Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Dawson Leery

(19,348 posts)
Fri Jan 22, 2016, 05:16 PM Jan 2016

"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 Sanders’s nominee to ensure that any particular case was “one of their first decisions.”"
28 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
"Why Bernie Sanders’ Misinformed Supreme Court Tweet Matters" (Original Post) Dawson Leery Jan 2016 OP
"Hillary Clinton, also has promised to appoint justices who will overrule Citizens United" beam me up scottie Jan 2016 #1
OOPSIE X 1000 IllinoisBrenel Jan 2016 #5
+ a zillion MissDeeds Jan 2016 #23
There's a difference Cali_Democrat Jan 2016 #14
LOL! Sure you guys run with that. beam me up scottie Jan 2016 #17
So Bernie had to walk back his tweet Cali_Democrat Jan 2016 #20
Another talking point: WALK BACK!!! beam me up scottie Jan 2016 #22
The two comments are very different Empowerer Jan 2016 #18
*YAWN* beam me up scottie Jan 2016 #19
Actually, justices DO have some say or control over the cases that come before them thesquanderer Jan 2016 #28
This attack is truly stupid DefenseLawyer Jan 2016 #2
It doesn't. N/T dogman Jan 2016 #3
So Hillary's statement of the same matters too? nt Live and Learn Jan 2016 #4
Wow this is the winning issue. Accusing a man who wrote the Constitution of ignorance. thereismore Jan 2016 #6
AUh, Dawson, I think you blew this one. pangaia Jan 2016 #7
Yes, this baseless attack does matter. 99th_Monkey Jan 2016 #8
I'm beginning to think they actually want Bernie to win. leftupnorth Jan 2016 #12
How is it desperate and unhinged to point out that a tweet is factually incorrect? You can bet Metric System Jan 2016 #15
Bernie is obviously talking about a NOMINATION for SCOTUS 99th_Monkey Jan 2016 #21
... closeupready Jan 2016 #9
stupid words directed to stupid voters SoLeftIAmRight Jan 2016 #10
The tweet was to appeal to people who don't now how the system works KingFlorez Jan 2016 #11
+1 I'd like to write it off as SBS just getting tired... MeNMyVolt Jan 2016 #13
And Hillary's speeches on the same subject don't??? Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #16
reminiscent Roy Ellefson Jan 2016 #24
You're really hanging an argument on that tiny hook? Bucky Jan 2016 #25
We are better than this. randys1 Jan 2016 #26
Easy. It doesn't. cheapdate Jan 2016 #27

beam me up scottie

(57,349 posts)
1. "Hillary Clinton, also has promised to appoint justices who will overrule Citizens United"
Fri Jan 22, 2016, 05:18 PM
Jan 2016
Of course, the fact that Sanders announced a substantive position on a major legal question is likely to be more important to voters than whether he understands the nuances of judicial procedure — as is the fact that Sanders feels so strongly about this particular question that he plans to only appoint justices who agree with him on this issue. (Sanders’s leading opponent for the Democratic nomination, Secretary Hillary Clinton, also has promised to appoint justices who will overrule Citizens United.) But a President Sanders’s ability to actually get the justices he wants on the Supreme Court could depend on whether he makes this issue a top priority.


You left that part out.

OOPSIE!




You're welcome!
 

Cali_Democrat

(30,439 posts)
14. There's a difference
Fri Jan 22, 2016, 05:41 PM
Jan 2016

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)
17. LOL! Sure you guys run with that.
Fri Jan 22, 2016, 05:44 PM
Jan 2016

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)
20. So Bernie had to walk back his tweet
Fri Jan 22, 2016, 05:46 PM
Jan 2016

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)
22. Another talking point: WALK BACK!!!
Fri Jan 22, 2016, 05:49 PM
Jan 2016

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)
18. The two comments are very different
Fri Jan 22, 2016, 05:44 PM
Jan 2016

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.

thesquanderer

(11,996 posts)
28. Actually, justices DO have some say or control over the cases that come before them
Sat Jan 23, 2016, 11:50 AM
Jan 2016

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.

thereismore

(13,326 posts)
6. Wow this is the winning issue. Accusing a man who wrote the Constitution of ignorance.
Fri Jan 22, 2016, 05:22 PM
Jan 2016

That's a joke on Bernie's age, OK? Peace, Chillary fans.
 

99th_Monkey

(19,326 posts)
8. Yes, this baseless attack does matter.
Fri Jan 22, 2016, 05:23 PM
Jan 2016

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)
12. I'm beginning to think they actually want Bernie to win.
Fri Jan 22, 2016, 05:27 PM
Jan 2016

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)
15. How is it desperate and unhinged to point out that a tweet is factually incorrect? You can bet
Fri Jan 22, 2016, 05:42 PM
Jan 2016

Sanders supporters would be all over Hillary if her campaign had tweeted this.

 

99th_Monkey

(19,326 posts)
21. Bernie is obviously talking about a NOMINATION for SCOTUS
Fri Jan 22, 2016, 05:46 PM
Jan 2016

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.

KingFlorez

(12,689 posts)
11. The tweet was to appeal to people who don't now how the system works
Fri Jan 22, 2016, 05:26 PM
Jan 2016

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)
13. +1 I'd like to write it off as SBS just getting tired...
Fri Jan 22, 2016, 05:34 PM
Jan 2016

... but after 8 months of watching his campaign, I'm starting to think it's intentional.

 

Motown_Johnny

(22,308 posts)
16. And Hillary's speeches on the same subject don't???
Fri Jan 22, 2016, 05:43 PM
Jan 2016
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/05/14/hillary-clintons-litmus-test-for-supreme-court-nominees-a-pledge-to-overturn-citizens-united/

^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)
24. reminiscent
Fri Jan 22, 2016, 06:09 PM
Jan 2016

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)
25. You're really hanging an argument on that tiny hook?
Fri Jan 22, 2016, 07:39 PM
Jan 2016

It's pretty standard campaign hyperbole. This, of course, tells us nothing about what Sanders understands about the SCOTUS

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»"Why Bernie Sanders’ Misi...