Republican dominated United States Supreme Court prove they’re Incompetent, Unfit, Lawless, Corrupt, Political Hack Politicians in Robes by protecting Trump, plus other horrible decisions going back to the 2000 election.

We’ve seen how the 2023 – 2024 GOP / Republican House of Representatives has been to worst and most dysfunctional in history. The same is true of the Republican dominated United States Supreme Court. They’re unfit to hold Public Office

 

Retired Conservative Judge Luttig blasts SCOTUS for avoiding ‘key question’ at the heart of Trump immunity case

 

‘All the king’s men’: Supreme Court ‘openly colluding’ with Trump on immunity

Chris Hayes on the Trump immunity arguments: “The Radical Right Wing Republican justices seemed to be almost openly colluding with Donald Trump, reconceptualizing the president as a sort of lawless dictator and just ignoring all constitutional, textual, and historical evidence that points in the other direction.” Jamelle Bouie joins to discuss.

 

The GOP Supreme Court should move into the RNC headquarters

Presidents deserving some form of immunity is an argument that Radical Right Wing Republican Supreme Court Justices are apparently open to, as revealed by Donald Trump’s immunity claim Supreme Court arguments. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) slams the Republican justices who seem to support this argument.

 

One vote from the end of democracy’: Weissmann sounds alarm on SCOTUS immunity case

 

Trump presidential immunity case exposes Radical Right Wing Republican Supreme Court’s true colors

For many observers, the Supreme Court’s treatment of Donald Trump’s presidential immunity claim has revealed just how far Radical Right Wing Republican justices will go to accommodate Trump’s interests. Leah Litman, professor at the University of Michigan Law School and co-host of the “Strict Scrutiny” podcast, talks with Alex Wagner about notable differences in how the court deals with cases involving Donald Trump.

 

Law & Order Democrat Justice Jackson raises a red flag on the idea of a president with no legal liability

Law & Order Democrat Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson made the intelligent argument that making the president above any criminal accountability for crimes they may commit in office presents a greater risk of mushrooming criminal activity in the White House than the “chilling effect” that concerns Donald Trump’s legal team and their sympathetic justices.

 

The Republican dominated United States Supreme Court is obstructing justice and helping Trump get re-elected by delaying his immunity appeal trial date so his criminality isn’t exposed in a courtroom until AFTER the 2024 election. This delay tactic which is beneficial to Trump, is more proof that they’re Corrupt Radical Right Wing Partisan Politicians in Robes.

 

Murder, coup, bribery: Trump team stands by extreme hypotheticals in Supreme Court immunity case

Arguments before the Supreme Court on “presidential immunity” and the lengths to which Radical Right Wing “justices” devoted to Donald Trump and the Republican Party went to accommodate Trump’s audacious argument that he should be impervious from prosecution for his role in the January 6 insurrection.

 

Partisan hacks’: Justice Thomas and Alito show their true colors in Trump Immunity arguments

Zoe Lofgren, Democratic Congresswoman from California and Dahlia Lithwick, Senior Editor for Slate, Ian Bassin, Executive Director of Protect Democracy, and Maya Wiley, former U.S. Attorney join Nicolle Wallace on Deadline White House with reaction to the Radical Right Wing Republican Supreme Court hearing Trump’s immunity claim, calling into question whether Justice Thomas should have recused himself given what his wife was involved with regarding the plot to overturn the 2020 Election.

 

Supreme Court declines to expedite appeal in Trump immunity dispute

Special counsel Jack Smith requested the court immediately take up former President Donald Trump’s claim of immunity from prosecution in his federal election interference case.

 

‘The fix is in’: Coup trial delay reveals Supreme Court ‘in cahoots’ with Trump

“No one needs to wonder anymore whether this right-wing court will—audaciously, flagrantly, in front of the whole nation—use their power to run the clock out so that Donald Trump faces no legal accountability,” says Chris Hayes on the Supreme Court taking up the Trump immunity case, further delaying his Jan. 6 trial.

 

‘Historic proof’: If the Supreme Court wanted to move quickly it could

Chris Hayes looks at the historic proof that a quick decision the Supreme Court is possible. “They can still—if they want to—move very quickly. It is still in their power. And no one should let them off the hook on this massively important and weighty question before the nation,” says Hayes.

 

Liz Cheney urges the Supreme Court to stop aiding Donald Trump’s delay tactics

Anthony Scaramucci, former Trump White House Communications Director, Charlie Sykes MSNBC Columnist, and Basil Smikle join Nicolle Wallace on Deadline White House with reaction to Liz Cheney’s most recent comments calling out the Radical Right Wing Republican Supreme Court for aiding and abetting Donald Trump and his legal team’s delay tactics by taking up the issue of Presidential Immunity.

 

Maddow shreds ‘cravenness’ of Supreme Court delaying Trump trial

“This is B.S.—you were doing this as a dilatory tactic to help your political friend,” says Rachel Maddow on the Supreme Court agreeing to hear the Trump immunity argument, delaying his coup trial. “And for you to say that this is something that the Court needs to decide because it’s something that’s unclear in the law is just flagrant bullpucky.”

 

‘Republicans in robes’: Supreme Court critics see politics behind action on Trump immunity case

For critics of the current Supreme Court, assembled by Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell for the purpose of fulfilling a Republican political agenda, the decision to take up Donald Trump’s presidential immunity appeal after an inexplicable delay confirms their cynicism about the court’s political motivations. Mark Joseph Stern, senior writer for Slate, and Elie Mystal, justice correspondent for The Nation, discuss with Alex Wagner.

 

The Supreme Court is suppressing evidence

After the Supreme Court agrees to hear Donald Trump’s immunity claim, Harvard Law professor Laurence Tribe joins MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell to discuss the impact this could have on Donald Trump’s reelection. Professor Tribe says that this is “not the way a country that is concerned to preserve the rule of law and constitutional democracy would proceed.”

 

‘We all know what he did’: Psaki reacts to Supreme Court delaying Trump criminal trial

Jen Psaki explains how the Supreme Court tipped the scales of justice in favor of Donald Trump by delaying his DC trial and why voting will be the most powerful antidote to the threat of a second Trump term. Psaki explains, “We all know what he did. There is no doubt about the basic facts of any of these cases, really. So while the American people deserve trials before election day, we shouldn’t need them to know the danger he poses to democracy and to our rights.”

 

Trump asks Supreme Court not to act on election interference immunity issue

Former President Donald Trump’s attorneys requested that the Supreme Court not intervene immediately on whether he is immune from federal prosecution in cases relating to actions he took challenging the 2020 presidential election results.

 

Harvard Law scholar: There is no ‘good reason for’ the Supreme Court to review Trump’s immunity case

President Biden and his campaign are fighting back against claims made about his mental fitness in Special Counsel Robert Hur’s report, and former President Donald is facing a gauntlet of court hearings and decisions in the coming weeks. Harvard Law professor emeritus Laurence Tribe joins Andrea Mitchell to discuss. “Donald Trump has another 11 hours within which to seek a stay of the decision of the DC Circuit, the unanimous decision, rejecting his extraordinary, extravagant and unprecedented claim of immunity. I don’t expect that the US Supreme Court will grant his stay,” Tribe tells Andrea. “There’s really no basis for it. It’s simply a delaying tactic. And I also don’t think there’s a good reason for the U.S. Supreme Court to grant review of the case.”

 

Majority of Americans want Trump trial verdicts before Election Day

 

Supreme Court warning SURGES into national spotlight

 

Trump is constantly being giving preferential treatment in Court and elsewhere. Attorney Marc Elias discusses how any other normal person would be thrown in jail if they behaved a fraction as outrageously as Trump.

 

Trump’s claims of “Election Interference” are LIES to deflect from his being held accountable for his many CRIMES of which he has been charged, arrested and will be prosecuted. Note how he’s constantly saying ‘it’s a disgrace to our country’ when he’s held accountable. This is how DICTATORS talk. It’s clear he thinks TRUMP = the United States of America and anyone who crosses him is an enemy of the entire country.

 

 

2000 ELECTION: BUSH V. GORE

Leading up to the 2000 election, Jeb Bush was the Republican Governor of the State of Florida and brother of the Republican Presidential candidate George W. Bush. Republican Secretary of State, Katherine Harris was also co-chair of Bush’s Florida campaign, clearly a conflict of interest in conducting a fair and impartial election.

Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris promised to “Deliver Florida” to George W. Bush as reported in numerous newspaper articles.

Secretary of State, Katherine Harris and Governor Jeb Bush had the motive and the means to make sure Florida’s decisive electoral votes were “delivered” to George W. Bush. They accomplished this by illegally purging thousands of black voters off of the Florida voter rolls, ensuring an unfair advantage to George W. Bush, as shown in the above video.

As shown in the “2000 Election Rigged for Bush” video, ChoicePoint / DBT was given a $4 million no-bid contract under the Jeb Bush administration which wrongly and illegally purged thousands of African Americans from the Florida voter rolls.

Jame Lee, Vice President of  Choicepoint / DBT testified to a panel called by US Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney that the State of Florida Division of Elections stated it only wanted 80% accuracy on the list.  In other words, to be identified as a convicted felon, one only need to have a similar name to that as someone listed on a Texas convicted felon’s list.

According to the Brennan Center for Justice “Florida registrants were purged from the rolls if 80 percent of the letters of their last names were the same as those of persons with criminal convictions. Those wrongly purged included Reverend Willie D. Whiting Jr., who, under the matching criteria, was considered the same person as Willie J. Whiting. Without specific guidelines for or limitations on the authority of election officials conducting purges, eligible voters are regularly made unnecessarily vulnerable”.

 

Antonin Scalia and his Radical Right Wing Republican majority of 5 “Justices” subverted democracy & engaged in partisan politics by stopping the 2000 election vote count. The above video explains the shocking details.

This caused George W. Bush to be installed as President. At the time the votes were stopped by the Supreme Court, there were only 154 votes separating Al Gore from George W. Bush.

With only 154 votes separating Al Gore from George W. Bush,  it’s easy to see how purging thousands of black voters being off of the Florida voter rolls rigged the 2000 election and handed it to George W. Bush on a Silver Platter.

If all of the illegally disqualified voters had been allowed to vote and all votes counted, the total votes would have decisively shown Al Gore to be the winner of the State of Florida and therefore the Presidency.

It was Jeb Bush’s illegal voter purge and Republicans who subverted Democracy by not allowing the votes to be counted that caused the installation of George W. Bush and the US to have a conservative majority in the Supreme Court.

 

Let’s not forget that Al Gore received 543,895 more votes than George W. Bush.  Al Gore was the majority of American’s choice for president so Democracy was violated.

 

SUPREME COURT GUTS VOTING RIGHTS ACT

Radical Right Wing Republican Supreme Court Guts Voting Rights Act

In 2013, the Radical Right Wing Republican Supreme Court issued one of the most consequential rulings in a generation in a case called Shelby county v Holder. In a 5-4 vote, the court struck down a formula at the heart of the Voting Rights Act, the landmark 1965 law that required certain states and localities with a history of discrimination against minority voters to get changes cleared by the federal government before they went into effect.

It’s hard to overstate the significance of this decision. The power of the Voting Rights Act was in the design that the supreme court gutted – discriminatory voting policies could be blocked before they harmed voters. The law placed the burden of proof on government officials to prove why the changes they were seeking were not discriminatory. Now, voters who are discriminated against now bear the burden of proving they are disenfranchised.
FILES-US-POLITICS-VOTE
(FILES) In this file photo US Attorney General William Barr looks on during a roundtable with US President Donald Trump,faith leaders and small business owners at Gateway Church Dallas Campus in Dallas, Texas, on June 11, 2020. – Attorney General William Barr on June 21, 2020 assailed the use of mail-in ballots in US elections, saying they could “open the floodgates of potential fraud.” His comment, in an interview with Fox News, echoed repeated assertions by President Donald Trump warning US states, without evidence of wrongdoing, against using mail-in ballots in the November elections. At a time of “intense division in the country,” Barr said on Fox, elections permit a peaceful transfer of power. But he said mail-in ballots “open the floodgates of potential fraud” and undermine public confidence in an election’s outcome.

Immediately after the decision, Republican lawmakers in Texas and North Carolina – two states previously covered by the law – moved to enact new voter ID laws and other restrictions. A federal court would later strike down the North Carolina law, writing it was designed to target African Americans “with almost surgical precision”.

“The scope of what, frankly, the right could do, in a pre-Shelby world was very limited. Now it’s not so limited,” said Bryan Sells, a voting rights attorney in Georgia. “If I’m a Republican political consultant or strategist, the options that are available to me are now wider than they used to be… It made it more advantageous to tinker.”

We may never know the full impact of the Shelby county decision. While statewide voting changes get a lot of attention, most of the voting changes the justice department reviewed were submitted by local jurisdictions. Now it’s much harder to even hear about those local changes – which include polling place closures or changing the way candidates are elected – let alone stop them, said Deuel Ross, an attorney at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund (LDF) who frequently challenges voting changes in the south. [source: theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/25/shelby-county-anniversary-voting-rights-act-consequences]

 

In a 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court invalidated a section of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that required states to get approval from the federal government before changing election laws.

 

BURWELL V. HOBBY LOBBY

In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Hobby Lobby and certain other private corporations may now deny female employees insurance coverage for contraception by simply claiming it goes against their company’s religion.

According to the all-male Republican appointed Supreme Court majority, Viagra gets covered. But if you’re trying to avoid getting pregnant–or have endometriosis and need a birth control prescription–you’re out of luck.

Why? Because as Justice Anthony Kennedy literally said during arguments, birth control is “not that important.”

In the devastating Burwell v. Hobby Lobby ruling, on June 30, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed certain bosses to block their employees’ access to birth control. The decision on this Supreme Court birth control case applied to more than half of all U.S. workers — that’s the tens of millions of workers at companies in which five or fewer people own more than 50%.

Two privately owned companies brought the case: cabinet manufacturer Conestoga Wood Specialties, and the Hobby Lobby national chain of craft stores, which employs 28,000.

Conestoga and Hobby Lobby’s Issue with Birth Control

The owners of these companies objected to having health insurance plans that included birth control — a coverage guarantee under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that has allowed nearly 63 million American women to access affordable birth control and has saved existing benefit recipients at least $1.4 billion on birth control pills alone since the provision went into effect (in 2013).

The Hobby Lobby bosses thought it was their business to control their employees’ access to birth control. In fact, the owners claimed that it violated their religious beliefs to let their employees have access birth control coverage. Apparently, the owners were not concerned about trampling on the beliefs and basic health care needs of their employees.

The Court ruled against birth control access in a 5-to-4 decision, with the majority of the justices saying that Hobby Lobby and other “closely held corporations” could deny birth control coverage to their employees.

The ruling set a new precedent. For the first time, the Supreme Court allowed “the commercial, profit-making world” to deny people access to basic health care like birth control because of religious beliefs. In the past, said Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in her dissent, the Supreme Court only allowed such exemptions to individual people, not to businesses. Justice Ginsburg noted that the ruling opened the door to the denial of other kinds of health care as well as employees’ other rights, based on their bosses’ beliefs — something that’s already playing out.

The Aftermath of Burwell v. Hobby Lobby

The Obama administration quickly swept in to close the loophole that SCOTUS created in the Hobby Lobby birth control case. In response to the decision, the Obama administration extended the birth control accommodation that was originally provided only to religiously affiliated nonprofits. In particular, the accommodation was extended to closely held for-profit entities — such as Hobby Lobby.

Although Hobby Lobby-like companies can refuse to cover birth control in their health plans, health insurance companies must directly provide birth control at no cost to employees.

So what’s the take-away? Workers shouldn’t have to get their bosses’ permission for birth control coverage. It’s that simple.

Ninety-nine percent of women will use birth control at some point in their lives, 58 percent of them for a reason other than preventing pregnancy, like treating endometriosis. As a result of today’s ruling, women will suffer and be unable to afford the medication they need.

 

CITIZENS UNITED V. FEC

How the Citizens United Decision Changed U.S. Political Campaigns (full PBS documentary)

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The court held 5–4 that the freedom of speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns by corporations, nonprofit organizations, labor unions, and other associations.

The majority held that the prohibition of all independent expenditures by corporations and unions in the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act violated the First Amendment. The ruling effectively freed corporations and nonprofit organizations to spend money on electioneering communications and to directly advocate for the election or defeat of candidates. In a dissenting opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens argued that the court’s ruling represented “a rejection of the common sense of the American people, who have recognized a need to prevent corporations from undermining self government”.

The decision remains highly controversial, generating much public discussion and receiving strong support or opposition from various politicians, commentators, and advocacy groups. Senator Mitch McConnell commended the decision, arguing that it represented “an important step in the direction of restoring the First Amendment rights”. By contrast, former President Barack Obama stated that the decision “gives the special interests and their lobbyists even more power in Washington”.

 

SUPREME COURT OVERTURNS ROE V. WADE

Radical Right Wing Republican Supreme Court overturns the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, which guaranteed a woman’s right to abortion.

 

Overturning Of Roe Is ‘Raw Exertion Of Power By 5 Right-Wing Judges’

This is about the raw exertion of power by five right-wing judges who have absolute, near veto-proof authority over the rest of the country. Today, millions of Americans had their right to bodily autonomy stripped because of this radical, activist court.

 

Never Forget The GOP Presidents Who Overturned Roe

Lawrence O’Donnell explains that Republican judges on the Supreme Court share a dangerous Trumpian characteristic: they are incapable of being embarrassed by what they don’t know or understand.

 

Warren On Ending Of Roe: ‘Supreme Court Doesn’t Get The Last Word’—We Do

Sen. Elizabeth Warren on the overturning of the constitutional right to an abortion: “Supreme Court doesn’t get the last word. In a democracy, we get the last word. It’s time to get in this fight and it’s time to make real change on behalf of everyone in this country.”

 

 

Supreme Court Justices should be appointed by Presidents who were elected to office by the majority of Americans so their viewpoints reflects the majority. That has NOT been the case due to the Electoral College, which made Republicans Bush & Trump President (who received less votes than their opponent)… and the Senate, which doesn’t represent the majority.

 

Republican Appointed Right Wing Judges Lied Under Oath to get their Seats and should be Impeached & Removed

 

Republican Appointed “Justices” LIED

Lawrence O’Donnell details the years of lying and hypocrisy from Republicans and Republican-appointed Supreme Court Justices on abortion rights.

 

‘Politicians in Robes’: How the right-wing Supreme Court is mounting a power grab

 

Republicans have hijacked the highest court in the land. First, they stole a Supreme Court seat from President Obama. Then, they changed a 70-year old rule to install two of Donald Trump’s far-right justices and confirmed Brett Kavanaugh despite credible allegations that he committed sexual assault and lied under oath.

Now, the politicized Supreme Court is enacting a far-right, partisan agenda that favors corporate interests and Republican Party special interests. Reproductive freedom, civil rights, environmental justice, common sense gun safety laws, and our right to vote are all at risk. And the Court has eroded confidence in our system of government with ethical lapses and lack of transparency.

 

DARK MONEY CONTROL OVER SUPREME COURT

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse gives outstanding presentation how Big Business “Dark Money” has been playing a role in the Supreme Court nomination process.

 

Sen. Whitehouse Blasts Radical Right Wing Republican SCOTUS Justices Rich Business

The New York Times reports that a former anti-abortion leader questions if Justice Alito leaked the decision in a 2014 ruling and details right-wing lobbying efforts to influence Radical Right Wing Republican justices. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, who has tracked dark money to the Supreme Court, joins MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell to discuss his reaction and the need for ethics reform.