ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 ก.ย. 2021
- "The level of defensiveness here shows the criticisms of the court are really getting to them. They hear it. They know that the public perception of them is bad. And that's a good thing,” says Chris Hayes, on the reaction from Justices to their low public approval and recent criticism.
» Subscribe to MSNBC: on.msnbc.com/SubscribeTomsnbc
MSNBC delivers breaking news, in-depth analysis of politics headlines, as well as commentary and informed perspectives. Find video clips and segments from The Rachel Maddow Show, Morning Joe, Meet the Press Daily, The Beat with Ari Melber, Deadline: White House with Nicolle Wallace, The ReidOut, All In, Last Word, 11th Hour, and more.
Connect with MSNBC Online
Visit msnbc.com: on.msnbc.com/Readmsnbc
Subscribe to MSNBC Newsletter: MSNBC.com/NewslettersYo...
Find MSNBC on Facebook: on.msnbc.com/Likemsnbc
Follow MSNBC on Twitter: on.msnbc.com/Followmsnbc
Follow MSNBC on Instagram: on.msnbc.com/Instamsnbc
#MSNBC #SupremeCourt #SCOTUS
![คุณอาเรียโต๊ะข้างๆ พูดรัสเซียหวานใส่ซะหัวใจจะวาย ตอนที่ 2 [ซับไทย] 【Ani-One Thailand】](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kbbfYakMY8k/mqdefault.jpg)
40% job approval rating for the Supreme Court of Justice? Embarrassing. That's McConnell's doing with Trump's incompetent approval.
That's surprising but then again Not. It is now corrupted by the Federalist Society.
Get ready to lose your civil rights.
Speaking of approval ratings, how is the current President doing?
@@TheUMIA better than the former guy ever did.
Almost as low as Joe Bidens approval!
@@crocodile2006 you prove the point they're a political entity now.
Kavanaugh nor Thomas should EVER have been allowed on the court. Awful people, totally unworthy of their seats.
ACB~💩
Yes. Thomas hasn't stopped being gringy. When the Kavanaugh thing was taking place, articles showed Thomas had continued to "harass" women since he's been on the bench. The women said they reported it, but nothing was done against him. So, its just a matter of time, before SHTF with one of them.
😂. Whiners. How’s that court packing going? Sorry ladies, it’s not going to happen. And you still want Breyer to retire with this Senate? 😂. Sinema and Manchin won’t vote for any far left liberal.
Yep.
So true Katusha
The pinnacle of elitism - "You can't question us, we are the SUPREME court."
Only those who hate this country would approved what is happening at our southern border.
@@jakesamual7803 And where was your concern for the border when Trump was caging kids and separating them from their parents?
They are not an independent nor bipartisan court at all, that exactly is the problem.
I suspect that you are one of the Democratic Party's Useful Idiots who doesn't like the Constitution and wants to get rid of it
@@jakesamual7803 I don't get that at all from the comment. Where are you seeing that? The Supreme Court is not the same as the Constitution.
@@jakesamual7803 No, I believe that Justice should be objective and fair, evolving, not going backwards.
@@pilargonzalez8442 That tells me you hate Constitution and want to get rid of it. With Constitution gone that is the end of this country
@@jakesamual7803 4 month old troll account, should have known. 🥱🖕
this supreme court does not have my respect.
and apparently 60 percent of us normal humans agree with my opinion
I have zero respect for the current SCOTUS and its fascist slant.
I have great respect for the institution of the Supreme Court; I have no respect for the recent party whores appointed by the anti democratic GOP.
@@theother1281 we aren't a democracy....we are a Republic. "Party whores".....is that the chatter down at the Starbucks Socialist Sewing Circle?....Civics education took a crap long ago apparently.
@@kyleg8098 Hi Kyle. I'm afraid you misunderstand the meanings of democracy and various forms of social order. Republic is non-monarchical (no royalty with absolute capricious power). The word often has no applied function in nations like North Korea and some old relics of the former Warsaw Pact nations, dictatorships.
If political parties are banned other than the single ruling party and voters can choose from a predetermined pool, is that a democracy? Gerrymandering is anti-democratic because the minority guarantees their continued, oppressive rule over the far greater majority. Governments formed by cheating are usually corrupt and unjust. Rome is an easy example of various forms of governance that changed to best meet the challenging situations. The US is not even close to being a democracy because one vote, one value doesn't exist.
@@mcullet2 we have that value….in the state elections and local ones as well. I actually would propose state electoral colleges. Look at New York. NYC and Albany Democrats control the state. The rural regions are left out, which encompasses a massive area.
@@kyleg8098 Hi Kyle. Dirt skews the value of any vote. There are different voting systems in practice. If your vote is worth 1/40th of mine, I believe that is unfair to you and vice versa. As I understand it, there are thousands of different electoral systems at play across America. I think that's nuts and yet there appears little appetite for a single robust (apolitical) process to elect people.
Voting is compulsory in some countries while it's like turning water into wine just to vote in lots of countries like the USA. Personally, it is hardly a mandate if only 40% vote and a winner gets 21% support from the population. There were no earth-shattering fraudulent votes. There is a Mount Olympus sized pile of evidence of Trump muscling people to change results in his favour. Most come from his mouth.
Too many people believe gravity goes up. No proof will change their belief: it's this insanity that is dangerous regardless of who wins an election. I've been really disappointed by election results. But without court acceptable evidence, I get behind whoever won. We have got to look to the next election and bring costed policies before the electorate and persuade enough people to vote for one or another candidate. America fought against the world's most powerful superpower of the time to elect a government rather than bow before some king. Trump is behaving as though he owned the presidency. No one owns it except the American people. He got fired for good reason. His solace is that he was given the second-highest votes in US history. He ignores this achievement because he's both a terrible winner and a terrible loser. Mike
They are defensive because their interpretation of the CONSTITUTION was not impartial.
It's not about their interpretation of the constitution. I don't know how they interpret the Constitution in part because the decisions they hand down have so little to do with the Constitution it's hard to make the connection. If they don't like criticism they should actually refer to portions of the Constitution and explain how those portions of the Constitution justify these partisan decisions. Until and unless they start doing that I shall continue to believe that what the six justices are doing is strictly partisan and has very little to do with legal interpretation of the Constitution.
@@SetemkiaFawn 100%
how do it wasn't impartial?
@@robinsss Read the constitution, then look at the 'justices' decisions.
@@margotpreston i have read it and i agree with some decisions like citizens united and McDonald V Chicago
and i disagree with other decisions
in the last 50 years the court has ruled against the democrats and against the republicans
so of all the branches of government it is the closest to being unbiased
If the feel bad then they should have spoken up when Merrick Garland wasn't allowed a seat yet 3 trump justices got jamed through
Elections have consequences
Denied by the democratically elected Senate.
Especially Coney Barrett after the Republicans (such as Graham) swore up and down (after refusing to confirm Garland) that no Supreme Court nominee would be confirmed in an election year.
@@nomore6167 Leftists keep whining about what Republicans said or didn't say like they make the rules. The rules are very simple. The Democratically elected SENATE decides if a Supreme Court justice is confirmed. You can cry all you want about what some politicians said or didn't say.. of course they lie or make up their own realities, but the rules remain the same. Why you are really crying is because the Democratically Elected senate refused the nomination.
If Obama wanted someone confirmed all he had to do was supply a name the Senate would approve... pretty simple really.
@@crocodile2006 Led (at the time) by a capricious Senator elected by less than 1.5% of the population of the U.S. Yes, capricious, when his stated reason for holding up the approval *process* in Garland's case was tossed out the window with less than a month to spare in Barrett's case.
😁If the Supremes are so politically neutral, why did Mitch McConnell and others bend over backwards to keep Democrats off the bench?😁
Why are you insulting Diana Ross, Mary Wilson and Florence Ballard because they were THE SUPREMES. The people that currently set on America's highest bench are more like a MOTLEY CRUE.
@Liam Neesons not another new troll account🖕.
Just like Diana Ross blocked Mary Wilson, Moscow Mitch blocked Obama 😂 So much supreme drama!
@@nonamegame9857 Sad, but true!
@Liam Neesons Can always pack the court. Needs to happen ASAP
Their gaslighting makes the point.
@@toreyneely9181Y u here then? U trolls amaze me. U serm to have forever time--tome to listem to ur own trash and then time to listen to everything here and comment. Daddy money, bed bound or trolling by wage? I say, lighten ur load and stay with Faux New.
@@toreyneely9181 Go crawling back to Fox. Your channel took their propaganda cues straight from Goebbels himself.
@@toreyneely9181 They may veer off onto the shoulder now and then but they don't just choose to drive in the ditch all the time like Fox non-News.
@@toreyneely9181 I'm so grateful that the majority of American people have not fallen for that fascist trick.
But please keep parroting your fascist orange leader...
Why should Americans not show disdain for the Supreme Court - look at their decisions and know they are no longer credible nor trustworthy.
Mitch McConnell is sitting on the stage reminding Amy Comey Barrett that she is beholden to him.
"The court" has damaged itself as an "independant institution". They are NOT behaving as an independant institution.
If justices have to defend themselves then they are losing the argument.
No, its just the dumb left having a problem with anything they do.
They lost the minute diaper don appointed the first one.
@@Bruh-hw8sy I love how you asked a question in another thread to act as if you were so sanguine. And here you are back to your true troll self
@@Bruh-hw8sy
Your account is barely three weeks old, and you have almost two thousand comments on this channel alone. That's pathetic. You don't get to call anyone dumb.
There isn’t even an attempt to look impartial with a lot of these Justices and Amy Barrett is the worst example.
@Yooootube Oh, many of those babies will still die in Texas, make no mistake. Republicans are NOT pro-life; they're just upset about not getting to torture the baby before it's killed. Don't fool yourself that Texas is going to take responsibility and be the adult in the room. They will experience a boom in demand for social services and quickly cut off everyone they can, leaving with nothing those babies they loved SO much they had to force the woman to give birth to a child neither she nor the state can or will care for. Those babies will die from hunger and homelessness, from heat when their electricity is shut off, from thirst when their water is shut off, from preventable diseases because they've been on a waiting list for a medical card for years, and from abusive boyfriends the mother is forced to shack up with because there's no way on Earth she could afford to live on her own with a child without benefits. If the "baby" makes it through the deprivation of their childhood, they'll be subjected to the harsh and abusive Texas school system (read: school-to-prison pipeline) and likely end up in prison because of the behavioral problems caused largely by the rank deprivation of their youth and the inability of most single mothers to adequately care for their children (poverty and fatherlessness are at the root of a LOT of behavioral issues). Then, after being dehumanized and physically and emotionally tortured in Texas' for-profit prison system for years, at least some of those "babies" will likely get shanked or commit suicide due to the utter hopeless despair of their lives. This is what Republican "Pro-Life" looks like. They care NOTHING for the welfare of mother and child, or Texas would have social programs that put California to shame. They just want to force birth on unwilling mothers (many of whom were likely denied access to birth control, as well) and then shirk all responsibility toward those mothers (whose lives they've likely ruined, condemning many such mothers to work for minimum wage and be treated like garbage for the rest of their lives) and children (whom they also shirk responsibility towards, denying them access to safe and effective schooling, medical care, food, shelter, etc.). Republicans are only the "personal responsibility" party when it suits their political desires. When it doesn't, they're very much a "not my responsibility" party.
@@Quagthistle Well done. The most concise and honest assessment of the situation ever written.
Matt M "... Amy Conan Barrett is the worse ..." The make up of this Court was the product of the Mitch McConnell's design. He is not concerned with Right To Life. McConnell's interest is in Packing a Federal Judicial System with CORRUPTED CORPORATE LACKEYS (ie. McConnell/Koch Bros and the SCOTUS Decision: Citizens United vs Federal Election Commission).
The Hypocrisy of the comments made by the Pro Life Contingent is Visible in their refusal to Support the "BUILD BACK BETTER" Act or the HR 1 2021 "FOR THE PEOPLE". Millions of Children need quality child care, safe after school care, quality dentistry, health care, adequate housing yet the focus never goes to the care and protection of these children, EVER. THE HYPOCRISY is RANCID.
It's hard to do a worse job than Thomas or Alito.
@@brahmburgers Reply from Kavanaugh "hold my beer"
One Justice per each Federal District is long overdue. No Representation for half the country is atrocious.
I like when Chris gets animated like this because he's literally channeling how we all feel about this constant stupidity that has become our reality.
Only those who hate this country would approved what is happening at our southern border.
Hey Amy, if you want to prove the court is not a bunch of "partisan hacks", then prove it to America by upholding Roe v. Wade.
She could only prove it by resigning her illegitimate seat on the bench. She is unqualified and the direct result of the most blatant hypocritical power grab since...well, Bush v Gore, I guess. Fancy that.
@@marlinbundo2409 I do want to agree, but at the same time, she was nominated to the court by Trump. It's not like she cheated her way into it, Trump cheated her into it. So I really don't know where I stand on her resigning because of what Trump did, but I understand both sides.
@@FtanmoOfEtheirys if you want to overthrow democracy and you appoint me the king of the new monarchy, i have a choice: i can either accept the offer or decline it. If I accept, I am complicit in ending the democracy. When Amy accepted the nomination she implicitly approved of and accepted the outrageous and harmful tactics the republicans employed to bestow it on her. She cannot wash her hands of that stain.
Gorsuch is an even worse offender, of course. But Barrett has her share of the blood on her hands
Now,you said it right ✅
@skrapyard444 what they deserve is a goddamned education
When the highest court in the land fails to uphold the Constitution, those Justices should be immediately removed from that court.
Exactly
You're so "spot on." This lack of action by SCOTUS correlates to " Dereliction of Duty!"
Can I ask you, is that what you think RBG did? Uphold the Costitution.
@@elroythegreat1590 The Constitution was written to be a protection, not a personal weapon. No single religious belief, personal or corporate greed should influence a decision. Yes, I do.
@@tmc6799 Thats weird, I was under the impression that she was the least constitutionalist of any of the modern day judges along with Sotomayor and Kagan.
Never in a million years did I think I would be so disgusted when I look at who's on the supreme Court determining our Fate. They are so entitled they are oblivious.
This is the most partisan bunch of supreme court justices in living memory.
Biden needs to expand the court.
Absolutely!
100 per cent!
Only want to expand the court when it disagrees with u. Typical dems
@UCJoRQKmYyEUCWi1bzYoCBHQ lol trump cry baby mike will sell you a pillow to cry in too lol
@@Bruh-hw8sy only when it disagrees with democracy,, not democrats.
Great judges wouldn’t be in Trump’s corner.
Or inflict limitations on the personal rights of any individual.
or sit by idle while the (D) holds political prisoners.
@@13bustah i heard Jan 6 prisoners are in solitary confinement is that true
@@mohamedsaid9416 One can only hope it is.
Thank you for this piece - it needed to be put out there.
The court needs to expand to either see twice as many cases or hear twice as many voices.
There is too much power concentrated in too little minds.
SCOTUS is hardly removed from politics. Just ask the women of Texas.
Or voters who are disenfranchised!
@@katherinejones850 how are they disenfranchised.....big adult talk here...don't just make crap up
@@kyleg8098 ...says the child. lol
@@curmudgeon1933 whoa…did the leftist have a brain meltdown?
And now Mississippi also.
I was starting to lose respect for the "Supremes" with the Hardwick decision in the 80's but I totally lost it with "Citizen's United". How could they possibly think that opening the flood gates for ever more money in elections was free speech is beyond me. It begs the question free speech for whom? This Court is terrible and I expect that President Biden will have to do something about it in his second term. Kudos to Chris for this piece.
What is the deal about shelving certain considerations to "The Second Term", in the first year of the first term. The President has a person for every role. Topics put on schedule, if approved, and tap or hire the individual that will head up the project and report in as needed. The push broom 🧹 in Congress should only be handled by the House Janitorial staff, not the Reps/Sens on the floor. So much time spent constipating the proletariat and not enuf time DISIMPACTING the bowels of politics. Nuthin' a good Olde Colonoscopy won't fix.
Citizen's United. : The worst Supreme Court decision ever. Of course it allows bribery to be justified / that is legalized. They hide behind the cloak of reasoning that it is free speech. HELLO !!!!!! Free speech is the written or spoken word expressed and communicated via language. A political contribution / or gift is a bribe because it is assumed to be a quid pro quo. Now in response to this some will say one needs to prove "intent" to draw that conclusion. To which I respond - not necessarily so. Just define it as such. Namely, a political contribution / gift to an individual holding public office is a bribe. The quid pro quo is assumed. Conclusion : The only honest government is one whose campaign is publicly financed.
In his second term hahahahahahahahaha 🤣🤣🤣😂😂 this guy will be lucky to get through his first term have you seen his approval rating lately obviously not but I’ll clue you in its 3 points lower than trump at this point of their presidencies but good luck with that logic especially after more states pass election integrity laws.
@@milycome I agree with everything. Which begs for the obvious conclusions: get rid of Citizens United, so dark money, and if the current administration does nothing, only vote for people who aren’t backed by lobbies, big corporations, banks and super PACs. And being a foreigner, from what I can see from here, it means the progressives and people like Sheldon Whitehouse (who keeps denouncing the maneuvers of those dark, hidden influences) or Katie Porter (and her famous white board).
@milleycome while I agree citizens United is up there, it’s not the worst decision. Dred Scott v Sanford was by far the worst Supreme Court decision ever passed down in American history. It’s decision would lead to even greater tensions between the north and south and shortly culminated in the secession of the south and subsequent bombarding of ft sumpter.
The justices need term limits 5 years and they're out.
Criminals should not be allowed to put justices in the Supreme Court
If they don't like what people are rightfully saying about them, then they can quit and let moral judges replace them.
Yeah, that shouldn't even be a problem as - according to themselves - their successors are not going to be political.
Mass resigning to regain the Americans trust in the court would be the logical step if they meant what they whined.
Their approval rating is in question because there are a bunch of accused sexual predators on the highest court in the land.
Isn't their Republican morals what got them the job? I wish I was joking...
That's the stupidest thing I've heard since the last time I heard the Kamala or jim crow Joe speak.
Are you able to walk and breathe at the same time?
ozzrob, I’d be content to simply replace them with COMPETENT Justices, and let them leave with their imaginary “moral high ground.” (But we’re still going to continue investigating who paid off 🤡Brett 🍺Kavanaugh’s staggering debt he incurred when he bought $200,000 in “baseball tickets.”)
Alito and Barrett are fascists in robes. Thomas and Kavanaugh are beyond fascist. Why did Souter leave again?
Anthony Kennedy was probably blackmailed to clear the swing vote tbh. ACB was just icing on the cake for the fascists.
My apologies for neglecting to mention the execrable Neil Gorsuch
In 2016, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said: "One of my proudest moments was when I told Obama, 'You will not fill this Supreme Court vacancy,'" and in 2017, he said, "Apparently there's yet a new standard now, which is not to confirm a Supreme Court nominee at all. I think that's something the American people simply will not tolerate." - Snopes (Claim acknowledged as "True")
Time to add 2 more justices to the court….
And take away 2
“The court is not a bunch of partisan hacks” - Barrett the partisan hack
And who was rattled through the system SO fast by the federalist society that she was put up as a judge and then to the SC within a single presidential term.
She **absolutely** knows she is a federalist puppet and she knows the country sees it too.
Her years on the SC are tainted.
While she's standing inside of a building dedicated to McConnell with him looking on.
just the majority
It’s so awesome that she’s going to be on the court for another 30 years!
@@Kingfisher1215 she took the place of RBG and she is no RBG. May God have her in his arms for all she did for us all.
Why should Americans not show disdain for the Supreme Court - look at their decisions and know they are no longer credible nor trustworthy.
They're a joke at this point.
What decisions were apparently so bad that you hate them?
Cultists in the Supreme Court.
@@Bruh-hw8sy Probably their most recent one where they basically threw up their hands and pretended they couldn't intervene in Texas' abortion law even though it was passed in the most illegitimate light imaginable? The thing basically says no one can do anything to it, because no one in the government is responsible for it.....
Definitely a time for them to step in and say "Yeah, this is a bunch of BS". Especially if they are as bipartisan as they say they are.
Exactly we can clearly see where they were pulled from and how they were picked.. 3 of the latest are the absolute worst. Especially ammy Conwoman barret or whatever her name is
Life tenure was envisioned as insulating from factional positions. The framers never saw McConnell coming.
My former professor, with whom I served as an assistant, called this one when Garland became Gorsuch, or Garsuch. Roberts must be going crazy as he has lost control.
If the justices don't like being thought of as partisan hacks, maybe they shouldn't act like partisan hacks.
So simple, you'd think if they wanted to prove how inbiased they are, they would toss a few bones to the majority who support Roe v wade.
Why should Americans not show disdain for the Supreme Court - look at their decisions and know they are no longer credible nor trustworthy.
Clarence Thomas's relationship with the Kochs was raising eyebrows more than a decade ago.
@@elliottboomsluiter7214 Actually, Roe v Wade remains the law of the land. The USSR and ultra capitalism are two unstable economic extremes. The US is failing to stabilize the concentration of wealth. Corporations are where true power resides. Democracy is incompatible with corporate kleptocracy.
@@AndyM_323YYY His attitude toward the women he outranked has been known for about 30. He shouldn't have accepted the nomination, because this is the only legacy it gave him. Character matters in government, and that whole mess showed how common he really is. Koch shouldn't be a surprise to anyone after that.
Well done Chris Hayes. You are quickly becoming a favorite of mine on MSNBC.
And the sheep goes baaah
Now go analyze the actual Poll........
Y'all are triggered 😂
@@caronadams4486 Seriously?
0:54 Seconds in - Including the base chart.
Now look up the actual poll and root down into the data.
As usual it is driven by a particular parties majority opinions. imagine that.
One of mine too!
Perfectly said!!! No one 'should' be above the law, nor above being criticized.
If they are only human. Fire One off them and get sued for wrongful dismissal and then see how human they are.
Thank you Chris Hayes! Keep speaking truth to lies and falsehoods.
yet you named not one.......fan boy leftist
@@kyleg8098 That's because there are way too many to list.
@@vernicethompson4825 start with one….all feelings
@@kyleg8098 What are you referring to by "all feelings"? The facts do not care about your feelings.
@@vernicethompson4825 you have zero facts since the left can’t cite the Constitution
This court is a cringe joke. NO RESPECT!
It's become BIPARTISANSHIP and a joke
@Yooootube because some people aren't all about themselves, you selfish git.
Dems have had their way for many years in the supreme court and we had to live with it and now its the other way around ill tell you the same . DEAL WITH IT 🙃
@@frankluna85 except 'the dems' haven't, and all it would take for you simpleton to have found that out would have been to look at citizens united...FURTHER traitor, because yes that is what you are. the supreme court isn't supposed to BE for dems or repugs. it's SUPPOSED to rule on law for ALL citizens. for the welfare, security, and safety of ALL CITIZENS you partisan traitor. not parties, not political affiliations, not ANYTHING else but the law and how it affects every citizen in the united states.
i can see you flunked civics class...though more likely you never even made it to a grade where it could be taught LMAO.
@@frankluna85 Thats not true it was a balanced court for many years and now its corporate city.
Chris, great reporting. This is so important. Thank you.
They may be scared, but not enough to change anything.
When I listened to a Breyer interview, I was struck by how arrogant and privileged he sounded. It’s so disappointing. I would rather have our collective fates decided by educated working class people. I don’t trust them with my fate. Or my children’s. I don’t have the kind of funds that can buy safety and security in this country.
Regular people don't usually have the means to become a judge, let alone in the SC
Was that when he was on the Stephen Colbert show? It was insane how flighty and disingenuous he was with his answers.
Sooo....the duck starts whining that people are saying that he looks like a duck? More people need to realize who the "sponsors" of these judges are***Federalist Society***
Alito describes the Federalist Society perfectly at 3:45. His objection to the portrayal of the court as "a dangerous cabal that resorts to sneaky and improper methods to get its ways" is more like a statement of the obvous.
*obvious
@Terry Harker says the troll account 🥱🖕
So
@Terry Harker The left has been take. Over by the loonies that's why. Open borders, out of control spending, teachers unions, wokeness running rampant and gross negligence and incompetency.
I love the way you break your news pieces down, Christ. YOu're right on POINT. Thank you so much. Keep up the amazing work!
Its time for term limits on supreme court justices and congress. We must demand this!!!
So they act like partisan hacks and then they get mad because they are all called partisan hacks? That tracks. The truth hits everybody.
Term limits for Supreme Court
Most definitely, the sooner the better!
I believe a maximum age is preferable
No because that just gives the gop and their right-wing corporate donors even more ability to 'game' the system since they'd know even further in advance when to push for their next SC patsy.
@@B_Bodziak means they will just appoint even younger judges who will be thinking about their next job after retiring. Bad idea
@@capitalb5889 It apparently does not work like that in other countries. In Australia, there is a maximum age of 70 for all judges, including Supreme Court, which tends to a centrist position as a result. And there needs to be a minimum age as well, 35 like the President, in order to avoid the issue you suggest. A maximum term is therefore 35 years, which is long enough to lead the justices to avoid political posturing.
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE keep it up the supreme court appointees are not on any fairness of the law or we the American people
It's time for term limits for SCOTUS and no filibusters for appointments to that court.
Friendly reminder that republicans pre-screen any nominees they put up for the Supreme Court, not to ensure they are free of political bias, but because they absolutely are not free of political bias.
Why should Americans not show disdain for the Supreme Court - look at their decisions and know they are no longer credible nor trustworthy.
Democrats do the same dummy.
Democrats should create an organisation to counter the Heritage Foundation which is responsible for these most recent partisan justices as well as many more unqualified federal district court judges.
That's what you get when all the G.O.P. nominees are all approved by the Federalist society a G.O.P organziation.
Anyone that's been paying attention to this is in no way surprised by their GOP bias, Implying that they aren't is sheer lunacy.
Why should Americans not show disdain for the Supreme Court - look at their decisions and know they are no longer credible nor trustworthy.
Disdain may not be the right word. Many may be questioning whether this court could aid in implementing an authoritarian system within the next 10 years.
Chris is doing a really good job of pointing out the things the congress and the supreme court and many others, don't think anybody can see them doing! Keep it up!!! Justice takes a long time, but we can see it coming, slowly.
Bringing a case before this Court is like going to a poker game in a dimly lit basement already knowing that the dealer is playing with a marked deck.
Trump and McConnell pulled Barrett out timed just like an abortion is effected?
Its now the Politicised Court of the United States (PCOTUS).
Another pillar of the USA's construct crumbling due to in-balance?
Misogyny actualised is men compelling women to bear a rapists brutality unto them? A life sentence for a victim?
Its obvious that its only those who can't afford to buy an in-house abortion must suffer?
Except people aren't playing cards and the lighting is good.
Great analogy.
Yes!
Or it’s just finally getting back to American Values and thankfully moving away from liberals “values”.
You wouldn’t believe how many anti-gun hypocrites are claiming Texas’s law is unconstitutional. But be careful of calling a democrat out for their hypocrisy.. their so sick of it that they invented a new word in attempt to push attention away from their hypocrisy. They call it “whataboutism”. Just imagine how big of a hypocrite you’d have to be to use that term.
The fact that the court has to publicly defend itself is condemnation enough. It should never have reached this point.
I would still like to know how much Anthony Kennedy sold his seat for Beer Boy Brett to be installed.
GOOD REPORTING 🙏🙏🙏
Seems they want the position with none of the scrutiny or responsibility.
Just 1 of the dangers of lifetime appointments with no accountability.
Exactly like their patron Donald Trumplethinskin.
Why should Americans not show disdain for the Supreme Court - look at their decisions and know they are no longer credible nor trustworthy.
SCOTUS should not be a lifetime appointment. This needs to change. Justices should be required to serve 20 years in a lower federal court before a SCOTUS nomination. Expand to 13 justices with rotating tenure. Every year a new SCOTUS justice is appointed to replace the longest serving member, who may retire or go back to serve on a lower court. This means justices will typically get 13 years on SCOTUS. If a Justice dies during their tenure, the vacancy stays open until the next yearly presidential appointment. No more partisan fights over every vacancy.
Term limits on SC seats is an awful idea and would lead to even more partisan machinations by the conservative cult to get 'their guy' nominated.
Great thinking here!!
@@telectronix1368 There is no absolute term limit under this idea though.
Also 'remove the longest-serving SC judge' based not on their actual knowledge or actions in office is a truly bass ackwards idea.
@@telectronix1368 they do that anyway, at least with term limits, we don’t have to put up with 20+ years of a partisan crappy hack on the court. Personally, I think there should be term limits for Being a federal judge regardless. The minute they are nominated to a judgeship it becomes a 40 year max that they can be a federal judge. Example, nominated as a district judge, 10 years later moved up to appellate court for 20 years, gets nominated to SCOTUS, they can only serve 10 years more. Once nominated to SCOTUS their limit should be 15 years. In Amy’s case, who was nominated to the 7th district in 2017 and then SCOTUS, she’s currently 49 years old and theoretically could continue to be a partisan hack, overturning centuries of settled law for the next 40+ years. Look at decisions done by SCOTUS justices over the years, like their disgusting interpretation of the commerce clause, that averages 750,000 incarcerations a year for a non toxic, non fatal plant. A justice who’s only threat to loosing their power is death or impeachment (and we see how well that works with partisanship protection), has zero incentive to not rule on their personal belief vs interpretation of the law and constitution. At least with a term limit, we rotate the garbage.
In that note, I also think Term limits should apply to congress. 12 years house and 12 years senate. A 24 year career of bumming off the tax payer and reaping lobbyists bribes is more then enough. No one should be in that position for 50 years… don’t get me wrong, Don Young supports what he says he will support, gotta give him credit for that, but Fk 50 years… unreal!
Term limits NOW!
one of the first things we learn when becoming politically aware is just how owned most of the members of the court are.
To think that a life time member of SCOTUS, Alito, would belittle himself by crying wolf is downright pitiful. Justices should never, ever complain in public.
RBG said similar things sport. I’m sure you were all over it.
alito,thomas to name two justices are way past their experation date
@@Kingfisher1215 I suppose you think an elephant looks similar to an apple...
Why should Americans not show disdain for the Supreme Court - look at their decisions and know they are no longer credible nor trustworthy.
The SC should be like the Queen of England : «Never complain, never explain. »
SCOTUS: *smiles and high-fives as it becomes packed and politicized*
Americans: "You're a joke, SCOTUS. We need term limits and more justices."
SCOTUS: *surprised Pikachu face*
Why should Americans not show disdain for the Supreme Court - look at their decisions and know they are no longer credible nor trustworthy.
I've been shouting & commenting about term limits for Federal Judges, Supreme Court Justices, congresspersons & senators since I began paying attention to politics: many years ago.
It should be & likely is unconstitutional for term limits not to be set for elected & appointed government officials. I'll argue that case any day of any week.
Absolutely.
@@lalo6564 No it's not because they arent credible it's because the left no longer has the majority and they now use the Constitution as a basis for their decisions and it's no longer political.
ACTIONS speak louder than WORDS!
Thank you for your journalism Mr. Hayes!
This shows more of the potential partisan views of a SUPREME COURT JUDGE! This only demotes their credibility and status!
Blatant partisan hack doesn’t like being called a partisan hack. Go figure.
Is you know, that thing partisan?
@@gratefulfredly8643 ??
The damage to the “independent” institution is being done by people like Alito and Co.
The more they talk, the lower their approval will be. Why are they hawking books and talking trash? Supreme Court Justices should not speak except through written decisions on the cases that come in front of them, and they should not hold shares in any business interests.
That's the problem... their own decisions are speaking badly of them.
We should be calling them the Supremely Partisan Court.
Until a man can have a baby by himself, no man should ever be able to have a say on reproductive rights. That's like women saying that men can't get a vasectomy or that they have to get one. I know that doesn't compare at all, but that's as close as I can get to the hypocrisy of men telling women what they can or can't do with their own bodies.
@Bitemegently Lost abortion is not a right
I agree and thank you for saying so. As to a better comparison, I dunno if this will suffice, but I remember, from when I was a teenaged girl, a lot of young men (boys, really) getting drafted & then traumatized, wounded, and/or killed in Vietnam all because of really bad decisions getting made for them due to no better reason than politics. It's really effed up that we have leaders who are fine with using young men as cannon fodder, women as sexual commodities, and, as the pandemic has shown us, the lives of older people and children as totally inconsequential. So many of the same people who would cry a river over the loss of someone else's fetus have no problem sending all our children - who are already BORN and HERE - to school unprotected against the deadliest virus we've seen in at least a century.
Every child ever born had half its dna from a man. Why should women be the only one with a stake in the child. It's absurd.
@ the constitution
@@graceporter9853 where exactly?
A lot more people, media, and other institutions need to be calling out the Supreme Court! A lot more.
It still wouldn't do anything since they can't be fired.
Great segment Chris! Keep it up!!
That shadow docket definition fits the SCOTUS perfectly.
That justice said it just right.
I'm so glad the courts are now finally getting some scrutiny. This really worries conservatives. Trust me!
Why should Americans not show disdain for the Supreme Court - look at their decisions and know they are no longer credible nor trustworthy.
I love Alito's projection right there! He sounds exactly like your average GOP flake.
Why should Americans not show disdain for the Supreme Court - look at their decisions and know they are no longer credible nor trustworthy.
Agreed!!!🤬🥺😣🥺😖🤬😳🤢🤮💩
Lifetime terms for the Supreme Court is absolutely stoooooooooooooooooopid!
The supreme court lost me with Citizens United... they like the easy money as much as the politicians.....
Maybe somebody should reiterate to them that it is their sworn mission to defend the Constitution and any action that attacks a Constitutional right or amendment IS their job. It's not 'politics'.
Thank you!
Pass an amendment to the constitution. Go ahead and try.
Why should Americans not show disdain for the Supreme Court - look at their decisions and know they are no longer credible nor trustworthy.
Republicans have already shown that their mission is to destroy the Constitution, so their puppets sure won't defend it.
Right. They are NOT doing their job at all.
Justice Barrett needs to go back to law school and Justice Kavanaugh needs to go back to his bar stool where he learned that “HE REALLY LIKES BEER”!
No, Kavanagh needs a permanent seat in the drunk tank. He'd fit right in.
Those two lied through their teeth during their confirmation hearings. It was a complete sham for both, who were going to be stuffed into a Justice’s robes no matter how much shady past was uncovered
They can be removed from office by impeachment and conviction of high crimes and misdemeanors.
The DUBIOUS circumstances surrounding some of the Appointments and the Court's utter indifference to these actions speaks volumes about how far removed from Politics the Court is.
Why is there no compulsory age limit or term limit on judges? It seems to me that there should be a regular refreshing of the judges. Perhaps a ten year limit on tenure combined with a maximum age of 75 could be appropriate. By age 65 any nominee's record should be clear enough to determine fitness and ten years, if appointed younger, limits the impact of any damage they could do.
Criticism pointing out immorality or criminality is only threatening when it's TRUE. If they're really above politics, than 'sticks and stones' & such.
Methinks they do protest too much
Time to expand the Supreme Court to 15.
I remember the 70's drive to impeach Justice Warren Burger...'Cause he came out pro most civil rights issues...Not new...
Of course SCOTUS is whining. That trait is a rightwing strength.
People with integrity don't need to whine.
@@UkeCan1 Correct! "Integrity" is not in a fascists lexicon.
When conservatives talk with their mouths, out comes grievances, grievances, grievances. I don't listen to them anymore.
@@ComesTheLight Smart!👍 They've played the role of "Victim" too many times and no one is believing them anymore. Like the boy who cried wolf.
Very well done. The court has actually been on the reactionary side of history FAR MORE than on the progressive side. If you just look at cases that would tend to weaken the power of money, they are almost ALWAYS on the wrong side. The Cts. actions to uphold the "freespeach" of money in various campaign finance cases and to denigrate voting rights taken together are rather shocking.
Breyer, Coney Barrett, and the others need to remember the ONE THING that it of the utmost importance -- their behavior and their judgements are supposed to be based exclusively on the law. They are supposed to be completely apolitical. Requiring the Supreme Court justices to be completely apolitical is a position that everyone, including both major political parties, *should* be able to support.
I feel that way exactly!!!!! They are not bipartisan but nothing but a Trump Court!
One of the justices commented earlier this summer that maybe the court is not as supreme as people think it is.
ohhhh the morons are out today!
The Federalist Society appointees.
It's The McConnell Trump Federalist Society Court
Some of these judges are on the WRONG SIDE OF THE BENCH.
No more life long appointments. Having politicians appoint judges is corrupt and a 3rd World move.
"The opening of the Mitch McConnell Center in Louisville."
...AAAAAND I just threw up.
BOYCOTT the Mitch McConnell center in louisville
Wasn't Clarence Thomas' wife funding the busloads being delivered to the Capitol on January 6th?
Yep!
Really! Interesting! Can this be proved?
@@katherinejones850 there's a lot written about it around that time. I would recommend looking for stories written right after the insurrection. The story broke a week or two after.
We need to get to the bottom of how he came to the court, who paid his debts etc.
The DOJ should apoint judges not politicians.