News that I missed, courtesy of The Babylon Bee:
WASHINGTON, D.C.—Amid outcry from conservatives demanding Trump tip the balance of the Supreme Court, Trump has nominated himself for a seat on the highest court in the land.
“Sometimes, you just gotta do a job yourself,” Trump said. “These other judges don’t know the law like I do. I actually know all the laws. I know all the best laws, and some of the bad ones too. At least some people say they’re bad. I think they might be right. We should stop listening to the bad laws. We shouldn’t even have them, really. I will make all the best decisions as a judge. Some loser judges are taking advantage of this country and it’s a total disgrace. I will make it all better, way better.”
According to sources, Trump plans to hold the office of President and Supreme Court Justice at the same time. Citing his experience as a judge for Miss Universe as well as his time on The Apprentice, Trump is promising to make it “look easy.”
Lawyers are scrambling to figure out whether Trump can do this legally. Mitch McConnell has vowed to rush the confirmation through the Senate as quickly as possible. Lawmakers found they were too late, however, when they found Trump had already purchased a black robe on Amazon and taken a seat on the bench, refusing to leave.
Go here to read the rest. Hmm. Actually it is not necessary to be an attorney to serve on the Supreme Court. (The most recent Justice without a law degree, although he practiced law, was Justice Reed who retired in 1957, the year of my birth, from the Court.) As to holding both posts, I recall that Huey Long was simultaneously both Governor of Louisiana and a Senator from Louisiana. It might be worth proposing if only to see Pelosi and Schumer both die on the spot from apoplexy!
Good idea. At least he wouldn’t be confused about his role. Nowadays the Justices don’t seem to know what their job is. I guess making your own law is more interesting than evaluating someone else’s.
I understand Pelosi is threatening impeachment again as if that was some kind of parliamentary maneuver that would prevent Trump and the Senate from acting.
I don’t know anymore whether or not if these people are dangerously unserious or if they’re unseriously dangerous.
In any case, impeachment is now agreed to be a political tool.
I will be disappointed if Republicans do not impeach every democrat president unfortunate enough to be in office with a Republican controlled congress. (It’s not like there won’t be a valid reason to impeach anyway. Obama could easily have been impeached for many things, including his escapades in Libya, and Clinton was actually impeached. The odds of an honest dem president are basically 0.)
It is such a waste of energy since conviction in the Senate will not occur absent 67 votes. A futile exercise in spite, as was the Clinton impeachment. Never impeach unless you can convict.
It’s really kind of a dangerous waste of energy actually.
If Pelosi, Nadler, and Schiff impeach Trump again, he should just ignore it. Let ’em indulge their petty little grievances with whatever trumped up charges they can make up.
But good luck ever getting to 67 in the Senate,so politicized will the process forever after be, even when faced with real malfeasance.
If they impeach him again, and Trump gets reelected, he could turn the Lincoln Bedroom into the Mara Lago Lincoln Bedroom and rent it out permanently to Vladimir Putin and not be impeached.
That’s pretty funny, but I think this bee article made me laugh even harder.
https://babylonbee.com/news/genius-trump-nominates-joe-biden-to-supreme-court
Actually it is not necessary to be an attorney to serve on the Supreme Court. (The most recent Justice without a law degree, although he practiced law, was Justice Reed who retired in 1957, the year of my birth, from the Court.)
Prior to about 1920, most of the superior and appellate court judges where I grew up had studied law in office apprenticeships. One of the last on the New York Court of Appeals to have learned this way was John van Voorhis. IIRC, he was admitted to the bar in 1919. Around the time of his retirement, he offered reminiscences on his time in law. He was a 2d generation lawyer. He said his father had scotched any idea of a law degree for him, telling him his post-secondary education to date had fed his theoretical bent well enough. His father told him, “I want you to learn law through the soles of my shoes”.
When I started practicing in 1982 there were still a few older attorneys in Illinois who gained their licenses prior to the requirement of graduating from law school. Of course as late as 1900 most states didn’t require college degrees to be a lawyer, almost all following the apprenticeship route taken by Lincoln and countless other attorneys. I am beginning to suspect that we are in the twilight era of the law schools. Too costly for too meager a return in the training of attorneys.
I am beginning to suspect that we are in the twilight era of the law schools. Too costly for too meager a return in the training of attorneys.
I have a suspicion that the purpose of many professional schools is not to impart skills, but to employ the people who work in them (and to manufacture and propagate a systemically dishonest professional ideology). Top candidates for closure: teachers’ colleges, social work programs, and library schools. Add to that the requirement of a baccalaureate degree to enter many of these schools, which is more padding. (And, of course, BA programs are scandalously padded themselves). So many rice bowls deserve to be broken.