“You guys are reading too much into this… There’s no way that any reasonable person would consider that an official act and this hypothetical president would surely be swiftly impeached and convicted. You’re worrying over nothing.”
- Roberts, probably
He basically said in the opinion:
“All you liberal women-folk got your panties in a bunch. Let an alpha male set you straight.”
They’re already calling Sotomayor’s dissent “hysterical.” It’s not an exaggeration.
Yeah that doesn’t surprise me at all. This has been his M.O. right along.
- Rule the most egregious shit that pretty much anyone can see where it leads.
- Call the opposition hysterical when they point out the logical conclusion of his ideas.
- Pretend to be shocked when the opposition is proved right if he acknowledges it at all.
But hey, just calling Balls and Strikes guys. Nothing to see here.
Biden’s first official act: No one convicted of a felony may run for office.
That act won’t really hold up. That’s not really an action. It’s taking away something ephemeral. Rights are not in the physical world.
Now, jailing Donald for crimes. That’s doing something physical. And the Supreme Court could rule against him, and Biden could say, “Make me.” And Don would continue to be jailed illegally. And the Supreme Court would have no say over the impotence of their own creation. And we’d have an impeachment hearing that won’t go anywhere.
But Biden won’t do that.
Trump would.
We can dream, can’t we?
People keep saying this but the ruling was he can commit crimes not create laws. Besides, Supreme Court rulings only work for Republicans.
So he can’t bar felons from running for office, but he could hire a hit squad and suffer no legal consequences?
As long as the kingmakers sanction it so.
And if trump gets elected he
mightwill appoint even more corrupt fascist judgesNot “might,” “will.”
Obama did it. He did it at least twice.
Before you downvote: [How Team Obama Justifies the Killing of a 16-Year-Old American
No, the actual judgement is that its presumed, and the other courts must figure out what counts as a constitutional act, an official act, and an unofficial act
I keep seeing this BS getting spread so here’s an actual quote from one of the justices on the SC.
Sotomayor warned that the ruling “will have disastrous consequences for the Presidency and for our democracy” and that it sends the message: “Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends.”
She added, “Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done. The relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law.”
I have no idea why so many people from the reddit/lemmy demographic feel compelled to downplay and “well akshully” this shit. People should be in the streets burning shit right now. Or we could just wait and see, I guess
We are in the wait and see phase. People should be protesting and burning shit… but the last set of protests had cops using excessive force. Most of us still have things we can lose. Not as many as before but we are all hoping someone else takes the trash out.
deleted by creator
Probably better to protest now before trump starts handing out lethal rounds to the national guard.🙃
Because my “bs” is from the actual judgement, not some rage bait
Well the person you’re replying to provided a source to back up their claim. Your answer is just “I’m right.” Do you care to do as your opponent did, and provide a source for your spurrious claims?
Guess we will be waiting for a while. Wouldn’t hold my breath.
The original judgement? You can find it pretty easily
Ah, the classic : search and you will discover I am correct
Meanwhile, acts just be happening while the courts take their judicious fucking time to determine how official those acts were.
JFC, you can’t be this dense, right?
Right. That way it can be kicked around appeals courts until Trump is deceased.
The point of the supreme court is to make a ruling on cases that already went through the lower courts. So it seems weird to make an official opinion saying it’s for the lower courts to decide instead of just letting the lower court decide by not making an opinion at all.
The judgment included the Take care clause as enough to make any conversation or action with the Justice department to be fully immune, not just presumed. How doesnt the actually explicit parts of the constitution about military command be included in the absolute immunity bucket?
