• toastboy79@kbin.earth
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    6 months ago

    Become one of Biden’s close personal advisors and remind him of his obligation to protect the constitution from insurrectionists using official acts? Sorry I’m hella salty today.

    • CaptnKarisma
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      6 months ago

      Same here man, but it makes me think. Does Monica Lewinsky count as an official act?

    • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      He can’t. His only power over SCOTUS is nominating Justices in the event of a vacancy.

      Congress can, but Republicans control the House.

        • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          That only applies to criminal prosecution. You really think Biden is going to off a dozen or so House members?

          • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            No, because he’s a coward and an appeaser.

            Btw, your cope that it has to be the President specifically doing the acts is disagreed with by Sonya Sotomayor in her dissent where she states outright that this decision makes political assassination legal.

            But you’d know the implications better than a SC Justice who works with the fascist members of the Court, right?

            • Mycatiskai@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              6 months ago

              So Biden can officially assassinate the entire Republican side and the supreme Court and because he was president when he ordered it, it is legal?

              • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                6 months ago

                Yes, exactly. “They were insurrectionists bent on overthrowing our government, and it was a tough, but necessary, decision to protect the nation, which is my duty as President.”

                That claim isn’t even entirely untrue.

                • Asafum@feddit.nl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  But Biden himself came out and spoke about the ruling (paraphrasing) “we need presidents to use their power with caution and respect the (self imposed) limitations of it. I’ll continue to do just that. The next guy might not do so and that’s concerning.”

                  Just a big ol’ shrug from Biden… “I won’t do it, but he sure as hell will.”

                  Thanks Mr.Virtue… where is all that virtue when it comes to Palestinians?

            • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              No. It’s new, and I haven’t seen the full transcript. I’m repeating what I’ve read in the news. Do you have a link so I can learn more?

              I understand how the President could theoretically order an assassination then pardon. That was a good point I read in another thread.

                • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  You’re absolutely correct. This is the part that has been left out of every news article I’ve read, and is undoubtedly the most concerning:

                  And some Presidential conduct-for example, speaking to and on behalf of the American people, see Trump v. Hawaii, 585 U. S. 667, 701 (2018) - certainly can qualify as official even when not obviously connected to a particular constitutional or statutory provision. For those reasons, the immunity we have recognized extends to the “outer perimeter” of the President’s official responsibilities, covering actions so long as they are “not manifestly or palpably beyond [his] authority.”

                  So it’s not just acts committed by the President, but also ordered by the President.

                  It’s also vague enough that charges can get bounced around lower courts indefinitely.

                  Thank you again for the link. I didn’t see it when I first searched.

                  • Asafum@feddit.nl
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    6 months ago

                    It’s also vague enough that charges can get bounced around lower courts indefinitely.

                    Yup! It will be the 5th circuit almost certainly. It’s the Republican rubber stamp circuit…

      • Count042
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        He can’t. His only power over SCOTUS is nominating Justices in the event of a vacancy.

        This is wrong. He can pack the courts RIGHT NOW. The Democratic party still holds the Senate. There is no requirement for there to only be nine justices.

        Edit: This does require the house changing the number of justices. So the above is incorrect.

    • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 months ago

      If Biden did that the House might impeach him. I mean, the surviving members of the House probably wouldn’t, but they theoretically could.