this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2024
851 points (99.1% liked)

politics

19097 readers
4071 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Justice Samuel Alito, a self-described Originalist, has been criticized for allegedly disregarding the Constitution’s text when it conflicts with his personal views.

Recently, it emerged that Alito accepted a knighthood from a European order, despite the Constitution’s ban on foreign titles for U.S. officials.

This title, from the House of Bourbon–Two Sicilies, raises questions about Alito’s commitment to American democratic ideals, which the Framers aimed to protect from foreign influence.

Critics argue that Alito’s actions reflect hypocrisy in his supposed adherence to Originalism and constitutional principles.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 121 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (5 children)

The key point here, not to get distracted, taking the title is trivial in the modern age. The title has little meaning to someone of today. The hitch is that Altito is a profound originalist. When he interprets the constitution he claims the text should be interpreted exactly as the founders explicited intented. All together, taking the title against the prohibition of the constitution acknowledges what his real intentions are. By claiming to know the framers exact intentions, something that is clearly unknowable, he can inject his own interests as he pleases.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

No, it is not trivial, it is a fundamental rejection of (small r) republicanism in the pursuit of personal vainglory.

It is also an aspect of Christofascism that you would, admittedly, need quite a lot of reading on development of the medieval concept of knighthood to pick up on even if modern elements are recognizable but the tl;Dr of it all is that knights as a separate and popular European political class are fundamentally linked to the "Crusader" archetype as an innately Christian warrior who does violence for the faith.

Whether Alito is aware of that specifically or not, and I wouldn't put much money on it as most people are rather surprised to find out even the earliest conceptualization of knight is actually more of a 10th century/Crusade thing than a Dark Age concept, I would certainly argue that that innately Christian aspect is at least subconsciously understood by Western society in general and I can say with certainty that 20th century fascist messaging was aware of it specifically and used it quite a lot.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago

The specific group that knighted him, the Sacred Military Constantinian Order of Saint George, is explicitly along Crusader lines.

https://realcasadiborbone.it/en/constantinian-order/

The Sacred Military Constantinian Order of Saint George is an ancient and internationally recognised Order of Knighthood which, from its remotest origins, has resolved to work for the glorification of the Cross, the propagation of the Faith, and the defence of the Holy Roman Church, to which it is strictly bound through special merits acquired in the East, and for which manifold evidences of gratitude and benevolence have been expressed by successive Supreme Pontiffs of the Roman Catholic Church.

Alito knows.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 3 days ago

This seems like bad behavior to me, doing something explicitly forbidden by the Constitution. Given that the Constitution says a justice shall "hold their office during good Behavior", he should be terminated from his position of power.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 3 days ago (1 children)

So, he’s either a dumb azz or he is lying?

[–] [email protected] 29 points 3 days ago (1 children)

He's lying. He's a traitorous piece of shit who should be executed thusly.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I hear Tar and Feathering traitors was all the rage back in the founding father days.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I would prefer lynching, hang him by his ligaments.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

We either keel haul or draw and quarter traitors, depending on the environment

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The key point here is that it is grounds for impeachment by.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Or even just starting the proceedings. Their counter argument would have to be so detached from reality and would undermine the decades they've been forcing originalism down our throats.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 3 days ago (2 children)

If you choose to look, Ted Kennedy received an honorary knighthood from Queen Elizabeth 2 whilst a sitting senator. And no one batted an eye. In fact he was widely praised for being knighted when it happened.

There are lots of meaningless honorary titles floating about if you care to actually look. And yes those types of titles, like "knighthood", are meaningless these days and have been for a number of centuries.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 days ago

Did you read what I wrote?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

This is not an honorary title. This is membership in the order, with duties and benefits. They gave him the highest rank you can get without noble blood. This is exactly what the Constitution bans.