Today the Supreme Court ended Set Precedent, which makes the court a worthless institution.

[fightforfreedom]

This decision is even worse than I original thought and I original thought is was really bad. It's worse than that. They decided any Supreme Court decision can be changed. No Supreme Court decision can be trusted.

They have destroyed the reputation of the court and I don't know if it can ever be recovered.

I am all in on the idea to expand the court.

[dem4decades]

1. Yeah, that's a great idea, except we're minority governed. We don't have

50 Senators to do anything.

[The Unmitigated Gall]

2. The pukes kill everything they touch.

[RKP5637]

3. It's become a right wing political court. It is worthless. And now obsolete!!! n/t

[Deuxcents]

4. The 3 dissenters agree with you..as do I

[Irish_Dem]

5. They are changing how the three branches of government operate to install their fascist regime.

It is going to be white male christian minority rule.

They are not hiding it anymore. It is all out in the open.

[RockRaven]

6. Let's call it the Republican Court, not the Supreme Court, until the composition is changed.

We should always be highlighting how politicized/overtly partisan and thereby illegitimate it is.

[icymist]

11. Not just the Republican Court, but the extreme agenda Republican Court.

They opened that door.

[ecstatic]

7. It either gets expanded or disbanded

Right now they are illegitimate, not credible.

[UpInArms]

8. The felonious five installed GWB

and said it could not be used for precedent …

Now they overturn Roe … I am sick to death of the rightwing nuts who are on that court …

I hate Moscow Mitch more every day

[Samrob]

9. Pray that not many others understand this or they will be passing state laws against everything. nt

[anarch]

13. somebody ought to push things and make a law to ban the consumption of meat

or, I dunno, make it illegal for a private individual to own a car.

[onenote]

10. The decision is terrible and wrong. But there has never been a rule against overruling a prior court

decision.

They shouldn't have overruled Roe and Casey, but not merely because those cases are settled precedent, but because those cases were correctly decided.

Many cases, some decades old, have been overruled. For example, Obergefell overruled Baker v Nelson, a 1972 case. It would have been outrageous if the Court has refused to overrule that case simply because it was a forty-plus year old precedent.

[David__77]

12. It's a political institution just as is congress and presidency.

Superpowers in decline aren’t the most stable politically.