The conservatives are said to have a 6-3 majority on the US Supreme Court, including Chief Justice John G Roberts, Jr. However, there are differences. The chief justice does not share the views of hardline conservative Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr.

The differences were caught on tape when a woman posing as a Catholic conservative secretly recorded her conversations with them without their knowledge at an exclusive gala at the Supreme Court last week,

Justice Alito said compromise between the left and right might be impossible in America and agreed with the woman that the nation should return to a place of godliness.

“One side or the other is going to win,” Justice Alito told the woman,  Laura Windsor.  “There can be a way of working, a way of living together peacefully, but it’s difficult, you know, because there are differences on fundamental things that really can’t be compromised.”

The judge agreed with Windsor when she said that “people in this country who believe in God have got to keep fighting for that, to return our country to a place of godliness”.

“I agree with you, I agree with you,” he responded.

Chief Justice Roberts differs with Justice Alito

His comments were in marked contrast to the views expressed by Chief Justice Roberts. The chief justice shot down Windsor’s suggestion that the court had an obligation to lead the country on a more “moral path”.

“Would you want me to be in charge of putting the nation on a more moral path?” said Chief Justice Roberts. “That’s for people we elect. That’s not for lawyers.”

Windsor sought his views on religion, saying: “I believe that the founders were godly, like we’re Christians, and I think that we live in a Christian nation and that our Supreme Court should be guiding us in that path.”

Chief Justice Roberts retorted, “I don’t know if that’s true.”

He added: “I don’t know that we live in a Christian nation. I know a lot of Jewish and Muslim friends who would say maybe not, and it’s not our job to do that.”

The chief justice did not think the country was irreparably divided. He pointed out that the United States had managed crises as severe as the Civil War and the Vietnam War.

Windsor secretly recorded the justices at an annual black-tie event for the Supreme Court Historical Society, a charity that preserves the court’s history and educates the public about its role. The gala was open only to members, not journalists, and tickets cost $500.

The charity criticized the secret recordings, edited and shared on social media.

“We condemn the surreptitious recording of justices at the event, which is inconsistent with the entire spirit of the evening,” it said.

Woman explains why she made secret recordings

Windsor describes herself as a documentary filmmaker and “advocacy journalist”.

She said she had no other way to report on the candid thoughts of the justices.

“We have a court that has refused to submit to any accountability whatsoever — they are shrouded in secrecy,” Windsor said. “I don’t know how, other than going undercover, I would have been able to get answers to these questions.”

She did not tell the justices she was a journalist and that they were being recorded. She said she had to record the justices secretly to ensure that her account would be believed.

“I wanted to get them on the record,” she said. “So recording them was the only way to have proof of that encounter. Otherwise, it’s just my word against theirs.”

Source: The New York Times

The post Conservative US Supreme Court justices’ differences revealed in secret recordings appeared first on The Independent News.

Donald Trump is championing a controversial plan to overhaul the civil service system. A move that critics warn could lead to unprecedented government control and pave the way for authoritarianism. At the heart of the plan is Schedule F.

This proposed classification would make firing tens of thousands of federal employees significantly easier.

This sweeping change could fundamentally alter the federal government’s landscape, stripping job protections from civil servants who currently enjoy merit-based safeguards and the right to appeal disciplinary actions.

Schedule F – what it is

Conservatives, including Trump, argue that the president should have more control over the federal bureaucracy. Trump has been particularly vocal, insisting it needs to be “brought to heel.” To this end, he created Schedule F through an executive order in October 2020.

The order aimed to reclassify federal workers in “confidential, policy-determining, policy-making, and policy-advocating positions” as “at-will” employees, stripping them of civil service protections and making them vulnerable to being fired for any reason or none at all.

Trump has made it clear that, if re-elected, he will revive Schedule F. In a campaign video last year, he pledged to “remove rogue bureaucrats,” promising to wield this power “very aggressively.”

Potential impact sparks alarm

The potential impact of Schedule F has sparked alarm among federal employees, political scientists, union leaders, and watchdog groups. They fear that at-will employment would stifle dissent, making government workers hesitant to raise concerns that conflict with their superiors’ political agendas.

“You can see where it can grind work to a halt,” said Joe Spielberger, policy counsel at the Project on Government Oversight. “Even people trying to do the right thing [would] be afraid that if they do something wrong, they’ll be out of a job.”

Critics like Donald Moynihan, a professor of public policy at Georgetown University, argue it would invite “politicization and patronage throughout the federal workforce.” He believes that under a president not committed to democratic norms, seizing control of the bureaucracy is a classic strategy for advancing authoritarian governance.

As Trump campaigns on the promise of enacting Schedule F, the nation faces a crucial question: will this proposed restructuring ensure a more accountable and efficient government, or will it erode the democratic principles on which the United States was built? The answer could shape the future of American democracy.

Sources:

Trump plan to gut civil service triggers pushback

Trump’s plan to gut civil service protections was harsher than estimated

The ‘Chilling’ Trump Plan That Could Pave the Way for Authoritarianism

Related Stories

Trump is greatest threat to democracy: Joe Biden

Trump says will jail opponents and this has some hotshots worried

Election Fears: Will Trump accept defeat in 2024?

The post “Schedule F”: Trump’s plan towards authoritarianism? appeared first on The Independent News.