#JAILTOTHECHIEF- Shit Just Got Real

Brenda Archer

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
1,184
Location
Arizona
SL Rez
2005
Joined SLU
Sept 2007
SLU Posts
12005
Speaking on judges: what exactly is the reasoning behind that judges on the supreme court are in service until death?
I don't think it's anything more than trying to prevent being replaced by someone odious.
Too late now.
 

Jopsy Pendragon

Nature: You break it? You 'buy it'.
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
410
Location
Hillcrest, San Diego, CA
SL Rez
2004
Joined SLU
2007
SLU Posts
11308
Speaking on judges: what exactly is the reasoning behind that judges on the supreme court are in service until death?
Iirc, it was too reduce the corruption caused by the desire to retain their seat through pandering to political/populist/wealthy interests.

ETA: lol, too slow
 

Innula Zenovka

Nasty Brit
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,982
SLU Posts
18459
So they are not subject to political pressure. Supposedly.
But how would serving until a fixed retirement age (say, 70 or 75) make them any more subject to political pressure than they are as lifetime appointments?

If anything, it increases the politicisation of the Supreme Court to have no fixed retirement age. Judge Bader Ginsburg, for example, has every incentive to postpone her retirement until at least after the next presidential election, in the hope that her successor will be chosen by a Democratic president, while Judge Thomas may be thinking of retiring rather earlier than he might otherwise care to, to be sure that his successor is nominated by the present incumbent.
 

Pamela

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
577
Location
Austin
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
2009
But how would serving until a fixed retirement age (say, 70 or 75) make them any more subject to political pressure than they are as lifetime appointments?

If anything, it increases the politicisation of the Supreme Court to have no fixed retirement age. Judge Bader Ginsburg, for example, has every incentive to postpone her retirement until at least after the next presidential election, in the hope that her successor will be chosen by a Democratic president, while Judge Thomas may be thinking of retiring rather earlier than he might otherwise care to, to be sure that his successor is nominated by the present incumbent.
Good point. If someone is going to be susceptible to influence or corruption they will find a way.

Like we still don’t know who paid Kavanaugh’s debts.
 
Last edited:

danielravennest

Active member
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
1,017
SLU Posts
9073
Speaking on judges: what exactly is the reasoning behind that judges on the supreme court are in service until death?
It is actually all federal judges, and until death or voluntary retirement. The reasoning is to make them independent of the legislative and the executive branches. They are appointed by the President, and confirmed by the Senate, but once in office, they can't be removed except by impeachment. So they can rule laws are unconstitutional, or stop the executive branch from doing something, without fear for their jobs. In theory, the only consideration they have is the Constitution and the law.
 

Katheryne Helendale

🐱 Kitty Queen🐱
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,819
Location
Right... Behind... You...
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
October 2009
But how would serving until a fixed retirement age (say, 70 or 75) make them any more subject to political pressure than they are as lifetime appointments?

If anything, it increases the politicisation of the Supreme Court to have no fixed retirement age. Judge Bader Ginsburg, for example, has every incentive to postpone her retirement until at least after the next presidential election, in the hope that her successor will be chosen by a Democratic president, while Judge Thomas may be thinking of retiring rather earlier than he might otherwise care to, to be sure that his successor is nominated by the present incumbent.
That's true, but that tactic wouldn't change the political leaning of the Supreme Court. A liberal justice would try to be replaced by a liberal president, and a conservative justice would try to be replaced by a conservative president. The person in the seat may change, but the leaning of the Court wouldn't. At least, in most circumstances. Unfortunately, there's a risk in waiting for a favorable president in that you might not make it long enough. Or a corrupt Senate Majority Leader refuses to allow the confirmation of the sitting president's nominee.
 

Ava Glasgow

Ava Ava hot like lava
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
395
Location
Underwater
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
2008
SLU Posts
2365
Certainly reading comments on the sentence on Twitter yesterday, where people were comparing it with what people are given for selling comparatively small quantities of weed, I agreed on the discrepancy but thought that they should be outraged not so much about Manafort's sentence but about what other people are given for lesser crimes.

While I do think the recommended 19-24 years may have been too much, I feel strongly that 4 years is far too lenient for stealing millions of dollars.

But yes, my main issue is that people with less privilege wallow in prison for a decade or even multiple decades for much smaller offenses.
 

Dakota Tebaldi

Well-known member
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 19, 2018
Messages
2,355
Location
Gulf Coast, USA
Joined SLU
02-22-2008
SLU Posts
16791
How and why does the owner of a shady massage chain have such access to so many high profile elected officials?
My vote: leverage.
 

Jolene Benoir

Hello World
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
791
Location
Minnesnowta
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
Dec 2010

This cunt. I don't use that word often and when I do, I mean it. Where has he been in Puerto Rico (which apparently doesn't exist for him) or California (which he hates because they didn't vote for his majesty)? I loathe this man with every fiber of my being. He likely doesn't even actually give a shit about any Alabama resident who died. It's all a fucking parade. I don't begrudge people getting help, of course I don't. I do hold anger and hatred toward the man who imposes his crazy award system to our country.

The signing of the bible makes me really irate. I'm surprised they didn't burst into flame. He has gall even looking at a bible. To him, he likely thinks that he is making the owners of the bibles money having his signature. Gah.
 
Last edited:

Innula Zenovka

Nasty Brit
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,982
SLU Posts
18459
In addition to the way he treated both Melania Trump and Monika Babišová, the Czech Prime Minister's wife, I was rather puzzled about the protocol about the Commander-in-Chief returning salutes.

He ignored the marines saluting him when he and Melania came of the door and then appeared, when returning inside the building, to give a really slap-dash salute in the form a wave that a pedestrian might use to acknowledge a motorist who slows down when she sees him waiting to cross the road.

Can any of the military veterans in this forum shed any light on how the C-i-C is supposed to conduct himself when he's saluted? I'm sure that, whatever the protocol is, it can't be what Individual 1 is doing.
 

Grandma Bates

Only mostly banned....
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
100
Location
Airport
Joined SLU
Yes
SLU Posts
-1000
In addition to the way he treated both Melania Trump and Monika Babišová, the Czech Prime Minister's wife, I was rather puzzled about the protocol about the Commander-in-Chief returning salutes.

He ignored the marines saluting him when he and Melania came of the door and then appeared, when returning inside the building, to give a really slap-dash salute in the form a wave that a pedestrian might use to acknowledge a motorist who slows down when she sees him waiting to cross the road.

Can any of the military veterans in this forum shed any light on how the C-i-C is supposed to conduct himself when he's saluted? I'm sure that, whatever the protocol is, it can't be what Individual 1 is doing.
Oy, this is a strangely complicated issue. I noticed the sloppy salute and had a little chuckle because of all the flack former Pres. Obama received from conservatives for not being respectful to the military. Technically, the President should not be saluting uniformed members of the military. First, you should not salute without a cover (a hat). Second, he is not in uniform.

Prior to former Pres. Reagan, presidents did not salute for the reasons given above. Even though they are in the chain of command, they are civilians, and it is a point of pride that the top three levels of the chain of command are civilians. (Pres -> Sec. of Defense -> Sec. of Army/Navy/A.F.). Former Pres. Reagan decided he wanted to salute so every president since then has saluted.

Personally, I am not all that uptight about his salute being so sloppy, even though I feel it is not appropriate for a president to salute. I do get a bit agitated by the flagrant hypocrisy, though, by a certain party that leverages any possible instance from wearing a tan suit to a less than snappy salute as a way to try to score points rather than act with any sense of dignity or moral compass whatsoever.

Sorry, The Presidential Salute Isn't A Real Thing

Edit to add.... almost forgot. My favourite presidential salute is when Pres. Trump saluted a North Korean General.
Trump faces backlash after saluting North Korean general

Of course, he got a free pass on that.