United For Democracy
@weareufd.bsky.social
We are a diverse coalition shining a spotlight on the ways this Supreme Court is impacting our families, our communities, our freedoms, and our democracy.
The MAGA justices want us to think they’re the final word. They’re not.
We the people decide what kind of democracy we want.
And we’re building the movement to take the Court back.
No more rubber stamps for authoritarianism. Let’s get to work.
We the people decide what kind of democracy we want.
And we’re building the movement to take the Court back.
No more rubber stamps for authoritarianism. Let’s get to work.
December 19, 2025 at 6:44 PM
The MAGA justices want us to think they’re the final word. They’re not.
We the people decide what kind of democracy we want.
And we’re building the movement to take the Court back.
No more rubber stamps for authoritarianism. Let’s get to work.
We the people decide what kind of democracy we want.
And we’re building the movement to take the Court back.
No more rubber stamps for authoritarianism. Let’s get to work.
This is the test of the Constitution.
Trump wants to overturn a 125-year precedent and strip U.S. citizenship from babies born here.
This is an attack on the very meaning of America.
Trump wants to overturn a 125-year precedent and strip U.S. citizenship from babies born here.
This is an attack on the very meaning of America.
December 18, 2025 at 7:52 PM
This is the test of the Constitution.
Trump wants to overturn a 125-year precedent and strip U.S. citizenship from babies born here.
This is an attack on the very meaning of America.
Trump wants to overturn a 125-year precedent and strip U.S. citizenship from babies born here.
This is an attack on the very meaning of America.
Mass shootings outnumber the days in a year.
Kids are dying in classrooms.
And SCOTUS is considering whether AR-15s(weapons of war) deserve protection.
If they back the gun lobby again, their legacy will be written in blood.
Kids are dying in classrooms.
And SCOTUS is considering whether AR-15s(weapons of war) deserve protection.
If they back the gun lobby again, their legacy will be written in blood.
December 17, 2025 at 8:57 PM
Mass shootings outnumber the days in a year.
Kids are dying in classrooms.
And SCOTUS is considering whether AR-15s(weapons of war) deserve protection.
If they back the gun lobby again, their legacy will be written in blood.
Kids are dying in classrooms.
And SCOTUS is considering whether AR-15s(weapons of war) deserve protection.
If they back the gun lobby again, their legacy will be written in blood.
Just gonna leave this here…
December 16, 2025 at 7:22 PM
Just gonna leave this here…
Guns are the #1 cause of death for kids and teens in America — surpassing car crashes and cancer.
The Roberts Court is being asked to decide whether AR-15s are protected under the Second Amendment.
If the Court cared about saving children’s lives, the answer should be simple.
The Roberts Court is being asked to decide whether AR-15s are protected under the Second Amendment.
If the Court cared about saving children’s lives, the answer should be simple.
December 15, 2025 at 5:35 PM
Guns are the #1 cause of death for kids and teens in America — surpassing car crashes and cancer.
The Roberts Court is being asked to decide whether AR-15s are protected under the Second Amendment.
If the Court cared about saving children’s lives, the answer should be simple.
The Roberts Court is being asked to decide whether AR-15s are protected under the Second Amendment.
If the Court cared about saving children’s lives, the answer should be simple.
Let’s be clear:
The Supreme Court has chosen Trump again and again—often in secret, often without a vote we can see.
That’s not judicial restraint.
That’s raw political power.
And it’s tearing a hole through our democracy.
The Supreme Court has chosen Trump again and again—often in secret, often without a vote we can see.
That’s not judicial restraint.
That’s raw political power.
And it’s tearing a hole through our democracy.
December 13, 2025 at 5:33 PM
Let’s be clear:
The Supreme Court has chosen Trump again and again—often in secret, often without a vote we can see.
That’s not judicial restraint.
That’s raw political power.
And it’s tearing a hole through our democracy.
The Supreme Court has chosen Trump again and again—often in secret, often without a vote we can see.
That’s not judicial restraint.
That’s raw political power.
And it’s tearing a hole through our democracy.
The Constitution gives Congress the power to create independent agencies like the FTC to serve the public — NOT the president.
Justice Jackson reminded the Court: That’s not a loophole. It’s by design.
If John Roberts overrides it, they’re not just changing a rule — they’re changing the balance of
Justice Jackson reminded the Court: That’s not a loophole. It’s by design.
If John Roberts overrides it, they’re not just changing a rule — they’re changing the balance of
December 11, 2025 at 7:33 PM
The Constitution gives Congress the power to create independent agencies like the FTC to serve the public — NOT the president.
Justice Jackson reminded the Court: That’s not a loophole. It’s by design.
If John Roberts overrides it, they’re not just changing a rule — they’re changing the balance of
Justice Jackson reminded the Court: That’s not a loophole. It’s by design.
If John Roberts overrides it, they’re not just changing a rule — they’re changing the balance of
Trump fired FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter — not for misconduct, but because she didn’t align with his agenda.
SCOTUS is now being asked to say: “That’s fine.”
This isn’t about one person. It’s about whether independent agencies can still exist.
And if they can’t — who protects the public?
SCOTUS is now being asked to say: “That’s fine.”
This isn’t about one person. It’s about whether independent agencies can still exist.
And if they can’t — who protects the public?
December 11, 2025 at 12:01 AM
Trump fired FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter — not for misconduct, but because she didn’t align with his agenda.
SCOTUS is now being asked to say: “That’s fine.”
This isn’t about one person. It’s about whether independent agencies can still exist.
And if they can’t — who protects the public?
SCOTUS is now being asked to say: “That’s fine.”
This isn’t about one person. It’s about whether independent agencies can still exist.
And if they can’t — who protects the public?
SCOTUS gave Trump immunity.
Now they’re weighing if he can purge every independent federal agency too.
They’re not restoring balance. They’re greenlighting autocracy.
Now they’re weighing if he can purge every independent federal agency too.
They’re not restoring balance. They’re greenlighting autocracy.
December 9, 2025 at 10:27 PM
SCOTUS gave Trump immunity.
Now they’re weighing if he can purge every independent federal agency too.
They’re not restoring balance. They’re greenlighting autocracy.
Now they’re weighing if he can purge every independent federal agency too.
They’re not restoring balance. They’re greenlighting autocracy.
A Court that protects fake clinics over real rights is a corrupt Court.
Let’s stop pretending this is about the law.
It’s about power, control, and shutting down reproductive freedom.
Let’s stop pretending this is about the law.
It’s about power, control, and shutting down reproductive freedom.
December 9, 2025 at 7:56 PM
A Court that protects fake clinics over real rights is a corrupt Court.
Let’s stop pretending this is about the law.
It’s about power, control, and shutting down reproductive freedom.
Let’s stop pretending this is about the law.
It’s about power, control, and shutting down reproductive freedom.
Reminder: when the 14th Amendment was written, lawmakers explicitly debated whether it applied to children of immigrants and said YES.
Trump’s team is asking SCOTUS to remove birthright citizenship by adding words to the Constitution that aren’t there.
It’s not law. It’s fraud.
Trump’s team is asking SCOTUS to remove birthright citizenship by adding words to the Constitution that aren’t there.
It’s not law. It’s fraud.
December 8, 2025 at 8:13 PM
Reminder: when the 14th Amendment was written, lawmakers explicitly debated whether it applied to children of immigrants and said YES.
Trump’s team is asking SCOTUS to remove birthright citizenship by adding words to the Constitution that aren’t there.
It’s not law. It’s fraud.
Trump’s team is asking SCOTUS to remove birthright citizenship by adding words to the Constitution that aren’t there.
It’s not law. It’s fraud.
Apparently, Trump wasn’t satisfied when the MAGA Court handed him a win on nationwide injunctions.
Now he wants more:
A full-blown ruling that ends birthright citizenship: a constitutional right since 1868.
They gave him a taste of power. He wants the whole Constitution.
Now he wants more:
A full-blown ruling that ends birthright citizenship: a constitutional right since 1868.
They gave him a taste of power. He wants the whole Constitution.
December 8, 2025 at 5:37 PM
Apparently, Trump wasn’t satisfied when the MAGA Court handed him a win on nationwide injunctions.
Now he wants more:
A full-blown ruling that ends birthright citizenship: a constitutional right since 1868.
They gave him a taste of power. He wants the whole Constitution.
Now he wants more:
A full-blown ruling that ends birthright citizenship: a constitutional right since 1868.
They gave him a taste of power. He wants the whole Constitution.
Trump asked Texas to rig the map. They did.
A court ruled it was unconstitutional.
SCOTUS said nothing…just reversed it.
Justice Kagan warns: “This Court’s precedents and our Constitution demand better.”
A court ruled it was unconstitutional.
SCOTUS said nothing…just reversed it.
Justice Kagan warns: “This Court’s precedents and our Constitution demand better.”
December 6, 2025 at 11:45 PM
Trump asked Texas to rig the map. They did.
A court ruled it was unconstitutional.
SCOTUS said nothing…just reversed it.
Justice Kagan warns: “This Court’s precedents and our Constitution demand better.”
A court ruled it was unconstitutional.
SCOTUS said nothing…just reversed it.
Justice Kagan warns: “This Court’s precedents and our Constitution demand better.”
The MAGA supermajority on the Supreme Court just gave Texas permission to erase the voting power of millions of people of color through racist gerrymandering.
This isn’t just a legal decision. It’s a greenlight to rig the midterms in favor of the GOP.
This isn’t just a legal decision. It’s a greenlight to rig the midterms in favor of the GOP.
December 5, 2025 at 7:26 PM
The MAGA supermajority on the Supreme Court just gave Texas permission to erase the voting power of millions of people of color through racist gerrymandering.
This isn’t just a legal decision. It’s a greenlight to rig the midterms in favor of the GOP.
This isn’t just a legal decision. It’s a greenlight to rig the midterms in favor of the GOP.
The whole point of the FTC is to be insulated from political pressure.
Yet Trump is asking his MAGA Justices to re-write the rules for him so he can pick loyalists.
He says he should be able to fire anyone, anytime, for any reason.
If they let him, there’s no going back.
Yet Trump is asking his MAGA Justices to re-write the rules for him so he can pick loyalists.
He says he should be able to fire anyone, anytime, for any reason.
If they let him, there’s no going back.
December 4, 2025 at 10:59 PM
The whole point of the FTC is to be insulated from political pressure.
Yet Trump is asking his MAGA Justices to re-write the rules for him so he can pick loyalists.
He says he should be able to fire anyone, anytime, for any reason.
If they let him, there’s no going back.
Yet Trump is asking his MAGA Justices to re-write the rules for him so he can pick loyalists.
He says he should be able to fire anyone, anytime, for any reason.
If they let him, there’s no going back.
Costco isn’t playing games.
They're not waiting for the Supreme Court—they’re demanding a refund on Trump’s unconstitutional tariffs.
This is what happens when one man plays president AND Congress.
We need checks. Not rubber stamps.
They're not waiting for the Supreme Court—they’re demanding a refund on Trump’s unconstitutional tariffs.
This is what happens when one man plays president AND Congress.
We need checks. Not rubber stamps.
December 3, 2025 at 7:11 PM
Costco isn’t playing games.
They're not waiting for the Supreme Court—they’re demanding a refund on Trump’s unconstitutional tariffs.
This is what happens when one man plays president AND Congress.
We need checks. Not rubber stamps.
They're not waiting for the Supreme Court—they’re demanding a refund on Trump’s unconstitutional tariffs.
This is what happens when one man plays president AND Congress.
We need checks. Not rubber stamps.
Imagine googling “abortion clinic near me.”
You show up.
It’s not a clinic—it’s a Crisis Pregnancy Center that won’t give you medical care, but will give you a sermon.
That’s what NJ tried to investigate.
And now the MAGA Supreme Court may block the investigation entirely.
You show up.
It’s not a clinic—it’s a Crisis Pregnancy Center that won’t give you medical care, but will give you a sermon.
That’s what NJ tried to investigate.
And now the MAGA Supreme Court may block the investigation entirely.
December 2, 2025 at 8:12 PM
Imagine googling “abortion clinic near me.”
You show up.
It’s not a clinic—it’s a Crisis Pregnancy Center that won’t give you medical care, but will give you a sermon.
That’s what NJ tried to investigate.
And now the MAGA Supreme Court may block the investigation entirely.
You show up.
It’s not a clinic—it’s a Crisis Pregnancy Center that won’t give you medical care, but will give you a sermon.
That’s what NJ tried to investigate.
And now the MAGA Supreme Court may block the investigation entirely.
It’s not just about Trump.
Roberts built a court that expects presidents to break the law — and protects them when they do.
What happened to checks and balances?
Roberts built a court that expects presidents to break the law — and protects them when they do.
What happened to checks and balances?
November 21, 2025 at 8:56 PM
It’s not just about Trump.
Roberts built a court that expects presidents to break the law — and protects them when they do.
What happened to checks and balances?
Roberts built a court that expects presidents to break the law — and protects them when they do.
What happened to checks and balances?
A Trump-appointed judge blocked Texas’ racial gerrymander.
Read that again. Even he said it went too far.
Now Trump’s MAGA-packed Supreme Court —led by John Roberts, who gutted the Voting Rights Act— gets to decide if it stands anyway.
This isn’t neutral. It’s engineered.
Read that again. Even he said it went too far.
Now Trump’s MAGA-packed Supreme Court —led by John Roberts, who gutted the Voting Rights Act— gets to decide if it stands anyway.
This isn’t neutral. It’s engineered.
November 20, 2025 at 8:16 PM
A Trump-appointed judge blocked Texas’ racial gerrymander.
Read that again. Even he said it went too far.
Now Trump’s MAGA-packed Supreme Court —led by John Roberts, who gutted the Voting Rights Act— gets to decide if it stands anyway.
This isn’t neutral. It’s engineered.
Read that again. Even he said it went too far.
Now Trump’s MAGA-packed Supreme Court —led by John Roberts, who gutted the Voting Rights Act— gets to decide if it stands anyway.
This isn’t neutral. It’s engineered.
Let’s stop pretending John Roberts is some moderate saving democracy.
He gutted voting rights. Greenlit gerrymandering. Shielded billionaires. And now he’s built a Court that rubber-stamps Trump’s every move.
This crisis didn’t appear overnight. It was designed.
He gutted voting rights. Greenlit gerrymandering. Shielded billionaires. And now he’s built a Court that rubber-stamps Trump’s every move.
This crisis didn’t appear overnight. It was designed.
November 20, 2025 at 5:44 PM
Let’s stop pretending John Roberts is some moderate saving democracy.
He gutted voting rights. Greenlit gerrymandering. Shielded billionaires. And now he’s built a Court that rubber-stamps Trump’s every move.
This crisis didn’t appear overnight. It was designed.
He gutted voting rights. Greenlit gerrymandering. Shielded billionaires. And now he’s built a Court that rubber-stamps Trump’s every move.
This crisis didn’t appear overnight. It was designed.
Republicans in Texas tried to draw five new GOP seats by slicing up Black and Latino communities.
A federal court said: Nope. That’s illegal racial gerrymandering.
Now they’re running to SCOTUS for backup.
This is about power—not representation.
A federal court said: Nope. That’s illegal racial gerrymandering.
Now they’re running to SCOTUS for backup.
This is about power—not representation.
November 19, 2025 at 10:01 PM
Republicans in Texas tried to draw five new GOP seats by slicing up Black and Latino communities.
A federal court said: Nope. That’s illegal racial gerrymandering.
Now they’re running to SCOTUS for backup.
This is about power—not representation.
A federal court said: Nope. That’s illegal racial gerrymandering.
Now they’re running to SCOTUS for backup.
This is about power—not representation.
SCOTUS gave ICE the green light to ignore the Constitution.
Non-criminal, contributing members of society are being hunted in broad daylight.
Non-criminal, contributing members of society are being hunted in broad daylight.
November 18, 2025 at 8:33 PM
SCOTUS gave ICE the green light to ignore the Constitution.
Non-criminal, contributing members of society are being hunted in broad daylight.
Non-criminal, contributing members of society are being hunted in broad daylight.
97.4% of immigrants detained in Chicago had no criminal record.
They weren’t the “worst of the worst.”
They were daycare workers, landscapers, cab drivers.
The Roberts Court says that’s fine.
They greenlit racial profiling, and called it law.
They weren’t the “worst of the worst.”
They were daycare workers, landscapers, cab drivers.
The Roberts Court says that’s fine.
They greenlit racial profiling, and called it law.
November 17, 2025 at 8:00 PM
97.4% of immigrants detained in Chicago had no criminal record.
They weren’t the “worst of the worst.”
They were daycare workers, landscapers, cab drivers.
The Roberts Court says that’s fine.
They greenlit racial profiling, and called it law.
They weren’t the “worst of the worst.”
They were daycare workers, landscapers, cab drivers.
The Roberts Court says that’s fine.
They greenlit racial profiling, and called it law.
This case is terrifying.
Can the U.S. block asylum-seekers on the Mexican side of the border, and act like they never came?
The Trump admin says yes.
The 9th Circuit said no: that would “radically contract” asylum rights.
Now it’s up to SCOTUS.
We’ve seen this 6–3 movie before.
Can the U.S. block asylum-seekers on the Mexican side of the border, and act like they never came?
The Trump admin says yes.
The 9th Circuit said no: that would “radically contract” asylum rights.
Now it’s up to SCOTUS.
We’ve seen this 6–3 movie before.
November 17, 2025 at 5:27 PM
This case is terrifying.
Can the U.S. block asylum-seekers on the Mexican side of the border, and act like they never came?
The Trump admin says yes.
The 9th Circuit said no: that would “radically contract” asylum rights.
Now it’s up to SCOTUS.
We’ve seen this 6–3 movie before.
Can the U.S. block asylum-seekers on the Mexican side of the border, and act like they never came?
The Trump admin says yes.
The 9th Circuit said no: that would “radically contract” asylum rights.
Now it’s up to SCOTUS.
We’ve seen this 6–3 movie before.
We expect Trump to ignore the rules.
We expect him to abuse executive power.
But the Supreme Court is supposed to stop that.
Instead, they’re letting it happen—again and again.
That’s not checks and balances. That’s complicity.
We expect him to abuse executive power.
But the Supreme Court is supposed to stop that.
Instead, they’re letting it happen—again and again.
That’s not checks and balances. That’s complicity.
November 16, 2025 at 4:11 PM
We expect Trump to ignore the rules.
We expect him to abuse executive power.
But the Supreme Court is supposed to stop that.
Instead, they’re letting it happen—again and again.
That’s not checks and balances. That’s complicity.
We expect him to abuse executive power.
But the Supreme Court is supposed to stop that.
Instead, they’re letting it happen—again and again.
That’s not checks and balances. That’s complicity.