Row 83213

Row ID: 83213 | Dataset Entry | Axioma AXP Content Repository

Content Data

This page contains data entry 83213 from the Axioma AXP content repository. The structured data below represents the complete record for this entry.

I think people are over worried about whiplash of legislations. The reason why scotus could made all these ridiculous decisions like gutting abortion rights, gutting voting rights, permitting unlimited and secret political contributions etc is that they are unanswerable to the voters.

SCOTUS will simply become part of the cabinet. The consequence will correctly reflect on the elected officials.

Voting Rights Act was reauthorized by overwhelming majority in congress multiple times until it was gutted by Roverts' court, precisely because the Roberts' court is unaccountable to voters.

Don't fear democracy. Fear the unchecked and absolute power of the republican Supreme Court justices.

[source](https://www.vox.com/21211880/supreme-court-chief-justice-john-roberts-voting-rights-act-election-2020)

>As Edward Blum, a wealthy anti-civil rights activist who would go on to be the driving force behind the Supreme Court case that gutted preclearance in 2013, complained in a 2006 National Review article, “Republicans don’t want to be branded as hostile to minorities, especially just months from an election.” > >The 2006 Voting Rights Act reauthorization passed both houses by overwhelming margins. It was signed into law by Bush. > >… > >Justice Antonin Scalia gave voice to this frustration during oral arguments in Shelby County v. Holder (2013), the Roberts Court case that quashed preclearance. The Voting Rights Act, Scalia claimed, was a “perpetuation of racial entitlement,” and “whenever a society adopts racial entitlements, it is very difficult to get out of them through the normal political processes.” > >“I don’t think there is anything to be gained by any Senator to vote against continuation of this act,” Scalia continued. “And I am fairly confident it will be reenacted in perpetuity unless — unless a court can say it does not comport with the Constitution.”

FieldValue
text I think people are over worried about whiplash of legislations. The reason why scotus could made all these ridiculous decisions like gutting abortion rights, gutting voting rights, permitting unlimited and secret political contributions etc is that they are unanswerable to the voters. SCOTUS will simply become part of the cabinet. The consequence will correctly reflect on the elected officials. Voting Rights Act was reauthorized by overwhelming majority in congress multiple times until it was…
label r/politics
dataType comment
communityName r/politics
datetime 2024-05-24
username_encoded Z0FBQUFBQm5Lak1uWjVxdUFWWlVZeVF0dFl0ZDAydEMtXy1HX0ZyU1VvdWFpWmZFX0J3SEhsVkQ2SnNpVFhZU0dBOWxxVWgzM2gtRTRUUUpBTVh3Y05FUjNCQ3dSN1A4Ymc9PQ==
url_encoded Z0FBQUFBQm5Lak80NXoxS2pHUUlPdXRxbW9JRTgwS0R5Y09zWWxvZXFVaVA4eFNiTmxfQXRMYnpjQ0tWRzZKeFVPUFJhNXlVb3hrQUZBMlBfSjhGdjZlaTVPRGJLTHBpY0dWeEUwOHVJSy1sbUJwWEFGZkZIc3NWUTNKS3lZbDcwU0lKSm1WVE5zOVBBZzFnZmJNenhnbUhFUGxrZEtxNEZMYUJsSDZ5MjlCRFlCQm5DV2RZMjNUeFFOVWRoVS1rZjN4cjlBdmtpNlRqTmNuYzY5SXFnWlVDNGJCQjUwZEx4UT09

Raw Record

{
  "text": "I think people are over worried about whiplash of legislations. The reason why scotus could made all these ridiculous decisions like gutting abortion rights, gutting voting rights, permitting unlimited and secret political contributions etc is that they are unanswerable to the voters. \n\nSCOTUS will simply become part of the cabinet. The consequence will correctly reflect on the elected officials.\n\nVoting Rights Act was reauthorized by overwhelming majority in congress multiple times until it was gutted by Roverts' court, precisely because the Roberts' court is unaccountable to voters. \n\nDon't fear democracy. Fear the unchecked and absolute power of the republican Supreme Court justices. \n\n[source](https://www.vox.com/21211880/supreme-court-chief-justice-john-roberts-voting-rights-act-election-2020)\n\n>As Edward Blum, a wealthy anti-civil rights activist who would go on to be the driving force behind the Supreme Court case that gutted preclearance in 2013, complained in a 2006 National Review article, “Republicans don’t want to be branded as hostile to minorities, especially just months from an election.”\n>\n>The 2006 Voting Rights Act reauthorization passed both houses by overwhelming margins. It was signed into law by Bush.\n>\n>…\n>\n>Justice Antonin Scalia gave voice to this frustration during oral arguments in Shelby County v. Holder (2013), the Roberts Court case that quashed preclearance. The Voting Rights Act, Scalia claimed, was a “perpetuation of racial entitlement,” and “whenever a society adopts racial entitlements, it is very difficult to get out of them through the normal political processes.”\n>\n>“I don’t think there is anything to be gained by any Senator to vote against continuation of this act,” Scalia continued. “And I am fairly confident it will be reenacted in perpetuity unless — unless a court can say it does not comport with the Constitution.”",
  "label": "r/politics",
  "dataType": "comment",
  "communityName": "r/politics",
  "datetime": "2024-05-24",
  "username_encoded": "Z0FBQUFBQm5Lak1uWjVxdUFWWlVZeVF0dFl0ZDAydEMtXy1HX0ZyU1VvdWFpWmZFX0J3SEhsVkQ2SnNpVFhZU0dBOWxxVWgzM2gtRTRUUUpBTVh3Y05FUjNCQ3dSN1A4Ymc9PQ==",
  "url_encoded": "Z0FBQUFBQm5Lak80NXoxS2pHUUlPdXRxbW9JRTgwS0R5Y09zWWxvZXFVaVA4eFNiTmxfQXRMYnpjQ0tWRzZKeFVPUFJhNXlVb3hrQUZBMlBfSjhGdjZlaTVPRGJLTHBpY0dWeEUwOHVJSy1sbUJwWEFGZkZIc3NWUTNKS3lZbDcwU0lKSm1WVE5zOVBBZzFnZmJNenhnbUhFUGxrZEtxNEZMYUJsSDZ5MjlCRFlCQm5DV2RZMjNUeFFOVWRoVS1rZjN4cjlBdmtpNlRqTmNuYzY5SXFnWlVDNGJCQjUwZEx4UT09"
}
Explore Dataset Explore Row

Entry Information