Bernie Sanders does not seem to understand how the federal judiciary works

[Lief 🗽]

https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/690337356411330560

"Any Supreme Court nominee of mine will make overturning Citizens United one of their first decisions."

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

That statement wasn't worded that well, but I'm sure he understands how it works. The point is, it's a litmus test for his SCOTUS appointees.

[DrScholl]

That statement wasn't worded that well, but I'm sure he understands how it works. The point is, it's a litmus test for his SCOTUS appointees.

I'm convinced you dig in Sanders' laundry and put his dirty clothes under your pillow when you go to sleep. You are a true stan.

[Alcon]

That statement wasn't worded that well, but I'm sure he understands how it works. The point is, it's a litmus test for his SCOTUS appointees.

It's a litmus test that would require most judges to violate judicial canons, in fact.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Another non issue that no one will think about when they are voting.

[The Other Castro]

A Sanders nominee replacing one of the conservative judges would flip the majority to liberal and indeed make a decision reversing CU possibly one of the first. It's pretty easy to find a case that allows for those kind of decisions. Granted, he probably misworded this and the correct phrasing should have been priorities instead of decisions.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

That statement wasn't worded that well, but I'm sure he understands how it works. The point is, it's a litmus test for his SCOTUS appointees.

It's a litmus test that would require most judges to violate judicial canons, in fact.

What canon? Citizens United was a very controversial right-wing activist 5-4 ruling.

Or do you mean on how a case gets to the Supreme Court? Yeah, obviously SCOTUS doesn't just invent cases for themselves, so maybe we'd have to wait a year or two.

[Darthpi – Anti-Florida Activist]

I would take this to mean that they will prioritize taking a case to do so at the earliest possible opportunity.

[YPestis25]

I think we all need to realize this is also an intern run twitter account. Yeah, the tweet is badly phrased, which is something the Sanders' camp seems to have a proclivity of doing, but to use this as an indictment of Sanders' comprehension of the judiciary is a bit of a stretch.

[Lief 🗽]

Another non issue that no one will think about when they are voting.

I would hope some people think twice before voting for someone who has no idea how the legal system works (in addition, of course, to having no idea how the financial system works, how the healthcare system works, how foreign policy works, etc.).

[ProgressiveCanadian]

His main point is wanting to get rid of citizens united. I doubt many disagree with him on that.

[Maxwell]

That implies the radical wing cares about how things work. They want to destroy the fabric of AMERICA, regardless of whether any of their "reforms" "work". Luckily, I'm for down to earth, homely moderate Donald Trump, who will build a nice looking wall with a door so people can be let in freely, a military so powerful nobody will attack us, and AMERICAN jobs from ear to ear! Join me in Trump's world!

[DrScholl]

Sanders tends to say whatever he thinks his people want to hear and that is how his staff maintains his Twitter account as well. No matter how you slice this, the tweet is making a huge promise that cannot at all be guaranteed.

[Trapsy]

Bernie also thinks he can just break up the banks in the first 100 days of his presidency. http://www.vox.com/2016/1/21/10802660/bernie-sanders-bank-breakup

[Alcon]

That statement wasn't worded that well, but I'm sure he understands how it works. The point is, it's a litmus test for his SCOTUS appointees.

It's a litmus test that would require most judges to violate judicial canons, in fact.

What canon? Citizens United was a very controversial right-wing activist 5-4 ruling.

Or do you mean on how a case gets to the Supreme Court? Yeah, obviously SCOTUS doesn't just invent cases for themselves, so maybe we'd have to wait a year or two.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but...

Judicial canons of ethics generally prohibit discussion of issues that may come in front of the court, which is explicitly what Sanders is demanding.  He could find a nominee from a jurisdiction where this isn't applied (I don't think there are many) or from outside the judiciary, but this would thin his options out a lot, putting aside that a lot of jurists would be unwilling to do this because of self-imposed ethics.  And I can't blame them.

[Hillary pays minimum wage]

https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/690337356411330560

"Any Supreme Court nominee of mine will make overturning Citizens United one of their first decisions."

Someone remind Sanders this is the US not Nazi Germany.

[NeverAgain]

https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/690337356411330560

"Any Supreme Court nominee of mine will make overturning Citizens United one of their first decisions."

Someone remind Sanders this is the US not Nazi Germany.

At least say Soviet Russia, that at least has a shred of sense.

[Lexii, harbinger of chaos and sexual anarchy]

https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/690337356411330560

"Any Supreme Court nominee of mine will make overturning Citizens United one of their first decisions."

Someone remind Sanders this is the US not Nazi Germany.

c'mon, you were getting a little better, that's too low even for a hack/troll

[Trapsy]

https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/690337356411330560

"Any Supreme Court nominee of mine will make overturning Citizens United one of their first decisions."

Someone remind Sanders this is the US not Nazi Germany.

This is a political revolution.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/690337356411330560

"Any Supreme Court nominee of mine will make overturning Citizens United one of their first decisions."

Someone remind Sanders this is the US not Nazi Germany.

"Hey, Bernie, this country didn't kill all your father's relatives."

OK, carry on.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

That statement wasn't worded that well, but I'm sure he understands how it works. The point is, it's a litmus test for his SCOTUS appointees.

It's a litmus test that would require most judges to violate judicial canons, in fact.

What canon? Citizens United was a very controversial right-wing activist 5-4 ruling.

Or do you mean on how a case gets to the Supreme Court? Yeah, obviously SCOTUS doesn't just invent cases for themselves, so maybe we'd have to wait a year or two.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but...

Judicial canons of ethics generally prohibit discussion of issues that may come in front of the court, which is explicitly what Sanders is demanding.  He could find a nominee from a jurisdiction where this isn't applied (I don't think there are many) or from outside the judiciary, but this would thin his options out a lot, putting aside that a lot of jurists would be unwilling to do this because of self-imposed ethics.  And I can't blame them.

How would/did this apply to nominees like Taft, Charles Evans Hughes and Earl Warren, who were politicians prior to joining the court?  I mean Taft was a former president.  What issues wouldn't he have had public positions on?

It just seems to me that a judge is allowed to have an opinion on a major case. It's just sometimes they prefer to be less political and not show their cards. And if it's a case that hasn't had an argument on the merits that they've examined, it would be bad for them to have an opinion yet.

[Hillary pays minimum wage]

https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/690337356411330560

"Any Supreme Court nominee of mine will make overturning Citizens United one of their first decisions."

Someone remind Sanders this is the US not Nazi Germany.

c'mon, you were getting a little better, that's too low even for a hack/troll

Not if he thinks he can give orders to the courts like a tyrant.

[NeverAgain]

https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/690337356411330560

"Any Supreme Court nominee of mine will make overturning Citizens United one of their first decisions."

Someone remind Sanders this is the US not Nazi Germany.

c'mon, you were getting a little better, that's too low even for a hack/troll

Not if he thinks he can give orders to the courts like a tyrant.

I disagree with a litmus test, but how is this any different than the GOP candidates who would only support pro-life judges to the SCOTUS?

[Hillary pays minimum wage]

https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/690337356411330560

"Any Supreme Court nominee of mine will make overturning Citizens United one of their first decisions."

Someone remind Sanders this is the US not Nazi Germany.

c'mon, you were getting a little better, that's too low even for a hack/troll

Not if he thinks he can give orders to the courts like a tyrant.

I disagree with a litmus test, but how is this any different than the GOP candidates who would only support pro-life judges to the SCOTUS?

Your comprehension is that being pro-life is the same as one man controlling the legal system?  As for your notion of Republicans only appointing pro-life judges, it's not true and never really been said by a serious candidate. People in your party often say what you said though in order to dramatize political issues in favor of their party.

[Zanas]

To be fair, nothing of legal substance can really be worded correctly in 140 characters. Twitter tends to narrow the thought, which is exactly what it's for.