I'm not seeing any consequences listed for failure to comply.
this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2023
80 points (93.5% liked)
politics
19080 readers
4020 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
There is no enforcement listed. It's all an attempt to paper over the issue.
We investigated ourselves and found that we have been very naughty. This will be reported to Santa for enforcement.
Any law or regulation without enforcement is irrelevant.
Thats a lot of shoulds when it needs to read shall
there's also zero enforcement on the code.
"Yea. We should not be assholes, but we're still gonna be assholes. whatchya gonna do?"
We need checks and balances, but sometimes it feels like the entire machine has never been maintained. What do you do with corruption this widespread?
I have no good answers,
Though the French solution seems… effective?
Ah, doth the Usurper's bossom ring true? Or wilst thou wish his hand stayed?
Does it? They almost elected a nazi wannabe... twice. In the last two elections. They still have to protest to get their rights protected. Their first revolution literally led to Napoleon.
People always talk about how "successful" the French are at protecting their democracy... but it seems mostly performative, not effective.
I was referring to guillotines, as used during the French revolutionary period.
It’s still a bad solution… but rapidly becoming one of the few. The powers that are, have increasingly made it difficult for common Americans to have a say; while making it too easy for the oligarchs
Right... and it didn't work. Acting like it's some how a viable solution when it didn't lead to anything but more dictators seems like a weird leap of logic.
Actually they kept a lot of benefits given during the Revolution, even during Napoleon. Nobles become taxable, the third estate (the common people) got a political voice, clergy lost a lot of power, military positions became more awarded by merit than nepotism, wealth, or nobility, laws were equalized and started applying more to everyone, the press became more free, spending became focused on the public, and more. There was a reason Beethoven was writing a song for him, up until he crowned himself Emperor. Until then, he was a representative of a mostly beneficial revolution. And yes, that crowning and obsession with war was an unfortunate move, but a lot of the changes stuck for awhile even after those bag parts lol. Even when the monarchy returned after Napoleon, they were scared of rolling back too much of the people's gains for fear of starting another revolution.
Point is, they had an emperor and then some kings again, but comparing life before and after for the average French man, after was a marked improvement. The Revolution did work, to a point. I think the lesson more is that with every progressive gains, there will always be a conservative reaction people need to be aware of. The old power structure will always try to regain what they had before. It's not too give up and ask for scraps from the people in power.
They are now only allowed to accept four lavish international vacations per year and free usage of yachts 75 feet long or less. /s
This is the best summary I could come up with:
WASHINGTON, Nov 13 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday announced its first formal code of conduct governing the ethical behavior of its nine justices, bowing to months of outside pressure over revelations of undisclosed luxury trips and hobnobbing with wealthy benefactors.
Steven Lubet, a legal ethics expert who teaches law at Northwestern University, said the court's code "answers a public demand in a very respectful and thorough way."
The court has been buffeted for months by revelations regarding justices over undisclosed trips on private jets, luxury vacations, real estate and recreational vehicle deals, and more.
The news outlet ProPublica has detailed luxury trips taken for years by Thomas provided by Texas businessman Harlan Crow as well as real estate transactions involving the justice and the billionaire Republican donor.
A report by Senate Democrats found that Thomas apparently failed to repay at least a "significant portion" of a $267,230 loan he received from longtime friend Anthony Welters to buy a luxury motor coach.
ProPublica also detailed an undisclosed 2008 flight that conservative Justice Samuel Alito took on a private jet provided by billionaire hedge fund founder Paul Singer for a luxury fishing trip in Alaska.
The original article contains 665 words, the summary contains 196 words. Saved 71%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!