While obviously great news, can the SC please pick a lane and stick to it with the precedence that they themselves create? For all the various (obvious illegal but who knows) firings there seems to be a completely different decision. No he can’t fire you so you’re safe (for now), no he can’t fire you but we’re gonna allow it anyways (for now), no he can’t fire you but it happened so oopsie poopsie. I know Thomas said they don’t care about precedent any more, but at least be a little consistent with your day to day rulings. It’s utter chaos and I can’t believe how stressful this must be for the lower court judges that are trying to actually maintain law in this country.
this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2025
115 points (100.0% liked)
politics
26793 readers
2591 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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I think the real criteria is how much effect it will have on those corrupt assholes' wealth.
They know blowing up the fed will make them immediately worse off, so they don't allow it. They know that the mass firing of union-protected workers will weaken public unions, so they let it go through.
They're on the take and one of the primary drivers of the reactionary political project.
They know that the mass firing of union-protected workers will weaken public unions, so they let it go through.
If the consequence of mass-firing union workers isn't the courts reinstating them, then the consequences simply become wildcat strikes, sympathy strikes, breaking scabs' kneecaps, etc. instead.
Somebody needs a reminder that things like the National Labor Relations Act and Executive Order 10988 were created to protect them from us, not the other way around.
Apparently they cannot 🤷♂️
can the SC please pick a lane and stick to it with the precedence that they themselves create?
A normal Supreme Court? Yes. This Supreme Court? I think we all know the answer to that.
They'll let Trump get away with almost anything, but they know letting him mess with the Fed will hurt their 401ks, and that is where they draw the line.
Oh, once he starts fucking with rich people’s money they grow a spine?
It's what got rid of Dan Snyder from the NFL...
And put Bernie Maddof in prison.
So is the plan to get their investments sorted and out of the US during the 3 month window they just created, only to allow these morons to fuck everything up in the new year?