this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2024
451 points (98.7% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2441 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Reminder that getting control of the house and senate could make stuff like this potentially get through

This proposal is not only one that expands the number of justices over time but alter things like the court's shadow docket, require justices to release tax returns, and more

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Most of the fix should be much simpler. Pay them each $600k, indexed to inflation.

That should make them pretty resistant to bribery. Your quality of life really doesn't improve much past that $600k point, even if you're maintaining two houses. (And the justices aren't representatives. They don't need a second house.)

But yes, their tax returns should be public as well.

[–] JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yes but once you make that much, then amassing more money turns into a game of how you can fuck over the most people to increase your value. See: every billionaire in existance.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

When all your planes come back with bullet holes at points A, B, and C, where should you add additional armor?

[–] JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Survivorship bias doesn't really work when there are no survivors lol

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Billionaires are a subset where they've already self-selected for extreme greed. Hopefully Supreme Court justices would be closer to a normal population.

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 3 points 2 months ago

Supreme Court justices have very little in common with average Americans.

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago

Our recent experience with Trump should have made it painfully clear that rich people can be bribed too.

So no, we don't need to pay them more. We need to send them to jail if the accept bribes. And the law that enables that should be passed with a note that it is not subject to judicial review by the Supreme Court.