So, I hear Trump is about to take a trip to Ireland … pic.twitter.com/7zg48K2qFi
— Ron Filipkowski (@RonFilipkowski) April 30, 2023
Trump and Eric probably burying some documents on the golf course in Scotland today. (Yes, that is Trump). pic.twitter.com/F1oGmlfXW6
— Ron Filipkowski (@RonFilipkowski) May 1, 2023
If there's one thing that's crystal clear at this point (as BG has pointed out), it's that DeSantis is very smart (he went to Harvard AND Yale!) and makes the sorts of intelligent decisions that Democrats can only dream of.okaydo said:DeSantis and his advisers loaded up his memoir with quotes about how he weaponized the state against Disney, as a selling point to GOP primary voters.
— Greg Sargent (@ThePlumLineGS) May 2, 2023
All this is now evidence against him. I went through Disney's lawsuit and pulled out key quotes here:https://t.co/vgMZ9FlHa7 pic.twitter.com/PZlIQVjL3q
"Time for us to attack Disney where they're weakest: copyright and trademark" https://t.co/zUoRv2NzT5
— Adam Weinstein (@AdamWeinstein) April 27, 2023
Today, the North Carolina Supreme Court issued 3 rulings:
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 29, 2023
🗺Partisan gerrymandering is allowed
❌56,000 people no longer have the right to vote
🗳A discriminatory voter ID law can go into effect
When we say democracy is on the docket, we mean it: https://t.co/zh06mT1A8N
The law, #SB824, establishes a narrow list of accepted photo IDs for voting. After the North Carolina Supreme Court flipped from Democratic to Republican control in the 2022 midterms, GOP lawmakers asked for the case to reheard and the court reversed its own prior decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023
The law was initially enacted in 1877 with the explicit purpose of denying Black men the right to vote and updated in the 1970s. In March 2022, a trial court permanently struck down the law for violating the North Carolina Constitution.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023
Last year, the then-Democratic majority of the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that partisan gerrymandering violates the state constitution and struck down the state's congressional and legislative maps. Today, the new Republican majority reversed that decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023
NEW: as expected, new GOP majority on NC Supreme Court reverses previous court's ruling that partisan gerrymandering is illegal. This could wipe out four Dem seats, nearly doubling the GOP's cushion in the House. Full backstory at @CookPolitical: https://t.co/HkgUv9uCuJ
— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) April 28, 2023
Unit2Sucks said:
For those who haven't heard, the NC Supreme Court recently came under conservative control and the results have been unsurprising - on Friday they ruled against common sense in 3 separate cases, 2 of which had already been decided by the same court a few months ago (before it flipped to GOP control) in the other direction.
In depth article here. Tweets below. I'm sure there will be lots of arguments from conservatives about why this is really a good thing or how things are supposed to work, but it's pretty clear the intent is to maintain and increase GOP control of the state, regardless of the wishes of voters.
I don't remember who it is that said that if the GOP knows it can't win elections democratically, it won't abandon its losing policies it will just abandon democracy. This is what we're seeing.Today, the North Carolina Supreme Court issued 3 rulings:
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 29, 2023
🗺Partisan gerrymandering is allowed
❌56,000 people no longer have the right to vote
🗳A discriminatory voter ID law can go into effect
When we say democracy is on the docket, we mean it: https://t.co/zh06mT1A8NThe law, #SB824, establishes a narrow list of accepted photo IDs for voting. After the North Carolina Supreme Court flipped from Democratic to Republican control in the 2022 midterms, GOP lawmakers asked for the case to reheard and the court reversed its own prior decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023The law was initially enacted in 1877 with the explicit purpose of denying Black men the right to vote and updated in the 1970s. In March 2022, a trial court permanently struck down the law for violating the North Carolina Constitution.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023Last year, the then-Democratic majority of the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that partisan gerrymandering violates the state constitution and struck down the state's congressional and legislative maps. Today, the new Republican majority reversed that decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023NEW: as expected, new GOP majority on NC Supreme Court reverses previous court's ruling that partisan gerrymandering is illegal. This could wipe out four Dem seats, nearly doubling the GOP's cushion in the House. Full backstory at @CookPolitical: https://t.co/HkgUv9uCuJ
— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) April 28, 2023
In 2018, NC switched to the partisan election of SC judges to 8-year terms, probably because at that time the GOP who controlled the state didn't like what the judges were doing. Lots of outside money came in, as you would expect. The elections were extremely close and essentially came down on party lines - 52-48. What's not clear to me is how they determined the partisanship of the judges who were elected prior to 2018 since they weren't the product of partisan elections.dimitrig said:Unit2Sucks said:
For those who haven't heard, the NC Supreme Court recently came under conservative control and the results have been unsurprising - on Friday they ruled against common sense in 3 separate cases, 2 of which had already been decided by the same court a few months ago (before it flipped to GOP control) in the other direction.
In depth article here. Tweets below. I'm sure there will be lots of arguments from conservatives about why this is really a good thing or how things are supposed to work, but it's pretty clear the intent is to maintain and increase GOP control of the state, regardless of the wishes of voters.
I don't remember who it is that said that if the GOP knows it can't win elections democratically, it won't abandon its losing policies it will just abandon democracy. This is what we're seeing.Today, the North Carolina Supreme Court issued 3 rulings:
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 29, 2023
🗺Partisan gerrymandering is allowed
❌56,000 people no longer have the right to vote
🗳A discriminatory voter ID law can go into effect
When we say democracy is on the docket, we mean it: https://t.co/zh06mT1A8NThe law, #SB824, establishes a narrow list of accepted photo IDs for voting. After the North Carolina Supreme Court flipped from Democratic to Republican control in the 2022 midterms, GOP lawmakers asked for the case to reheard and the court reversed its own prior decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023The law was initially enacted in 1877 with the explicit purpose of denying Black men the right to vote and updated in the 1970s. In March 2022, a trial court permanently struck down the law for violating the North Carolina Constitution.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023Last year, the then-Democratic majority of the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that partisan gerrymandering violates the state constitution and struck down the state's congressional and legislative maps. Today, the new Republican majority reversed that decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023NEW: as expected, new GOP majority on NC Supreme Court reverses previous court's ruling that partisan gerrymandering is illegal. This could wipe out four Dem seats, nearly doubling the GOP's cushion in the House. Full backstory at @CookPolitical: https://t.co/HkgUv9uCuJ
— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) April 28, 2023
How/why did the court flip because of the results of the midterm elections?
Quote:
Richard Dietz (R) defeated Lucy N. Inman (D), and Trey Allen (R) defeated incumbent Sam Ervin IV (D), in partisan elections for two North Carolina Supreme Court seats on November 8, 2022. As a result of these elections, the court flipped from a 4-3 Democratic majority to a 5-2 Republican majority in 2023. Heading into the 2020 election, Democrats had a 6-1 majority on the court.
Justice Robin Hudson (D) did not run for re-election in 2022 because she was nearing the court's mandatory retirement age.[url=https://ballotpedia.org/North_Carolina_Supreme_Court_elections,_2022#cite_note-1][1][/url] Dietz and Inman, both judges on the North Carolina Court of Appeals, ran to succeed her.
North Carolina began using partisan elections for judicial selection in 2018. Supreme court justices are elected to eight-year terms.
Unit2Sucks said:In 2018, NC switched to the partisan election of SC judges to 8-year terms, probably because at that time the GOP who controlled the state didn't like what the judges were doing. Lots of outside money came in, as you would expect. The elections were extremely close and essentially came down on party lines - 52-48. What's not clear to me is how they determined the partisanship of the judges who were elected prior to 2018 since they weren't the product of partisan elections.dimitrig said:How/why did the court flip because of the results of the midterm elections?Unit2Sucks said:
For those who haven't heard, the NC Supreme Court recently came under conservative control and the results have been unsurprising - on Friday they ruled against common sense in 3 separate cases, 2 of which had already been decided by the same court a few months ago (before it flipped to GOP control) in the other direction.
In depth article here. Tweets below. I'm sure there will be lots of arguments from conservatives about why this is really a good thing or how things are supposed to work, but it's pretty clear the intent is to maintain and increase GOP control of the state, regardless of the wishes of voters.
I don't remember who it is that said that if the GOP knows it can't win elections democratically, it won't abandon its losing policies it will just abandon democracy. This is what we're seeing.Today, the North Carolina Supreme Court issued 3 rulings:
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 29, 2023
🗺Partisan gerrymandering is allowed
❌56,000 people no longer have the right to vote
🗳A discriminatory voter ID law can go into effect
When we say democracy is on the docket, we mean it: https://t.co/zh06mT1A8NThe law, #SB824, establishes a narrow list of accepted photo IDs for voting. After the North Carolina Supreme Court flipped from Democratic to Republican control in the 2022 midterms, GOP lawmakers asked for the case to reheard and the court reversed its own prior decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023The law was initially enacted in 1877 with the explicit purpose of denying Black men the right to vote and updated in the 1970s. In March 2022, a trial court permanently struck down the law for violating the North Carolina Constitution.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023Last year, the then-Democratic majority of the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that partisan gerrymandering violates the state constitution and struck down the state's congressional and legislative maps. Today, the new Republican majority reversed that decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023NEW: as expected, new GOP majority on NC Supreme Court reverses previous court's ruling that partisan gerrymandering is illegal. This could wipe out four Dem seats, nearly doubling the GOP's cushion in the House. Full backstory at @CookPolitical: https://t.co/HkgUv9uCuJ
— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) April 28, 2023
If the conservative judges hadn't won, the RWNJs would be claiming Soros, that much is sure. Instead, they will say that elections have consequences and that this is the will of the people, regardless of financial influence. Unlike with normal politicians, court decisions are really supposed to be based on, you know, justice, the constitution etc. but that feels like ancient history. We've become so politicized that we've accepted that judges should be partisan and GOP in NC abandoned the entire notion of an independent judiciary. To me this is just more evidence that rather than abandon conservatism, they will abandon democracy. The partisan SC in NC has now made it a lot harder for the will of the people to be reflected in elections and the intent was specifically to prevent the will of black people (~1/4 of the state) from being heard.
Here's an impartial summary:Quote:
Richard Dietz (R) defeated Lucy N. Inman (D), and Trey Allen (R) defeated incumbent Sam Ervin IV (D), in partisan elections for two North Carolina Supreme Court seats on November 8, 2022. As a result of these elections, the court flipped from a 4-3 Democratic majority to a 5-2 Republican majority in 2023. Heading into the 2020 election, Democrats had a 6-1 majority on the court.
Justice Robin Hudson (D) did not run for re-election in 2022 because she was nearing the court's mandatory retirement age.[url=https://ballotpedia.org/North_Carolina_Supreme_Court_elections,_2022#cite_note-1][1][/url] Dietz and Inman, both judges on the North Carolina Court of Appeals, ran to succeed her.
North Carolina began using partisan elections for judicial selection in 2018. Supreme court justices are elected to eight-year terms.
dimitrig said:Unit2Sucks said:In 2018, NC switched to the partisan election of SC judges to 8-year terms, probably because at that time the GOP who controlled the state didn't like what the judges were doing. Lots of outside money came in, as you would expect. The elections were extremely close and essentially came down on party lines - 52-48. What's not clear to me is how they determined the partisanship of the judges who were elected prior to 2018 since they weren't the product of partisan elections.dimitrig said:How/why did the court flip because of the results of the midterm elections?Unit2Sucks said:
For those who haven't heard, the NC Supreme Court recently came under conservative control and the results have been unsurprising - on Friday they ruled against common sense in 3 separate cases, 2 of which had already been decided by the same court a few months ago (before it flipped to GOP control) in the other direction.
In depth article here. Tweets below. I'm sure there will be lots of arguments from conservatives about why this is really a good thing or how things are supposed to work, but it's pretty clear the intent is to maintain and increase GOP control of the state, regardless of the wishes of voters.
I don't remember who it is that said that if the GOP knows it can't win elections democratically, it won't abandon its losing policies it will just abandon democracy. This is what we're seeing.Today, the North Carolina Supreme Court issued 3 rulings:
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 29, 2023
🗺Partisan gerrymandering is allowed
❌56,000 people no longer have the right to vote
🗳A discriminatory voter ID law can go into effect
When we say democracy is on the docket, we mean it: https://t.co/zh06mT1A8NThe law, #SB824, establishes a narrow list of accepted photo IDs for voting. After the North Carolina Supreme Court flipped from Democratic to Republican control in the 2022 midterms, GOP lawmakers asked for the case to reheard and the court reversed its own prior decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023The law was initially enacted in 1877 with the explicit purpose of denying Black men the right to vote and updated in the 1970s. In March 2022, a trial court permanently struck down the law for violating the North Carolina Constitution.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023Last year, the then-Democratic majority of the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that partisan gerrymandering violates the state constitution and struck down the state's congressional and legislative maps. Today, the new Republican majority reversed that decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023NEW: as expected, new GOP majority on NC Supreme Court reverses previous court's ruling that partisan gerrymandering is illegal. This could wipe out four Dem seats, nearly doubling the GOP's cushion in the House. Full backstory at @CookPolitical: https://t.co/HkgUv9uCuJ
— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) April 28, 2023
If the conservative judges hadn't won, the RWNJs would be claiming Soros, that much is sure. Instead, they will say that elections have consequences and that this is the will of the people, regardless of financial influence. Unlike with normal politicians, court decisions are really supposed to be based on, you know, justice, the constitution etc. but that feels like ancient history. We've become so politicized that we've accepted that judges should be partisan and GOP in NC abandoned the entire notion of an independent judiciary. To me this is just more evidence that rather than abandon conservatism, they will abandon democracy. The partisan SC in NC has now made it a lot harder for the will of the people to be reflected in elections and the intent was specifically to prevent the will of black people (~1/4 of the state) from being heard.
Here's an impartial summary:Quote:
Richard Dietz (R) defeated Lucy N. Inman (D), and Trey Allen (R) defeated incumbent Sam Ervin IV (D), in partisan elections for two North Carolina Supreme Court seats on November 8, 2022. As a result of these elections, the court flipped from a 4-3 Democratic majority to a 5-2 Republican majority in 2023. Heading into the 2020 election, Democrats had a 6-1 majority on the court.
Justice Robin Hudson (D) did not run for re-election in 2022 because she was nearing the court's mandatory retirement age.[url=https://ballotpedia.org/North_Carolina_Supreme_Court_elections,_2022#cite_note-1][1][/url] Dietz and Inman, both judges on the North Carolina Court of Appeals, ran to succeed her.
North Carolina began using partisan elections for judicial selection in 2018. Supreme court justices are elected to eight-year terms.
The idea of electing Supreme Court justices seems wrong. I can't believe 21 states choose their Supreme Courts that way.
The Texas man also searched his wife's phone and took screenshots of texts from her friends talking about medication abortion. Then he reported his wife to the police—an effort to prevent her from divorcing him after he emotionally abused her for years. https://t.co/b0ybT06I06 pic.twitter.com/cmgYwFHimr
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) May 2, 2023
It is very clear that Jonathan Mitchell is aiding and abetting the abusive manipulation of a violently jealous man who tried to blackmail his ex-wife out of divorcing him. It exemplifies the ends-justify-the-means mentality of the anti-abortion movement. https://t.co/b0ybT06I06 pic.twitter.com/SxT3VWv3gk
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) May 2, 2023
dajo9 said:dimitrig said:Unit2Sucks said:In 2018, NC switched to the partisan election of SC judges to 8-year terms, probably because at that time the GOP who controlled the state didn't like what the judges were doing. Lots of outside money came in, as you would expect. The elections were extremely close and essentially came down on party lines - 52-48. What's not clear to me is how they determined the partisanship of the judges who were elected prior to 2018 since they weren't the product of partisan elections.dimitrig said:How/why did the court flip because of the results of the midterm elections?Unit2Sucks said:
For those who haven't heard, the NC Supreme Court recently came under conservative control and the results have been unsurprising - on Friday they ruled against common sense in 3 separate cases, 2 of which had already been decided by the same court a few months ago (before it flipped to GOP control) in the other direction.
In depth article here. Tweets below. I'm sure there will be lots of arguments from conservatives about why this is really a good thing or how things are supposed to work, but it's pretty clear the intent is to maintain and increase GOP control of the state, regardless of the wishes of voters.
I don't remember who it is that said that if the GOP knows it can't win elections democratically, it won't abandon its losing policies it will just abandon democracy. This is what we're seeing.Today, the North Carolina Supreme Court issued 3 rulings:
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 29, 2023
🗺Partisan gerrymandering is allowed
❌56,000 people no longer have the right to vote
🗳A discriminatory voter ID law can go into effect
When we say democracy is on the docket, we mean it: https://t.co/zh06mT1A8NThe law, #SB824, establishes a narrow list of accepted photo IDs for voting. After the North Carolina Supreme Court flipped from Democratic to Republican control in the 2022 midterms, GOP lawmakers asked for the case to reheard and the court reversed its own prior decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023The law was initially enacted in 1877 with the explicit purpose of denying Black men the right to vote and updated in the 1970s. In March 2022, a trial court permanently struck down the law for violating the North Carolina Constitution.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023Last year, the then-Democratic majority of the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that partisan gerrymandering violates the state constitution and struck down the state's congressional and legislative maps. Today, the new Republican majority reversed that decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023NEW: as expected, new GOP majority on NC Supreme Court reverses previous court's ruling that partisan gerrymandering is illegal. This could wipe out four Dem seats, nearly doubling the GOP's cushion in the House. Full backstory at @CookPolitical: https://t.co/HkgUv9uCuJ
— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) April 28, 2023
If the conservative judges hadn't won, the RWNJs would be claiming Soros, that much is sure. Instead, they will say that elections have consequences and that this is the will of the people, regardless of financial influence. Unlike with normal politicians, court decisions are really supposed to be based on, you know, justice, the constitution etc. but that feels like ancient history. We've become so politicized that we've accepted that judges should be partisan and GOP in NC abandoned the entire notion of an independent judiciary. To me this is just more evidence that rather than abandon conservatism, they will abandon democracy. The partisan SC in NC has now made it a lot harder for the will of the people to be reflected in elections and the intent was specifically to prevent the will of black people (~1/4 of the state) from being heard.
Here's an impartial summary:Quote:
Richard Dietz (R) defeated Lucy N. Inman (D), and Trey Allen (R) defeated incumbent Sam Ervin IV (D), in partisan elections for two North Carolina Supreme Court seats on November 8, 2022. As a result of these elections, the court flipped from a 4-3 Democratic majority to a 5-2 Republican majority in 2023. Heading into the 2020 election, Democrats had a 6-1 majority on the court.
Justice Robin Hudson (D) did not run for re-election in 2022 because she was nearing the court's mandatory retirement age.[url=https://ballotpedia.org/North_Carolina_Supreme_Court_elections,_2022#cite_note-1][1][/url] Dietz and Inman, both judges on the North Carolina Court of Appeals, ran to succeed her.
North Carolina began using partisan elections for judicial selection in 2018. Supreme court justices are elected to eight-year terms.
The idea of electing Supreme Court justices seems wrong. I can't believe 21 states choose their Supreme Courts that way.
There is no magic to a judge's robe. You can either have politicized judge's or unelected, unaccountable dictators. The key is to limit the power of judge's as our Constitution is actually written.
North Carolina chooses judges in a better manner than the United States. Let elections have consequences.
dimitrig said:dajo9 said:dimitrig said:Unit2Sucks said:In 2018, NC switched to the partisan election of SC judges to 8-year terms, probably because at that time the GOP who controlled the state didn't like what the judges were doing. Lots of outside money came in, as you would expect. The elections were extremely close and essentially came down on party lines - 52-48. What's not clear to me is how they determined the partisanship of the judges who were elected prior to 2018 since they weren't the product of partisan elections.dimitrig said:How/why did the court flip because of the results of the midterm elections?Unit2Sucks said:
For those who haven't heard, the NC Supreme Court recently came under conservative control and the results have been unsurprising - on Friday they ruled against common sense in 3 separate cases, 2 of which had already been decided by the same court a few months ago (before it flipped to GOP control) in the other direction.
In depth article here. Tweets below. I'm sure there will be lots of arguments from conservatives about why this is really a good thing or how things are supposed to work, but it's pretty clear the intent is to maintain and increase GOP control of the state, regardless of the wishes of voters.
I don't remember who it is that said that if the GOP knows it can't win elections democratically, it won't abandon its losing policies it will just abandon democracy. This is what we're seeing.Today, the North Carolina Supreme Court issued 3 rulings:
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 29, 2023
🗺Partisan gerrymandering is allowed
❌56,000 people no longer have the right to vote
🗳A discriminatory voter ID law can go into effect
When we say democracy is on the docket, we mean it: https://t.co/zh06mT1A8NThe law, #SB824, establishes a narrow list of accepted photo IDs for voting. After the North Carolina Supreme Court flipped from Democratic to Republican control in the 2022 midterms, GOP lawmakers asked for the case to reheard and the court reversed its own prior decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023The law was initially enacted in 1877 with the explicit purpose of denying Black men the right to vote and updated in the 1970s. In March 2022, a trial court permanently struck down the law for violating the North Carolina Constitution.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023Last year, the then-Democratic majority of the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that partisan gerrymandering violates the state constitution and struck down the state's congressional and legislative maps. Today, the new Republican majority reversed that decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023NEW: as expected, new GOP majority on NC Supreme Court reverses previous court's ruling that partisan gerrymandering is illegal. This could wipe out four Dem seats, nearly doubling the GOP's cushion in the House. Full backstory at @CookPolitical: https://t.co/HkgUv9uCuJ
— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) April 28, 2023
If the conservative judges hadn't won, the RWNJs would be claiming Soros, that much is sure. Instead, they will say that elections have consequences and that this is the will of the people, regardless of financial influence. Unlike with normal politicians, court decisions are really supposed to be based on, you know, justice, the constitution etc. but that feels like ancient history. We've become so politicized that we've accepted that judges should be partisan and GOP in NC abandoned the entire notion of an independent judiciary. To me this is just more evidence that rather than abandon conservatism, they will abandon democracy. The partisan SC in NC has now made it a lot harder for the will of the people to be reflected in elections and the intent was specifically to prevent the will of black people (~1/4 of the state) from being heard.
Here's an impartial summary:Quote:
Richard Dietz (R) defeated Lucy N. Inman (D), and Trey Allen (R) defeated incumbent Sam Ervin IV (D), in partisan elections for two North Carolina Supreme Court seats on November 8, 2022. As a result of these elections, the court flipped from a 4-3 Democratic majority to a 5-2 Republican majority in 2023. Heading into the 2020 election, Democrats had a 6-1 majority on the court.
Justice Robin Hudson (D) did not run for re-election in 2022 because she was nearing the court's mandatory retirement age.[url=https://ballotpedia.org/North_Carolina_Supreme_Court_elections,_2022#cite_note-1][1][/url] Dietz and Inman, both judges on the North Carolina Court of Appeals, ran to succeed her.
North Carolina began using partisan elections for judicial selection in 2018. Supreme court justices are elected to eight-year terms.
The idea of electing Supreme Court justices seems wrong. I can't believe 21 states choose their Supreme Courts that way.
There is no magic to a judge's robe. You can either have politicized judge's or unelected, unaccountable dictators. The key is to limit the power of judge's as our Constitution is actually written.
North Carolina chooses judges in a better manner than the United States. Let elections have consequences.
I disagree. The public is not able to vet the qualifications of judges. Los Angeles County puts its judges on the ballot and I do a little research but I really don't feel qualified to have an opinion. I think the judicial branch benefits by not being subject to the whims of the electorate. We already have branches of government that serve that purpose.
.@JoeBiden did this! Trump supported HBCU athletes, @HBCUSports and codified HBCU funding into law. Ironically, is been reduced by the Biden Administration! @realDonaldTrump @TeamTrump pic.twitter.com/lXRAvDWvU3
— Vernon Jones (@VernonForGA) May 2, 2023
dajo9 said:dimitrig said:dajo9 said:dimitrig said:Unit2Sucks said:In 2018, NC switched to the partisan election of SC judges to 8-year terms, probably because at that time the GOP who controlled the state didn't like what the judges were doing. Lots of outside money came in, as you would expect. The elections were extremely close and essentially came down on party lines - 52-48. What's not clear to me is how they determined the partisanship of the judges who were elected prior to 2018 since they weren't the product of partisan elections.dimitrig said:How/why did the court flip because of the results of the midterm elections?Unit2Sucks said:
For those who haven't heard, the NC Supreme Court recently came under conservative control and the results have been unsurprising - on Friday they ruled against common sense in 3 separate cases, 2 of which had already been decided by the same court a few months ago (before it flipped to GOP control) in the other direction.
In depth article here. Tweets below. I'm sure there will be lots of arguments from conservatives about why this is really a good thing or how things are supposed to work, but it's pretty clear the intent is to maintain and increase GOP control of the state, regardless of the wishes of voters.
I don't remember who it is that said that if the GOP knows it can't win elections democratically, it won't abandon its losing policies it will just abandon democracy. This is what we're seeing.Today, the North Carolina Supreme Court issued 3 rulings:
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 29, 2023
🗺Partisan gerrymandering is allowed
❌56,000 people no longer have the right to vote
🗳A discriminatory voter ID law can go into effect
When we say democracy is on the docket, we mean it: https://t.co/zh06mT1A8NThe law, #SB824, establishes a narrow list of accepted photo IDs for voting. After the North Carolina Supreme Court flipped from Democratic to Republican control in the 2022 midterms, GOP lawmakers asked for the case to reheard and the court reversed its own prior decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023The law was initially enacted in 1877 with the explicit purpose of denying Black men the right to vote and updated in the 1970s. In March 2022, a trial court permanently struck down the law for violating the North Carolina Constitution.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023Last year, the then-Democratic majority of the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that partisan gerrymandering violates the state constitution and struck down the state's congressional and legislative maps. Today, the new Republican majority reversed that decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023NEW: as expected, new GOP majority on NC Supreme Court reverses previous court's ruling that partisan gerrymandering is illegal. This could wipe out four Dem seats, nearly doubling the GOP's cushion in the House. Full backstory at @CookPolitical: https://t.co/HkgUv9uCuJ
— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) April 28, 2023
If the conservative judges hadn't won, the RWNJs would be claiming Soros, that much is sure. Instead, they will say that elections have consequences and that this is the will of the people, regardless of financial influence. Unlike with normal politicians, court decisions are really supposed to be based on, you know, justice, the constitution etc. but that feels like ancient history. We've become so politicized that we've accepted that judges should be partisan and GOP in NC abandoned the entire notion of an independent judiciary. To me this is just more evidence that rather than abandon conservatism, they will abandon democracy. The partisan SC in NC has now made it a lot harder for the will of the people to be reflected in elections and the intent was specifically to prevent the will of black people (~1/4 of the state) from being heard.
Here's an impartial summary:Quote:
Richard Dietz (R) defeated Lucy N. Inman (D), and Trey Allen (R) defeated incumbent Sam Ervin IV (D), in partisan elections for two North Carolina Supreme Court seats on November 8, 2022. As a result of these elections, the court flipped from a 4-3 Democratic majority to a 5-2 Republican majority in 2023. Heading into the 2020 election, Democrats had a 6-1 majority on the court.
Justice Robin Hudson (D) did not run for re-election in 2022 because she was nearing the court's mandatory retirement age.[url=https://ballotpedia.org/North_Carolina_Supreme_Court_elections,_2022#cite_note-1][1][/url] Dietz and Inman, both judges on the North Carolina Court of Appeals, ran to succeed her.
North Carolina began using partisan elections for judicial selection in 2018. Supreme court justices are elected to eight-year terms.
The idea of electing Supreme Court justices seems wrong. I can't believe 21 states choose their Supreme Courts that way.
There is no magic to a judge's robe. You can either have politicized judge's or unelected, unaccountable dictators. The key is to limit the power of judge's as our Constitution is actually written.
North Carolina chooses judges in a better manner than the United States. Let elections have consequences.
I disagree. The public is not able to vet the qualifications of judges. Los Angeles County puts its judges on the ballot and I do a little research but I really don't feel qualified to have an opinion. I think the judicial branch benefits by not being subject to the whims of the electorate. We already have branches of government that serve that purpose.
How do you think judges should be chosen?
dimitrig said:dajo9 said:dimitrig said:dajo9 said:dimitrig said:Unit2Sucks said:In 2018, NC switched to the partisan election of SC judges to 8-year terms, probably because at that time the GOP who controlled the state didn't like what the judges were doing. Lots of outside money came in, as you would expect. The elections were extremely close and essentially came down on party lines - 52-48. What's not clear to me is how they determined the partisanship of the judges who were elected prior to 2018 since they weren't the product of partisan elections.dimitrig said:How/why did the court flip because of the results of the midterm elections?Unit2Sucks said:
For those who haven't heard, the NC Supreme Court recently came under conservative control and the results have been unsurprising - on Friday they ruled against common sense in 3 separate cases, 2 of which had already been decided by the same court a few months ago (before it flipped to GOP control) in the other direction.
In depth article here. Tweets below. I'm sure there will be lots of arguments from conservatives about why this is really a good thing or how things are supposed to work, but it's pretty clear the intent is to maintain and increase GOP control of the state, regardless of the wishes of voters.
I don't remember who it is that said that if the GOP knows it can't win elections democratically, it won't abandon its losing policies it will just abandon democracy. This is what we're seeing.Today, the North Carolina Supreme Court issued 3 rulings:
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 29, 2023
🗺Partisan gerrymandering is allowed
❌56,000 people no longer have the right to vote
🗳A discriminatory voter ID law can go into effect
When we say democracy is on the docket, we mean it: https://t.co/zh06mT1A8NThe law, #SB824, establishes a narrow list of accepted photo IDs for voting. After the North Carolina Supreme Court flipped from Democratic to Republican control in the 2022 midterms, GOP lawmakers asked for the case to reheard and the court reversed its own prior decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023The law was initially enacted in 1877 with the explicit purpose of denying Black men the right to vote and updated in the 1970s. In March 2022, a trial court permanently struck down the law for violating the North Carolina Constitution.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023Last year, the then-Democratic majority of the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that partisan gerrymandering violates the state constitution and struck down the state's congressional and legislative maps. Today, the new Republican majority reversed that decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023NEW: as expected, new GOP majority on NC Supreme Court reverses previous court's ruling that partisan gerrymandering is illegal. This could wipe out four Dem seats, nearly doubling the GOP's cushion in the House. Full backstory at @CookPolitical: https://t.co/HkgUv9uCuJ
— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) April 28, 2023
If the conservative judges hadn't won, the RWNJs would be claiming Soros, that much is sure. Instead, they will say that elections have consequences and that this is the will of the people, regardless of financial influence. Unlike with normal politicians, court decisions are really supposed to be based on, you know, justice, the constitution etc. but that feels like ancient history. We've become so politicized that we've accepted that judges should be partisan and GOP in NC abandoned the entire notion of an independent judiciary. To me this is just more evidence that rather than abandon conservatism, they will abandon democracy. The partisan SC in NC has now made it a lot harder for the will of the people to be reflected in elections and the intent was specifically to prevent the will of black people (~1/4 of the state) from being heard.
Here's an impartial summary:Quote:
Richard Dietz (R) defeated Lucy N. Inman (D), and Trey Allen (R) defeated incumbent Sam Ervin IV (D), in partisan elections for two North Carolina Supreme Court seats on November 8, 2022. As a result of these elections, the court flipped from a 4-3 Democratic majority to a 5-2 Republican majority in 2023. Heading into the 2020 election, Democrats had a 6-1 majority on the court.
Justice Robin Hudson (D) did not run for re-election in 2022 because she was nearing the court's mandatory retirement age.[url=https://ballotpedia.org/North_Carolina_Supreme_Court_elections,_2022#cite_note-1][1][/url] Dietz and Inman, both judges on the North Carolina Court of Appeals, ran to succeed her.
North Carolina began using partisan elections for judicial selection in 2018. Supreme court justices are elected to eight-year terms.
The idea of electing Supreme Court justices seems wrong. I can't believe 21 states choose their Supreme Courts that way.
There is no magic to a judge's robe. You can either have politicized judge's or unelected, unaccountable dictators. The key is to limit the power of judge's as our Constitution is actually written.
North Carolina chooses judges in a better manner than the United States. Let elections have consequences.
I disagree. The public is not able to vet the qualifications of judges. Los Angeles County puts its judges on the ballot and I do a little research but I really don't feel qualified to have an opinion. I think the judicial branch benefits by not being subject to the whims of the electorate. We already have branches of government that serve that purpose.
How do you think judges should be chosen?
I am okay with governor appointments and confirmation by another body like the senate.
dajo9 said:dimitrig said:dajo9 said:dimitrig said:dajo9 said:dimitrig said:Unit2Sucks said:In 2018, NC switched to the partisan election of SC judges to 8-year terms, probably because at that time the GOP who controlled the state didn't like what the judges were doing. Lots of outside money came in, as you would expect. The elections were extremely close and essentially came down on party lines - 52-48. What's not clear to me is how they determined the partisanship of the judges who were elected prior to 2018 since they weren't the product of partisan elections.dimitrig said:How/why did the court flip because of the results of the midterm elections?Unit2Sucks said:
For those who haven't heard, the NC Supreme Court recently came under conservative control and the results have been unsurprising - on Friday they ruled against common sense in 3 separate cases, 2 of which had already been decided by the same court a few months ago (before it flipped to GOP control) in the other direction.
In depth article here. Tweets below. I'm sure there will be lots of arguments from conservatives about why this is really a good thing or how things are supposed to work, but it's pretty clear the intent is to maintain and increase GOP control of the state, regardless of the wishes of voters.
I don't remember who it is that said that if the GOP knows it can't win elections democratically, it won't abandon its losing policies it will just abandon democracy. This is what we're seeing.Today, the North Carolina Supreme Court issued 3 rulings:
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 29, 2023
🗺Partisan gerrymandering is allowed
❌56,000 people no longer have the right to vote
🗳A discriminatory voter ID law can go into effect
When we say democracy is on the docket, we mean it: https://t.co/zh06mT1A8NThe law, #SB824, establishes a narrow list of accepted photo IDs for voting. After the North Carolina Supreme Court flipped from Democratic to Republican control in the 2022 midterms, GOP lawmakers asked for the case to reheard and the court reversed its own prior decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023The law was initially enacted in 1877 with the explicit purpose of denying Black men the right to vote and updated in the 1970s. In March 2022, a trial court permanently struck down the law for violating the North Carolina Constitution.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023Last year, the then-Democratic majority of the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that partisan gerrymandering violates the state constitution and struck down the state's congressional and legislative maps. Today, the new Republican majority reversed that decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023NEW: as expected, new GOP majority on NC Supreme Court reverses previous court's ruling that partisan gerrymandering is illegal. This could wipe out four Dem seats, nearly doubling the GOP's cushion in the House. Full backstory at @CookPolitical: https://t.co/HkgUv9uCuJ
— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) April 28, 2023
If the conservative judges hadn't won, the RWNJs would be claiming Soros, that much is sure. Instead, they will say that elections have consequences and that this is the will of the people, regardless of financial influence. Unlike with normal politicians, court decisions are really supposed to be based on, you know, justice, the constitution etc. but that feels like ancient history. We've become so politicized that we've accepted that judges should be partisan and GOP in NC abandoned the entire notion of an independent judiciary. To me this is just more evidence that rather than abandon conservatism, they will abandon democracy. The partisan SC in NC has now made it a lot harder for the will of the people to be reflected in elections and the intent was specifically to prevent the will of black people (~1/4 of the state) from being heard.
Here's an impartial summary:Quote:
Richard Dietz (R) defeated Lucy N. Inman (D), and Trey Allen (R) defeated incumbent Sam Ervin IV (D), in partisan elections for two North Carolina Supreme Court seats on November 8, 2022. As a result of these elections, the court flipped from a 4-3 Democratic majority to a 5-2 Republican majority in 2023. Heading into the 2020 election, Democrats had a 6-1 majority on the court.
Justice Robin Hudson (D) did not run for re-election in 2022 because she was nearing the court's mandatory retirement age.[url=https://ballotpedia.org/North_Carolina_Supreme_Court_elections,_2022#cite_note-1][1][/url] Dietz and Inman, both judges on the North Carolina Court of Appeals, ran to succeed her.
North Carolina began using partisan elections for judicial selection in 2018. Supreme court justices are elected to eight-year terms.
The idea of electing Supreme Court justices seems wrong. I can't believe 21 states choose their Supreme Courts that way.
There is no magic to a judge's robe. You can either have politicized judge's or unelected, unaccountable dictators. The key is to limit the power of judge's as our Constitution is actually written.
North Carolina chooses judges in a better manner than the United States. Let elections have consequences.
I disagree. The public is not able to vet the qualifications of judges. Los Angeles County puts its judges on the ballot and I do a little research but I really don't feel qualified to have an opinion. I think the judicial branch benefits by not being subject to the whims of the electorate. We already have branches of government that serve that purpose.
How do you think judges should be chosen?
I am okay with governor appointments and confirmation by another body like the senate.
Politicized and unaccountable. Like our current Aupreme Court.
Trump 2024 Ad Claiming U.S. ‘Decline’ Under Biden Uses Images Taken During Trump’s Presidencyhttps://t.co/B8BQfsLeWR
— Mediaite (@Mediaite) May 3, 2023
“The $535,200 can be wired to HR Talent”https://t.co/jYHI0wICNv pic.twitter.com/t7NjHQctGL
— Jacob Rubashkin (@JacobRubashkin) May 4, 2023
Texans were told to prepare for a "new reality" Wednesday after energy experts announced demand for power this summer will likely outweigh the supply. https://t.co/IHSQhpP0OY
— WFAA (@wfaa) May 4, 2023
DeSantis' efforts to take on NYT v Sullivan and mainstream media by overhauling defamation law in Florida have fallen short — a rare legislative defeat for a governor used to getting his way. Opposition came from conservative media. https://t.co/D3mOwAx3RS
— Ken Bensinger (@kenbensinger) May 3, 2023
Damned if you do... https://t.co/rGQ4eoF29t
— Rolling Stone (@RollingStone) May 4, 2023
Does Herschel really misspell his own name?okaydo said:“The $535,200 can be wired to HR Talent”https://t.co/jYHI0wICNv pic.twitter.com/t7NjHQctGL
— Jacob Rubashkin (@JacobRubashkin) May 4, 2023
My daughter was born three months early. If I delivered her in Texas tomorrow, and happened to mention I had an abortion a few years previous, my doctor would be mandated by law to report my daughter’s early birth as a complication of abortion. https://t.co/5pTKWMLINF
— Jessica Valenti (@JessicaValenti) May 4, 2023
All because “preterm delivery in subsequent pregnancies” is on the law’s list of reportable conditions.
— Jessica Valenti (@JessicaValenti) May 4, 2023
It is a clusterfuck
King Charles III's Coronation: Peaceful Republican Protesters Arrested for 'Breaching the Peace' https://t.co/Gb18jTmc58
— Variety (@Variety) May 6, 2023
dimitrig said:dajo9 said:dimitrig said:dajo9 said:dimitrig said:Unit2Sucks said:In 2018, NC switched to the partisan election of SC judges to 8-year terms, probably because at that time the GOP who controlled the state didn't like what the judges were doing. Lots of outside money came in, as you would expect. The elections were extremely close and essentially came down on party lines - 52-48. What's not clear to me is how they determined the partisanship of the judges who were elected prior to 2018 since they weren't the product of partisan elections.dimitrig said:How/why did the court flip because of the results of the midterm elections?Unit2Sucks said:
For those who haven't heard, the NC Supreme Court recently came under conservative control and the results have been unsurprising - on Friday they ruled against common sense in 3 separate cases, 2 of which had already been decided by the same court a few months ago (before it flipped to GOP control) in the other direction.
In depth article here. Tweets below. I'm sure there will be lots of arguments from conservatives about why this is really a good thing or how things are supposed to work, but it's pretty clear the intent is to maintain and increase GOP control of the state, regardless of the wishes of voters.
I don't remember who it is that said that if the GOP knows it can't win elections democratically, it won't abandon its losing policies it will just abandon democracy. This is what we're seeing.Today, the North Carolina Supreme Court issued 3 rulings:
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 29, 2023
🗺Partisan gerrymandering is allowed
❌56,000 people no longer have the right to vote
🗳A discriminatory voter ID law can go into effect
When we say democracy is on the docket, we mean it: https://t.co/zh06mT1A8NThe law, #SB824, establishes a narrow list of accepted photo IDs for voting. After the North Carolina Supreme Court flipped from Democratic to Republican control in the 2022 midterms, GOP lawmakers asked for the case to reheard and the court reversed its own prior decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023The law was initially enacted in 1877 with the explicit purpose of denying Black men the right to vote and updated in the 1970s. In March 2022, a trial court permanently struck down the law for violating the North Carolina Constitution.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023Last year, the then-Democratic majority of the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that partisan gerrymandering violates the state constitution and struck down the state's congressional and legislative maps. Today, the new Republican majority reversed that decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023NEW: as expected, new GOP majority on NC Supreme Court reverses previous court's ruling that partisan gerrymandering is illegal. This could wipe out four Dem seats, nearly doubling the GOP's cushion in the House. Full backstory at @CookPolitical: https://t.co/HkgUv9uCuJ
— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) April 28, 2023
If the conservative judges hadn't won, the RWNJs would be claiming Soros, that much is sure. Instead, they will say that elections have consequences and that this is the will of the people, regardless of financial influence. Unlike with normal politicians, court decisions are really supposed to be based on, you know, justice, the constitution etc. but that feels like ancient history. We've become so politicized that we've accepted that judges should be partisan and GOP in NC abandoned the entire notion of an independent judiciary. To me this is just more evidence that rather than abandon conservatism, they will abandon democracy. The partisan SC in NC has now made it a lot harder for the will of the people to be reflected in elections and the intent was specifically to prevent the will of black people (~1/4 of the state) from being heard.
Here's an impartial summary:Quote:
Richard Dietz (R) defeated Lucy N. Inman (D), and Trey Allen (R) defeated incumbent Sam Ervin IV (D), in partisan elections for two North Carolina Supreme Court seats on November 8, 2022. As a result of these elections, the court flipped from a 4-3 Democratic majority to a 5-2 Republican majority in 2023. Heading into the 2020 election, Democrats had a 6-1 majority on the court.
Justice Robin Hudson (D) did not run for re-election in 2022 because she was nearing the court's mandatory retirement age.[url=https://ballotpedia.org/North_Carolina_Supreme_Court_elections,_2022#cite_note-1][1][/url] Dietz and Inman, both judges on the North Carolina Court of Appeals, ran to succeed her.
North Carolina began using partisan elections for judicial selection in 2018. Supreme court justices are elected to eight-year terms.
The idea of electing Supreme Court justices seems wrong. I can't believe 21 states choose their Supreme Courts that way.
There is no magic to a judge's robe. You can either have politicized judge's or unelected, unaccountable dictators. The key is to limit the power of judge's as our Constitution is actually written.
North Carolina chooses judges in a better manner than the United States. Let elections have consequences.
I disagree. The public is not able to vet the qualifications of judges. Los Angeles County puts its judges on the ballot and I do a little research but I really don't feel qualified to have an opinion. I think the judicial branch benefits by not being subject to the whims of the electorate. We already have branches of government that serve that purpose.
How do you think judges should be chosen?
I am okay with governor appointments and confirmation by another body like the senate.
DiabloWags said:dimitrig said:dajo9 said:dimitrig said:dajo9 said:dimitrig said:Unit2Sucks said:In 2018, NC switched to the partisan election of SC judges to 8-year terms, probably because at that time the GOP who controlled the state didn't like what the judges were doing. Lots of outside money came in, as you would expect. The elections were extremely close and essentially came down on party lines - 52-48. What's not clear to me is how they determined the partisanship of the judges who were elected prior to 2018 since they weren't the product of partisan elections.dimitrig said:How/why did the court flip because of the results of the midterm elections?Unit2Sucks said:
For those who haven't heard, the NC Supreme Court recently came under conservative control and the results have been unsurprising - on Friday they ruled against common sense in 3 separate cases, 2 of which had already been decided by the same court a few months ago (before it flipped to GOP control) in the other direction.
In depth article here. Tweets below. I'm sure there will be lots of arguments from conservatives about why this is really a good thing or how things are supposed to work, but it's pretty clear the intent is to maintain and increase GOP control of the state, regardless of the wishes of voters.
I don't remember who it is that said that if the GOP knows it can't win elections democratically, it won't abandon its losing policies it will just abandon democracy. This is what we're seeing.Today, the North Carolina Supreme Court issued 3 rulings:
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 29, 2023
🗺Partisan gerrymandering is allowed
❌56,000 people no longer have the right to vote
🗳A discriminatory voter ID law can go into effect
When we say democracy is on the docket, we mean it: https://t.co/zh06mT1A8NThe law, #SB824, establishes a narrow list of accepted photo IDs for voting. After the North Carolina Supreme Court flipped from Democratic to Republican control in the 2022 midterms, GOP lawmakers asked for the case to reheard and the court reversed its own prior decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023The law was initially enacted in 1877 with the explicit purpose of denying Black men the right to vote and updated in the 1970s. In March 2022, a trial court permanently struck down the law for violating the North Carolina Constitution.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023Last year, the then-Democratic majority of the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that partisan gerrymandering violates the state constitution and struck down the state's congressional and legislative maps. Today, the new Republican majority reversed that decision.
— Democracy Docket (@DemocracyDocket) April 28, 2023NEW: as expected, new GOP majority on NC Supreme Court reverses previous court's ruling that partisan gerrymandering is illegal. This could wipe out four Dem seats, nearly doubling the GOP's cushion in the House. Full backstory at @CookPolitical: https://t.co/HkgUv9uCuJ
— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) April 28, 2023
If the conservative judges hadn't won, the RWNJs would be claiming Soros, that much is sure. Instead, they will say that elections have consequences and that this is the will of the people, regardless of financial influence. Unlike with normal politicians, court decisions are really supposed to be based on, you know, justice, the constitution etc. but that feels like ancient history. We've become so politicized that we've accepted that judges should be partisan and GOP in NC abandoned the entire notion of an independent judiciary. To me this is just more evidence that rather than abandon conservatism, they will abandon democracy. The partisan SC in NC has now made it a lot harder for the will of the people to be reflected in elections and the intent was specifically to prevent the will of black people (~1/4 of the state) from being heard.
Here's an impartial summary:Quote:
Richard Dietz (R) defeated Lucy N. Inman (D), and Trey Allen (R) defeated incumbent Sam Ervin IV (D), in partisan elections for two North Carolina Supreme Court seats on November 8, 2022. As a result of these elections, the court flipped from a 4-3 Democratic majority to a 5-2 Republican majority in 2023. Heading into the 2020 election, Democrats had a 6-1 majority on the court.
Justice Robin Hudson (D) did not run for re-election in 2022 because she was nearing the court's mandatory retirement age.[url=https://ballotpedia.org/North_Carolina_Supreme_Court_elections,_2022#cite_note-1][1][/url] Dietz and Inman, both judges on the North Carolina Court of Appeals, ran to succeed her.
North Carolina began using partisan elections for judicial selection in 2018. Supreme court justices are elected to eight-year terms.
The idea of electing Supreme Court justices seems wrong. I can't believe 21 states choose their Supreme Courts that way.
There is no magic to a judge's robe. You can either have politicized judge's or unelected, unaccountable dictators. The key is to limit the power of judge's as our Constitution is actually written.
North Carolina chooses judges in a better manner than the United States. Let elections have consequences.
I disagree. The public is not able to vet the qualifications of judges. Los Angeles County puts its judges on the ballot and I do a little research but I really don't feel qualified to have an opinion. I think the judicial branch benefits by not being subject to the whims of the electorate. We already have branches of government that serve that purpose.
How do you think judges should be chosen?
I am okay with governor appointments and confirmation by another body like the senate.
Look no further than the Superior Court of Contra Costa County, where then Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger appointed a ton of LIBERAL JUDGES to fill vacancies, to the point where DA Diane Becton and her team cant even do their job anymore.
These judges do everything they can to eliminate jail time. And Covid gave them cover too.
Yeah, that's worked out real well.
Real well for our society.
At this point, the GOP's insecurity and hatred of people is impossible to hide. They're banning rainbows and shooting beer cans because it's the swan song of an intolerant, irrelevant generation, bemoaning the loss of control over a world that no longer needs them.
— Ben Kraus (@TheSharkPunch) May 4, 2023
Florida GOP Representative Jeff Holcomb says the quiet part out loud on the House floor today.
— Carlos Guillermo Smith (@CarlosGSmith) May 2, 2023
“Our terrorist enemies hate homosexuals MORE THAN WE DO.”
Audible gasping in the chamber.
And then there’s @RepSkidmore’s reaction. 😲 pic.twitter.com/ukH8EZmqL2
Truly prescient!! https://t.co/h4fMxQYHRw
— Laurence Tribe 🇺🇦 ⚖️ (@tribelaw) May 5, 2023
Quote:
Leaked communications between members of the group and minutes taken at board meetings over the course of several years speak loudly about the challenges the group faced in pursuing its deeply unpopular agenda: returning America to a time when the laws and social mores around family squared neatly with evangelical Christian beliefs.
Many of the College's most radical views target transgender people, and in particular, transgender youth. The leak, which had been indexed by Google, includes volumes of literature crafted specifically to influence relationships between practicing pediatricians, parents, and their children. It includes reams of marketing material the College aims to distribute widely among public school officials. This includes pushing schools to adopt junk science painting transgender youth as carriers of a pathological disorder, one that's capable of spontaneously causing others la the dancing plagueto adopt similar thoughts and behaviors.
This is one of the group's most dubious claims. While unsupported by medical science, it is routinely and incuriously propagated through literature targeted at schools and medical offices around the US. The primary source for this claim is a research paper drafted in 2017 by Lisa Littman, a Brown University scholar who, while a medical doctor, was not specialized in mental health. The goal of the paper was to introduce, conceptually, "rapid onset gender dysphoria"a hypothetical disorder, as was later clarified by the journal that published it. Littman would also clarify personally that her research "does not validate the phenomenon" she'd hypothesized, since no clinicians, nor individuals identifying as trans, had participated in the study.
More on #Verdict: https://t.co/0UaB0aAI7S
— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) May 7, 2023
Wow. The Florida GOP legislator revealing his inner bigotry was stunning and Carl Sagan's prediction was scarily accurate. I wish I could give this post more than one star.Unit2Sucks said:At this point, the GOP's insecurity and hatred of people is impossible to hide. They're banning rainbows and shooting beer cans because it's the swan song of an intolerant, irrelevant generation, bemoaning the loss of control over a world that no longer needs them.
— Ben Kraus (@TheSharkPunch) May 4, 2023Florida GOP Representative Jeff Holcomb says the quiet part out loud on the House floor today.
— Carlos Guillermo Smith (@CarlosGSmith) May 2, 2023
“Our terrorist enemies hate homosexuals MORE THAN WE DO.”
Audible gasping in the chamber.
And then there’s @RepSkidmore’s reaction. 😲 pic.twitter.com/ukH8EZmqL2
Carl Sagan saw this era coming.Truly prescient!! https://t.co/h4fMxQYHRw
— Laurence Tribe 🇺🇦 ⚖️ (@tribelaw) May 5, 2023
And finally, there's been a massive leak of files from an abhorrent religious "doctor" group pretending to be a think tank that shows how twisted so much of this anti-trans obsession by conservatives is.
Here's just a taste:Quote:
Leaked communications between members of the group and minutes taken at board meetings over the course of several years speak loudly about the challenges the group faced in pursuing its deeply unpopular agenda: returning America to a time when the laws and social mores around family squared neatly with evangelical Christian beliefs.
Many of the College's most radical views target transgender people, and in particular, transgender youth. The leak, which had been indexed by Google, includes volumes of literature crafted specifically to influence relationships between practicing pediatricians, parents, and their children. It includes reams of marketing material the College aims to distribute widely among public school officials. This includes pushing schools to adopt junk science painting transgender youth as carriers of a pathological disorder, one that's capable of spontaneously causing others la the dancing plagueto adopt similar thoughts and behaviors.
This is one of the group's most dubious claims. While unsupported by medical science, it is routinely and incuriously propagated through literature targeted at schools and medical offices around the US. The primary source for this claim is a research paper drafted in 2017 by Lisa Littman, a Brown University scholar who, while a medical doctor, was not specialized in mental health. The goal of the paper was to introduce, conceptually, "rapid onset gender dysphoria"a hypothetical disorder, as was later clarified by the journal that published it. Littman would also clarify personally that her research "does not validate the phenomenon" she'd hypothesized, since no clinicians, nor individuals identifying as trans, had participated in the study.
My phone has been having trouble with these massively Twitter laden threads for a while now. This is the first one that choked my tablet. So far, my PC is hanging tough though for this thread page it's taking a few minutes to load the images..sycasey said:
This thread now has so many Twitter links that it crashes when I try to view it on mobile.
"Why are we using taxpayer dollars to overly sexualize or indoctrinate children?" -- Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt on vetoing funding for PBS pic.twitter.com/iKOrxfVkq1
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 8, 2023
This was as recent as 2007. https://t.co/sMYPq9yTRo pic.twitter.com/lG90zuF210
— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) May 8, 2023
okay the “why aren’t these kids hornier” thing is getting out of hand https://t.co/VJTZ3QaBvL
— Jane Coaston (@janecoaston) May 8, 2023
Whenever I stumble on this publication I'm struck by how much conservative "thought" is just empty nostalgia and jingoism. https://t.co/LtDWejwI2o pic.twitter.com/cQzyJqCkYV
— Michael Hobbes (@RottenInDenmark) May 8, 2023
You could see the conservative approach to sexuality being articulated during Me Too, and I think often of how much more precise and challenging that movement might have become if it hadn’t been chained down with defensiveness and eventually smothered by backlash.
— Moira Donegan (@MoiraDonegan) May 8, 2023
Leaked Video Shows Ron DeSantis and Matt Gaetz Workshopping a Response to a Racist Comment https://t.co/Pph9Ie77dz pic.twitter.com/vinULvLacg
— Jezebel (@Jezebel) May 8, 2023
