Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Jake Hildreth (acorn) :blacker_heart_outline: (horse@infosec.exchange)'s status on Wednesday, 20-Dec-2023 20:13:56 JST Jake Hildreth (acorn) :blacker_heart_outline:

   in reply to

   • Qasim Rashid, Esq.
   • Tor Iver Wilhelmsen
   • Jacob - Challenging Apathy

   @ChallengeApathy @toriver @QasimRashid The Colorado state Supreme Court is appointed but each member has to win retention votes to remain on the court. 6 of 7 current judges have won retention elections. So, while not elected in the traditional sense, they are supported by the voting public.

   • Embed this notice
     Jacob - Challenging Apathy (challengeapathy@infosec.exchange)'s status on Wednesday, 20-Dec-2023 20:13:57 JST Jacob - Challenging Apathy

     in reply to

     • Qasim Rashid, Esq.
     • Tor Iver Wilhelmsen

     @toriver @QasimRashid The doctor analogy is a bit flawed. You get to choose what doctor you go to (within reason). It's not legality the Colorado Supreme Court determined, it's politics. This whole thing really does boil down to the ruling class acting as if voters can't make decisions for themselves. I, for one, am fully capable of doing my research and making up my own mind without the help of mass media, big tech algorithmic manipulation and, yes, without the help of an unelected court stepping out of its bounds to play party politics.

   • Embed this notice
     Tor Iver Wilhelmsen (toriver@mas.to)'s status on Wednesday, 20-Dec-2023 20:13:58 JST Tor Iver Wilhelmsen

     in reply to

     • Qasim Rashid, Esq.
     • Jacob - Challenging Apathy

     @ChallengeApathy @QasimRashid As they have done. Election qualifications are part of the laws. Being «unelected» is not a disqualification for doing their job. Is your doctor «elected»? No. Being «elected» to a position is a rarity, most people are hired. That does not make them worthless. Unless you want a separate political class that runs unsupervised by others.

   • Embed this notice
     Jacob - Challenging Apathy (challengeapathy@infosec.exchange)'s status on Wednesday, 20-Dec-2023 20:13:59 JST Jacob - Challenging Apathy

     in reply to

     • Qasim Rashid, Esq.
     • Tor Iver Wilhelmsen

     @toriver @QasimRashid Indeed, but the courts are there to determine the legality of legislation, not to determine what candidates can run. They're unelected. It's not their role to decide politics, it's their role to determine legality.

   • Embed this notice
     Tor Iver Wilhelmsen (toriver@mas.to)'s status on Wednesday, 20-Dec-2023 20:14:00 JST Tor Iver Wilhelmsen

     in reply to

     • Qasim Rashid, Esq.
     • Jacob - Challenging Apathy

     @ChallengeApathy @QasimRashid Then you will want to change the Constitution to remove the Electoral College and take the responsibility of running elections away from the states. As it is now, elections are PER STATE.

   • Embed this notice
     Jacob - Challenging Apathy (challengeapathy@infosec.exchange)'s status on Wednesday, 20-Dec-2023 20:14:01 JST Jacob - Challenging Apathy

     in reply to

     • Qasim Rashid, Esq.

     @QasimRashid I'm not going to get political but the idea of a single state court being capable of banning a candidate from running sets a very, very bad precedent for EVERYONE. A candidate should only be banned either by the SCOTUS or by a 75% majority of state supreme courts. It shouldn't be permissible for one state to determine who can and cannot run.

   • Embed this notice
     Qasim Rashid, Esq. (qasimrashid@mastodon.social)'s status on Wednesday, 20-Dec-2023 20:14:02 JST Qasim Rashid, Esq.

     Republicans: The Senate cannot convict and ban Trump because that's for the courts to decide!

     Colorado Supreme Court: Okay, done.

     Republicans: wait not like that

   • Embed this notice
     Jacob - Challenging Apathy (challengeapathy@infosec.exchange)'s status on Wednesday, 20-Dec-2023 20:21:12 JST Jacob - Challenging Apathy

     in reply to

     • Qasim Rashid, Esq.
     • Tor Iver Wilhelmsen

     @horse @toriver @QasimRashid I appreciate the explanation but this is still an issue. With a representative or senator, you're able to impact the way they vote in congressional hearings where there's proper debate.

   • Embed this notice
     Jake Hildreth (acorn) :blacker_heart_outline: (horse@infosec.exchange)'s status on Wednesday, 20-Dec-2023 21:25:15 JST Jake Hildreth (acorn) :blacker_heart_outline:

     in reply to

     • Qasim Rashid, Esq.
     • Tor Iver Wilhelmsen
     • Jacob - Challenging Apathy

     @ChallengeApathy @toriver @QasimRashid I would fully agree with you if Supreme Court justices lived in isolation chambers completely separate from public opinion or <gestures wildly at the world>.

     If elections keep reps and senators (at least somewhat) beholden to the public, why don't elections do the same for justices?

   • Embed this notice
     Nicole Parsons (npars01@mstdn.social)'s status on Wednesday, 20-Dec-2023 22:04:26 JST Nicole Parsons

     in reply to

     • Qasim Rashid, Esq.

     @QasimRashid

     None of these 147 congressional coup-plotters in the GOP should ever hold office ever again.
     https://www.salon.com/2023/04/28/special-counsel-calls-for-tapes-that-implicate-ted-cruz-in-attempts-to-delay-bidens-certification/

   • Embed this notice
     Jacob - Challenging Apathy (challengeapathy@infosec.exchange)'s status on Wednesday, 20-Dec-2023 22:33:08 JST Jacob - Challenging Apathy

     in reply to

     • Qasim Rashid, Esq.
     • Tor Iver Wilhelmsen

     @horse @toriver @QasimRashid Fair perspective, neighbor (PA native here). I just don't think anything as important as dictating the future of our federal government should be left up to oligarchs, regardless of what sort of oligarchs those are. Something that big should be, at the very least, heavily and transparently impacted by the public at large. These people are supposed to represent all of us, not just a select few and that's why this precedent concerns me.

     It's really not about politics for me in this specific case, just about the precedent it sets. We're in more dire straights than we've been in since the Civil War and this partisan goofiness isn't helping. We have differences but both sides demonize each other instead of recognizing that the system WANTS us to do that: a house divided cannot stand.

   • Embed this notice
     ccm_martin (merneptah1209@theblower.au)'s status on Thursday, 21-Dec-2023 02:13:47 JST ccm_martin

     in reply to

     • Qasim Rashid, Esq.
     • Nicole Parsons
     • jwhevans
     • Gatekeeper..Harris Walz

     @GatekeepKen @jwhevans @Npars01 @QasimRashid

     is there a bigger coward than ted cruz

   • Embed this notice
     Gatekeeper..Harris Walz (gatekeepken@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 21-Dec-2023 02:13:48 JST Gatekeeper..Harris Walz

     • Qasim Rashid, Esq.
     • ccm_martin
     • Nicole Parsons
     • jwhevans

     @jwhevans @Npars01 @QasimRashid @merneptah1209