• caffinatedone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    4 months ago

    Ahem, Bush v Gore… bit longer than a decade. They’re certainly more shameless now that they have a larger margin, but republican justices have been pushing an agenda for awhile.

    • qevlarr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      4 months ago

      At the time, it wasn’t this widely regarded as a power grab by conservative politicians in the Supreme Court. Not saying it wasn’t, but it was not seen as such. It was nowhere near as brazen as what we’re seeing today. Confidence was still quite high at the time or at least it returned quickly.

      • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        A bad decision like Bush v Gore or Citizens United was seen as an anomoly. While there were people who saw these as the political flexing they were, the general sentiment of the public was, “well, it must have been a difficult and complex decision. I’m sure they understand the legal impact and made the best decision that they could for the future of the country.”

            • halowpeano@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              No they weren’t… They were derided as conservative power grabs then as now. Even then they talked about Roberts as an activist conservative, as the “decider” vote in a 5v4 court, who played politics to maintain the appearance of neutrality on unimportant, to them, decisions so they could strike when it mattered.

              Hell, even then mass media referred to “conservative” and “liberal” justices, which clearly shows judges were not neutral.