Alito on SCOTUS critics: 'questioning our integrity crosses an important line' 
https://old.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/xr8fer/alito_on_scotus_critics_questioning_our_integrity/
Generated from TLDR This:
Justice Samuel Alito says criticism of the Supreme Court is going too far.
But saying or implying that the court is becoming an illegitimate institution or questioning our integrity crosses an important line,” he said.
“I think judges create legitimacy problems for themselves – undermine their legitimacy – when they don’t act so much like courts and when they don’t do things that are recognizably law,” she said in New York earlier this month.
Roberts had a different view of the court’s legitimacy.
In a speech in Colorado, he said that while all of the court’s opinions are open to criticism, he pointedly noted that “simply because people disagree with opinions is not a basis for questioning the legitimacy of the court.”
The justices will also come together Friday morning – along with President Joe Biden – for the investiture of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The lamestream media controlled by the
s and the huberians is trying to destroy America.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Edit: were you trying to refer to People of Whisky?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yes
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
i agree with this statement when they do something that they agree with, otherwise i will be mad and call this censorship
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
I definitely think the Court is the most interesting of our institutions mostly because the law here has weird, quasi-religious notions once you get that high up the chain. I also think it's disingenuous to slam Alito and Thomas for being partisan hacks in these big cases, when Sotomayor and Kagan are parallels. William O. Douglas is my favorite justice because he didn't put up some thin veil of "judicial philosophy." The guy just did what he wanted, which they all do anyway, Bill just wasn't a kitty about it.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Atheist's and Euro's seethe when you point out that the American Constitution just recognizes rights granted by God, whoever you might think that would be. The idea is that Government is not the supreme power is written into the founding document. Why do you think it makes so many Commies and materialists seethe? It mocks their philosophy.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
it does mean that americans have guns because they believe god thinks they should which makes us like mandalorians
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
this is the gay.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Redditers sneer about the separation of church and state thinking it was written to take the church out of government and not the other way around.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
They kinda just sneer about anything that gets in the wat of them being pure consumers. You can argue day and night about how a lot of the Christian and Jewish Bible doesn't mesh with the modern day, most redditors never really took that perspective. You wanna know why the Bible basically said don't buttfrick a man? They didn't have the same medical care we do, they don't have diapers when the elasticity of the butthole fails and you start pooping yourself, and s*x purely for pleasure only existed in Rome where they'd kill twinks after they anally prolapsed and then get new slave bussy.
The concept of sin doesn't really register all that much to them.
The people who wrote the American Constitution were forward thinkers. The first constitution failed and many who were in government later like Adams became hypocrites almost immediately. Still the concept being that your Rights are God-given rather than some vague nonsense about Human Rights and Dignity that change with zeitgeist is comforting.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Oh I just meant the competing canons of philosophy and stuff, not any actual God shit
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
are you r-slurred? the king is below God, has been that way for centuries here. no power but through God
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It's a pinkoid. What do you expect?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
I don’t think it’s necessarily wrong to shit on Alito, Gorsuch, or Kavanaugh for being partisan hacks, because fundamentally they are. While the SCOTUS has always been a political court, the conservative nominations post-roe have significantly diverged from previous standards. In looking to overturn Roe conservatives looked for judges that held extreme political views who would overturn standing precedent to ensure political gain.
While liberal justices certainly have their politics biases, they were mostly nominated as judges who have a clear legal doctrine that would shape the law in a way the Dems wanted, similar to how Thomas has an extreme legal doctrine, but it is relatively consistent. Whereas the previously mentioned justices have little in the way of legal philosophy to justify their decisions and instead can be viewed more as politicians than judges.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Pretty sure this is bullshit, but don't know enough about the matter to say definitively.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Yeah, I think for me, the main difference is the philosphy the justices tie themselves too. The "living tree" allows for more decisions that are frankly "this works better/sounds better/is better" and doesn't necessarily veil itself in strict guidelines. This allows for a lot more leeway in not looking like a hypocrite but also leads to the popular view of "judicial activism" (which is kinda dumb because tons of cases at SCOTUS involve this). In an effort to avoid that stigma, conservative justices try to claim that they make decisions based on established doctrine - originalism, textualism - not just "what they feel like," but inevitably, when you're making these kinds of tight decisions argued by expert consul, what you feel like is how you decide. Trying to back that up with strict doctrine fails because as soon as you leave it, you open yourself to attack.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
tbh all of the dissenting judges on citizens united should be straight up removed. I can't think of a better litmus test than "doesn't think political speech critical of a politician during an election season is protected speech".
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
God Alito is such a
. Ever since Scalia passed away it feels like the textualists have managed to become dumber than before. Feels like Robert's court only knows how to eat paste and blindly follow fedsoc. 
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Alito and Gorsuch are
and Kavanaugh is at best a midwit budget Scalia. The downward trend is real.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
I might even go so far as to say that it's dangerous to our democracy.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
The Supreme Court seems kinda r-slurred honestly. If you're a very special (lucky) president a couple of them will die and you get to have your side control all judicially decided policy for the next three to four decades. Democrats should just pack it and then the Republicans can do the same when they win just to see how big it can get before the country collapses.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
And how do you propose they do it?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
As I understand it while 9 is the normal number of justices there is no actual upper limit in the Constitution or anywhere so you could just break convention and pack it till you have a majority :3 but if you did that the other side would probably do the same.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Hope we get to the point that all of Congress is a member of the court, shitd be hilarioys
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Yes I am a female g*mer, yes I even like Zelda. What a surprise (after I even gave him personal bonus points for wearing a Zelda Shirt). No, a g*mer shirt is not "a handicap". Yes, when you think wearing a Zelda shirt equals "dating a minor" then you are the problem, not the shirt. Nope, I don't think the "majority of women will see it as a turn off". Yes, when all women you know act negatively around people wearing g*mer shirts and degrade others for having that hobby you have a pretty bad and in my opinion immature social environment to be honest. Nope, you don't have to be a "nerd" or g*mer in order to accept and/or respect other people's hobbies. I think I got all covered now.
Snapshots:
archive.org
archive.ph (click to archive)
ghostarchive.org (click to archive)
https://old.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/xr8fer/alito_on_scotus_critics_questioning_our_integrity/:
undelete.pullpush.io
archive.org
archive.ph (click to archive)
ghostarchive.org (click to archive)
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context