political boundaries. There may be good reasons to put an entire city into one district, for example, but the algorithm might not make that happen.
https://theconversation.com/can-math-solve-the-congressional-districting-problem-44963
Just get rid of districts! They don't need to fucking exist!
Whatever we do, and we need to do SOMETHING, it should probably be defined by a Constitutional amendment.
Right now, you're right, congressional districts have no constitutional mandate other than "Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers"
It's already been updated once thanks to that ugly 3/5ths language:
And again since that update only specifically mentioned male voters. :(
https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/19th-amendment
But at no point did we define HOW the congressmembers are to be selected.
Nor that there should be winner take all districts. I think reps should be based on population and then reps allotted based on the percentage of votes the party received. Each party can have their own district maps.
There are already algorithms for gerrymandering based on whatever you require the final product to be.
we're about to see what happens if you tell the supreme court to get fucked. I assumed the next constitutional crisis was gonna be either marijuana laws or when some state decides to just not bother with elections, but this could be a fun one too
Nah, this just goes to a lower court who hands it off to a special master who then redraws the lines with zero input from their legislature: It’s if they try and ignore that is where we get into the fun “federal executive flexes it’s genitals at a state” and runs the election. Probably a long con, but the Republicans are going to lose at least one seat, and the special master may find a way to make them lose two.
When you're so racist even a conservative Supreme Court is telling you to chill out
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Alabama Republicans on Monday defended their decision not to create a second majority-Black district in a hearing before a panel of federal judges over the state’s redrawn congressional maps.
Abha Khanna, an attorney representing one group of plaintiffs in the case, said Alabama chose “defiance over compliance”.
The results of the extended court battle could also determine whether Democrats pick up another seat in Congress, where Republicans currently hold a slim majority.
“It’s unlawful to enforce proportionality over traditional redistricting principles,” Edmund LaCour, Alabama’s solicitor general, told the three-judge panel.
Plaintiffs in the supreme court case attended with many wearing T-shirts printed with their proposed map which would have two majority-Black districts.
“Alabama’s latest congressional map is a continuation of the state’s sordid history of defying court orders intended to protect the rights of Black voters,” former US attorney general Eric Holder, chairman of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, said in a statement.
I'm a bot and I'm open source!
I'll do you one better, bot. "Republicans are racist". Done.
The party of "law and order"
I wonder how many dead Alabama Republican politicians it would take to change their minds? Obviously I am just asking questions and not advocating for vigilantes to take matters into their own hands lol. But how many, though?