Supreme Court rules president can remove independent-agency appointees
MAJOR BREAKING: In a 5-4 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court held that states may count mail-in ballots that are postmarked on or before Election Day, even if they arrive afterward. Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh dissented.
Romance reader monster496Why any judge rules against counting legitimate votes submitted on time is ridiculous
Newton's Apple Core139It has gotten to the point where I knew exactly which 4 Justices dissented before reading it. It will take a generation to undo the damage Trump has done to US institutions.
Sue in Rockville 💙🦋💙🦋💙🦋97That's 3! Good Rulings by SC First, do no harm By the SC declining Trump's final appeal? The court reaffirms Trump is a RAPIST, & an Pedophile, Adulterer & repeat sexual abuser Bravo E. Jean Carroll! There was "No malice" by CNN bsky.app/profile/ronf...
trump is destroying the country49Likely Amy barrett and Roberts were afraid it would disenfranchise right wing voters too, also this is them throwing a crumb to those pretending this court isn’t fully in the tank to trump
Middlerage31This day keeps getting better & better! Bye bye Dumpy. You are OUT come November!
John III16In these days and times, it's interesting that these same individuals are always on the opposite side of what the American public wants. They are indeed excellent cherry pickers when they want to be it seems.
Tamika3The fact that this is 5-4 should concern people. Easily should be 9-0
Calvin C3#VotingRights upheld, try as they might to suppress them.
Ernesto3#BREAKING The #SupremeCourt just upheld the right of the voters to have our timely mailed ballots counted under state law #Resist
Paul S Kemp2The fact that anyone dissented on this is just another argument for court reform. Absolutely absurd.
Our independent federal regulatory agencies were created to protect the public from corporate harms. The only reason to end these protections is to give corporate America even higher profits by shifting the risks of harms to individual people. The shame of the John Roberts court.
Tom13If capitalists truly understand something, it's that "you get what you pay for." This administration and SCOTUS were thoroughly paid for, and the payors are getting exactly what they needed.
democracy4u.bsky.social9they will go after us for our many, many crimes
Self Driving Humans9The Roberts court continues to work the will of Project 2025.
YvetteJR718☮️💙♋️ ♎️❌9Roberts is a heinous person. What’s even worse he shouldn’t be. He has his job for life. He’s highly educated so one would think he definitely has been exposed to other countries & cultures. Yet he’s still a horrible RACIST! He’s still a MISOGYNIST. There’s no EXCUSE. Roberts should be ASHAMED. 🤷♀️☮️💔
Algebraically Delicious8The Declaration of Independence famously states that whenever a government becomes destructive to the rights of the people, it is their right to "alter or to abolish it", i.e. overthrowing a tyrannical government is the most American thing Americans can do.
wickit411.bsky.social7Because of corruption, the billionaires win again. November 2026 is coming and We The People... have the power to stop the systematic corruption. VOTE.
First (but *not* last) ruling from #SCOTUS today is in Watson v. RNC. For a 5-4 majority (with Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch, Kavanaugh dissenting), Justice Barrett holds that federal law does *not* bar states from counting late-arriving mail-in ballots that are postmarked on or before Election Day.
Jim McWilliams77Too narrow a win for comfort, but I’ll take it.
David Marshall30Good, but does it require the USPS to postmark ballots on the day they’re received? If not, those ballots remain in jeopardy.
smm570.bsky.social22Well that was a close shave.
Courtney15Seems obvious under the law but we have to celebrate every win. 🏆
LostBoyJim11The sad thing here is that I am shocked that they ruled this way.
Eric H7Gosh. This is a surprise, isn’t it?
Adam Bonin554On behalf of the BlueSky Robert Caro Stans Caucus, a note on Watson: Alito's dissent characterizes LBJ's 1948 "Box 13 scandal" as involving "late arriving votes" which flipped the election. No. No! It's about votes which were never cast in the first place. www.newyorker.com/magazine/199...
Bill20This is a pleasant surprise.
Athul K. Acharya12Oregon—we dodged a bullet here.
Ruth Zakarin11The level of hate that will be directed at Barrett will be off the charts. Again for my fellow white women… You are never protected by white supremacy. You can be adjacent to it as long as you uphold it. As soon as you don’t, you will see the violent misogyny that is a pillar of white supremacy.
ashley 🌹11that’s not what I expected lol
Modernista648And election officials across the nation breathe a small sigh of relief.
Stephen Fesler 🧦 🥑🚶♂️🚌 🚊 🚆 🇺🇸 🇮🇪 🇪🇺🇻🇦🕊️6I’m sure they’re all happy with the outcome so they can reliably vote absentee when out of state
Robert (Bob) Kubinec4Sometimes democracy's survival comes down to the difference between Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh.
AblativMeatshld3Well that was depressingly close.
armandondk.bsky.social3That's crazy it got 4 dissenting votes
BREAKING: The Supreme Court upholds Trump’s firing of FTC commissioner Rebecca Slaughter without cause. The decision overturns a 90-year-old precedent that protected the heads or board members of independent agencies from arbitrary presidential dismissals. Full story to come.
Democracy Docket105The Court ruled 6-3 along partisan lines. Roberts, who delivered the opinion, wrote: "Although it is up to the Senate to decide whether to confirm those with whom the President would prefer to work...Subordinates who exercise the President’s power are subject to removal by him." Full story:
Christina M27So he can't remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, but he can remove FTC commissioner Rebecca Slaughter? Are they just making decisions by a dice roll at this point?
Richie Newport22SCOTUS clearly wants a king. And it shows. Impeach any justice who supports this BS.
taylormade56.bsky.social18Looking forward our next POTUS, a democrat will be able to fire all Trump's appointees in the FTC and other independent commissions without push back
Justin Satzman17The only plausible reason SCOTUS allows Trump to fire Slaughter and not Cook is that they have stock portfolios
Carl Darwin16So you mean now the president can force an agency head to do what he wants or get fired? That seems like a terrible f****** idea
Craig Johnson18ok this was what the big political controversies in the Gilded Age were about - corruption and cronyism
David Allsopp10Another nail in the coffin of democracy
terry gross’s ass double5it really rocks that SCOTUS just does whatever and don’t even lie about it a little bit anymore
Anjela Bugher (🦑❤️🐈)2I've changed my mind. People who said JR was concerned about his legacy were correct. He just wants his legacy to be destroying democracy in the United States.
Quixotica2Grats on your king MAGA. Agencies will no longer be independent.. except the for the fed reserve since that makes banks nervous but screw agencies that actually help the rest of us. Bravo 👏🏻
The Supreme Court has significantly expanded presidential power, allowing Trump to remove the heads of most independent federal agencies even while legal challenges continue. The ruling marks a major shift in the balance between the White House and
Alt National Park Service180agencies that Congress designed to operate with a degree of independence. The Court did make one notable exception the Federal Reserve. Justice Lisa Cook will remain on the Federal Reserve Board while she challenges Trump’s attempt to remove her over allegations of mortgage fraud.
Maggie From The Commonwealth (God save it!)9For nearly 70 years, the GOP/right wing has worked a long game for total control of the U.S. It spent many of those years carefully constructing the 6-traitor SCOTUS majority to enable permanent REPUBLICAN rule. Trump is simply the president in place giving them the opportunities to finish the job.
Drew Warned You9And yet when Dems try to use these powers, SCOTUS will then rule it's unconstitutional
Katsat9I can’t believe this is happening in broad daylight. Each decision coming down is worse than the last, and direct attack on our Democracy.
BenFrankArt8Just flagrant collusion with this lawless president they helped install. Lord help us.
William Cook5Unless it deals with thier buddies wealth.
BREAKING (Good) NEWS: SCOTUS rules that states may accept & count mail-in ballots if they are postmarked on or before Election Day & can be counted if they arrive after Election Day. This is a big win for voting rights. The 4 dissents are Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch & Kavanaugh. Should surprise no one.
Warren Harding11Despite the good outcome, it’s clear that we need to reform the court in a huge way. These conservatives are destroying the country decision by decision.
RFK Brain Worm Jr.5Except that you will need to make sure you take your ballot to the counter and watch them postmark it because USPS made changes last year in that they no longer have to postmark mail on the day it was mailed, only when it reaches certain processing centers. www.wolterskluwer.com/en/expert-in...
Susan4As a Canadian I know way too much about the diabolical state of the US Supreme Court. 😫 At least there’s occasionally something to celebrate.
Dave4Pretty scary how narrow the margin of democracy is at this point.
Evan Lahti1Voting is legal, narrowly. Gee, what a relief
D.G1Term limits and time to write real code of ethics policy when it comes to the SCOTUS.
Erica Anderson53I will enjoy this win at the moment.
Larry 🇬🇧 🇺🇦 🇵🇸 🇨🇦 🇲🇽 🇵🇦 🇬🇱48Thomas (Corrupt Sex Pervert), Alito (Corrupt Nazi), Gorsuch (Plagiarist, Misogynist & Liar) & Kavanaugh (Liar & Drunken Sex Pervert) all need to be impeached & removed from SCOTUS ASAP.
Tamela Ehlinger 🇩🇰🇨🇦🇵🇦🇲🇽🇳🇴🇸🇪🇬🇧🇺🇦4This court MUST be reformed. It is not a question of maybe anymore. It is a MANDATE to get it done
“Matter of Fact”3This is HUGE and Trump will be all over this saying it’s fraudulent and Rigged, my response, hey, Kiss my 🫏 Ass 🫏
but… they were cast before the election… that this case was 5-4 in favor of basic logic and not 9-0 is monumentally absurd
Grudgie the Whale22It’s the equivalent of “stay in line.” The voter was on time.
Andrew Robbins12supreme court upholds right v wrong by single vote
Claire Managlia2Sooooo, if a person were to interrupt a polling station to the extent that ballots couldn’t be counted until the day after, would that nullify all those votes? What the actual fuck have they done here?
Dillon "Back to making games again"2Is it bad that I'm glad it wasn't 6-3 along party lines in the opposite direction? Because that's how bad I expect the Republican Justices to be.
jlp2024.bsky.social1By alito logic the count should stop at 11:59:59 pm regardless of how the ballots are received
Chad Denton1I vaguely recall a time when the Court was still a reactionary dictatorial body but they put at least *some* effort into the pretense.
The Supreme Court just threw out nearly a century of precedent to help Trump consolidate power and reward corruption. Independent agencies exist to serve the public interest, not the political interests of whichever president happens to be in office.
Indivisible ❌👑35By stripping those protections, the MAGA SCOTUS is dismantling the checks and balances it is supposed to uphold. The carveout for the Federal Reserve only shows how grossly political this decision is.
Patricia Mitchell3THE U.S. IS IN PERIL. Are the mainstream Republicans happy about this?? How many will continue to vote for the (R) in any race??
Bones712The conservative Supreme Court is corrupt and needs their power limited. Vote Blue so we can change this!! Vote!
Jones2This absolutely sucks. Now what?
thatraleighguy.bsky.social2On the plus side, they made it easier for a Democratic President to fire all of Trump's lackeys wherever they might be.
JoeBurgh1The $Scrotus is more corrupt than the 🍊💩!
So the next Democratic president is gonna fire every single Republican serving in any agency on day one, right?
Mark Anderson15To get my vote in the primary you better at least promise to.
kfkfa.bsky.social6Until there's a lawsuit and this "court" says Humphrey's is actually really important and is settled law again
Singularity Shitposting2I mean, if they arent running on it im not voting for them. I want a war of vengeance against their entire political project and will settle for nothing less.
peregrine kate (she/her)1IANAL and still my hair in on fire over this one (& the incoherence in juxtaposition with Cook). Yes, I’m glad she has her position, but the destruction of agency independence is massive overreach even for them. FFS.
Tuffy11This is how government death spirals happen. Not saying the Dems would be wrong to purge Trump appointees, just that it’s if it becomes a feature of changing administration the outcome is pretty bad.
Josh Jones6The quickness with which the Roberts Court will find "dems can't do this, actually" carveouts will make ya'lls head spin
WalkingTaako🏴☠️🏳️🪣💩3No, you see, that's not allowed.
Another day, another major event in the Trump era that corporate media doesn’t seem to know how to report on. They tell us the president now has the power to fire people at independent agencies. And I ask, sorry, what “independent” agencies? The Supreme Court just ended those.
nanagleason.bsky.social6But can’t fire at the Fed. How did the court square that circle?
Stevie Z3Apparently, MAGA "Justices" were never taught the meaning of the word "independent". But... bsky.app/profile/stev...
saintmaker.bsky.social1Another thing I now expect any Democrat running for president to promise…and KEEP their promise…to fire EVERY Trump-tainted appointee on Day-One.
Thedocrucker1Correction, republican presidents have the power to fire people at independent agencies.
Is it fair to say they also given the next Democratic president a weapon to clear out all the Trump-loyal staff being placed in the agencies now?
RawrTigerlily102Yeah, this is the only silver lining. They put all Trump’s chumps under the same threat of removal.
Dru Stevenson14Yes, assuming they are consistent and that we get to have free elections in the future.
Moldy Diner Bagels7Depends on the Democrat. Because, you know, norms and such.
Staid Winnow4No. The rules change for Democratic presidents.
Gabe Burgess3Except SCOTUS will quickly reverse their decision if the Dems ever regain control. This court needs to be destroyed, if they ever regain control of the Congress and the Presidency they must pack the shit out of the court and pass massive judicial reforms.
Scocyc33They don’t intend to ever lose control of the Presidency. That’s the major crux here, they’re being straightforward about that disclosure and always have been.
