USA 2024 presidential election

Also, the problem with bypassing Harris is that it would likely enrage quite a lot of the black vote - particularly black women. No Democrat can win without any overwhelming majority of that demographic.

Imagining a scenario where the Republicans control the Senate and refuse to back any VP nomination on the basis that anyone that isn't to the right of Marjorie Taylor Greene is a communist.

To be clear, the agency in question in this latest case has ended the challenged program and refunded the monies it collected. This case should have been dismissed, but the opportunity it afforded the conservatives was too great to pass up.

I find it rather funny that you argue from a position that Federal Agencies have overstepped their remits in how they interpret law, yet seemingly have no issues with the Court positioning itself as ultimate authority on all issues. A role not granted in the Constitution whatsoever. Those decades of lawsuits were from aggrieved businesses who objected having their activities curtailed for the public good. I'll certainly accept that there can be misguided efforts by government agencies, but i can recognize that the vast majority of the time, they are trying act in a way to protect people and nature, rather than businesses. Which is the real issue for conservatives.

To your last point, there's no basis in the Constitution for them having powers of Judicial Review. That was the court seizing power, kinda like what you're accusing Agencies of doing. Difference being there's oversight of Agencies, and absolutely none for the Supreme Court.

I believe in a common sense approach that allows Agencies to adapt their regulations to emerging data and circumstances. For example, the FCC classifying the internet with the same status as tv and radio waves for oversight. Something vehemently opposed by business as it would impede their exploitative practices. A common feature of this debate.

I feel you are arguing in bad faith here, where you present an option of Congress taking action address emergent issues, when you know this isn't the case. The Republicans refuse to engage in governance, responsible or otherwise. You are also aware, I'm sure, that Republicans have been engaged in efforts to use the courts as a way to allow the Supreme Court to make rulings in their favor. Bypassing the need for legislation, the very reason you're arguing in support of this most recent decision. Pushing extreme cases through the court system, failing upwards at every level in the hopes that they can get in front of this extremist Supreme Court. This is a strategy developed and nurtured by the Federalist Society and other organisations, and we've seen the fruit it has born this week.

Let's see if this pans out

You mean he has an interview scheduled with ABC on Friday.....

Manic, you're arguing as though we live in a functioning Democracy, where one party isn't actively trying to dismantle it. The Dominionists have been explicit about their goals and how they intend to secure them. Using the SC to overturn long standing precedent and protections is their main weapon to achieve them.

I would argue there's also quite a difference between political appointees to agencies and the rank and file careerists working there. Why did Net Neutrality change over the years? Trump came in and let the foxes run the henhouse. I would hold to the belief that most agencies are run by people who consistently try and do the right thing, who advocate for regulations that would benefit the public. Removing their ability to effectively implement those isn't going to help anyone, bar businesses.

"Or have the DOJ create fake evidence to prosecute someone"

That seems incredibly likely.Not as if Trump doesn't already have form in this area.

His gang of cronies will be emboldened to facilitate his every whim and the judiciary will be terrified to rule against him(if they are still in office)

What is MAGA lingo for Kristallnacht ?

First they will go for the migrants...