2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forum"Why Bernie Sanders’ Misinformed Supreme Court Tweet Matters"
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/01/22/3742001/why-bernie-sanderss-misinformed-supreme-court-tweet-matters/"The problem with this tweet, however, is that it betrays a serious misunderstanding of how the Supreme Court operates. Unlike a legislature, which is free to take up or ignore particular issues at their leisure, court cases must clear numerous procedural hoops before they are decided, and this is doubly true for the Supreme Court of the United States. In reality, it would be nearly impossible for Sanderss nominee to ensure that any particular case was one of their first decisions."
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)You left that part out.
OOPSIE!
You're welcome!
IllinoisBrenel
(51 posts)MissDeeds
(7,499 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Hillary said she would appoint someone who would overturn CU. Bernie said it would be one of the first decisions of his appointee to the SCOTUS....which is pretty much impossible.
Reading is fundamental.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Between the communism, sexism, racism and anti-Semitic talking points today it's definitely preferable to imply the man is a moron who doesn't know what he's doing based off one tweet which was already clarified.
Take the high road, HC supporters!
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)because he knew how foolish and uninformed it made him look
You proved the point of the OP.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)So popular there were 9,340 results when I googled Bernie + walk back on DU.
So predictable, don't you guys have anything positive to post about your candidate?
Because all of this Brockian shit is backfiring.
Empowerer
(3,900 posts)Sanders said, "Any Supreme Court nominee of mine will make overturning Citizens United one of their first decisions." No one who has even a rudimentary understanding of how the Supreme Court works would ever say such a thing and he is being rightly criticized for the comment.
Justices have no say or control over the cases that come before them and therefore have absolutely no say in what their first decision will involve. Cases are appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court from the lower courts and, only then, can the justices decide whether to hear the case. No justice goes on the Court and says, "Let's see. What cases do I want to to decide? Ah, yes, I think I'll overrule Citizens United before I do anything else." Sanders' comment may have just been a matter of misspeaking, but it makes him sound clueless about how the Supreme Court gets its cases.
Had Sanders just said, "Any Supreme Court nominee of mine would overturn Citizens United," as Hillary Clinton has said, that would have been fine. But, unless he expects his appointees to recuse themselves from every case that comes before them until a case involving Citizens United is appealed to the Court so that can be one of their first case on the bench, Sanders' insistence that they would overturn Citizens United as their one of their first decisions makes him sound clueless.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Already been clarified, find something else to throw at the wall.
thesquanderer
(11,996 posts)There are ways a court can "encourage" a case to be brought on a topic they want to address.
At any rate, awkard phrasing in a tweet is not going to change anyone's mind about a candidate, and I don't think anyone seriously believes that someone who has been in Congress as long as Sanders has, and who has sat through numerous nomination processes, actually has no understanding about it.
As others have pretty much said, if this is the kind of stuff that the other side has to use as ammunition, they must be desperate.
DefenseLawyer
(11,101 posts)Try again.
dogman
(6,073 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)thereismore
(13,326 posts)That's a joke on Bernie's age, OK? Peace, Chillary fans.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)Because it shows how utterly desperate and unhinged the Hillarians are becoming, to
accuse someone with Bernie's congressional experience and years in DC of being "uninformed"
about how SCOTUS works. It's about picking nominations, stupid. end of story.
If that's all you guys have, then by all means, please proceed. I can't wait to hear Bernie's
reply to this bizzare half-baked hit piece.
leftupnorth
(886 posts)They have to know how this will look, don't they?
Otherwise it doesn't make any sense. At all.
Metric System
(6,048 posts)Sanders supporters would be all over Hillary if her campaign had tweeted this.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)that any nominee of his will have CU as a top priority, to over-turn it
at the first opportunity.
Tweets by their very nature are limited to very few words. This is a
Hillarian tempest in a teapot.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)some will bite - sad
KingFlorez
(12,689 posts)The problematic phrase is "one of their first decisions", because it is misleading about how the court works. Another over promise.
MeNMyVolt
(1,095 posts)... but after 8 months of watching his campaign, I'm starting to think it's intentional.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)^snip^
Hillary Clinton told a group of her top fundraisers Thursday that if she is elected president, her nominees to the Supreme Court will have to share her belief that the court's 2010 Citizens United decision must be overturned, according to people who heard her remarks.
Roy Ellefson
(279 posts)This lame attack is reminiscent of the right wing's attack on President Obama for his comment that he had visited "57 States"...those right wing idiots decided that Obama was so stupid that he didn't know there are only 50 states...a very similar ridiculous and silly attack coming
Bucky
(54,087 posts)It's pretty standard campaign hyperbole. This, of course, tells us nothing about what Sanders understands about the SCOTUS