• Pips@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    10 months ago

    What are you talking about? Citizens United was a 5-4 decision as to the parts everyone is mad about. The 4 dissents were Ginsberg, Kagan, Stevens, and Sotomayor. The liberals concurred with the conservatives as to a disclosure requirement, which, why wouldn’t they? They dissented as to the rest of the opinion. Unsurprisingly with the benefit of hindsight, the only justice who disagreed with the reporting requirements was Thomas.

    • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      If the liberals actually gave a fuck about stopping the blatant corruption of the Court they’d have told Obama his primary responsibility in office was filling Court seats, including RBG’s, and expanding it when they had the chance for the express goal of overturning a bought and paid for decision.

      They knew from the moment those five voted yes to Citizens United what they were dealing with, and buried their heads in the sand instead. There is a direct quote from Stevens outright stating “Democracy can not function effectively when its constituent members believe laws are being bought and sold.”

      Instead, they sit and smile at their “colleagues” and murmur quietly about “the reputation of the Court” instead of using their position to call out corruption.

      Now, why do you think they aren’t screaming about being in the same room with a travesty like Thomas?

      Do you think it’s because they actually respect his legal opinions?

      Or are they worried their own finances can’t stand up to scrutiny?