Stealing the election from Gore was the official end of America.
It has been broken since Bush v. Gore.
If the conservative Supreme Court Justices find that Presidents have (Edit: *practically*) unlimited immunity, Joe Biden should exercise that power by firing the conservative Supreme Court Justices.
I say that sarcastically, but it seems to me that he would have the authority to do it. As long as Congress and the Senate don’t impeach him afterwards, he’s free to do whatever he wants, presumably that including liquidating any Congresspersons or Senators who express support for impeaching him. It’s all in the name of national security, after all, the President needs that kind of immunity in order to do their job.
The conservative Supreme Court justices say they are concerned that allowing the prosecution of a former President would lead to a slippery slope, I’m more concerned about the fast fall off a sheer cliff if they give the President this kind of power.
This country was founded on the desire to get *away* from petty tyrants and jealous dictators; if the Supreme Court finds that Trump has anything like unlimited immunity… I’m not going to finish that thought, but the worst case scenario is easy to imagine.
>The conservative justices did not seem concerned that Mr. Trump’s lawyer, D. John Sauer, said his client was free during his presidency to commit lawless acts, subject to prosecution only after impeachment by the House and conviction in the Senate. (There have been four presidential impeachments, two of Mr. Trump, and no convictions.)
>Prompted by Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, Mr. Sauer added another requirement to holding a former president accountable. Not only must there first be impeachment and conviction in Congress, but the criminal statute in question must also clearly specify in so many words, as very few do, that it applies to the president.
>Returning to “Justice Kagan’s example of a president who orders a coup,” Justice Barrett sketched out what she understood to be Mr. Sauer’s position.
>“You’re saying that he couldn’t be prosecuted for [ordering a coup], even after a conviction and impeachment proceeding, if there was not a statute that expressly referenced the president and made it criminal for the president?”
If the court finds in Trump’s favor, that’s the argument they would be endorsing.
Been corrupt from the start.
>The text of the Constitution does not contain a specific reference to the power of judicial review. Rather, the power to declare laws unconstitutional has been deemed an implied power, derived from Article III and Article VI.
>Marbury was the point at which the Supreme Court adopted a monitoring role over government actions. After the Court exercised its power of judicial review in Marbury, it avoided striking down a federal statute during the next fifty years. The court would not do so again until Dred Scott v. Sandford
Wow so they grabbed power for themselves and then the next time they used it was in Dred Scott.
>a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that held the U.S. Constitution did not extend American citizenship to people of black African descent, and therefore they could not enjoy the rights and privileges the Constitution conferred upon American citizens.
Yep, ass from the start.
If they say a President should have absolute immunity that will seal the corruption!
I feel sorry for the three non-conservative justices who get tarred with the corrupt brush every time someone rails against SCOTUS.
Anyone from outside reads about the ‘Federalist Society’.
Then looks at a blind lady justice and wonders what the fuck y’all are doing.
The court is corrupt and illegitimate having been corrupted by an illegitimate pos potus who cheated his way into office illegally. Say it with me, they are illegitimate.
Despite how much I may agree with the subject the “Say it With Me” headline style just needs to die forever. I see it over and over again.
i’m just sitting here, eating popcorn and waiting for scotus, 45 and the whole maga lot to appear on r/leopardsatemyface , one by one.
giving immunity to anyone, anyone really, *will* eventually backfire.
Does this motherfucking corrupt supreme court not deserve a terrifying nationwide protest of the likes of the George Floyd tragedy or a lot bigger, the big one that has never been seen before. There must be at least 150 million pissed off people at this point? These are 6 fragile individuals holding a country of over 300 million people hostage. They should fear the citizenry not the other way around. These actions and comments deserve a mass protest march to Washington. Nobody leave until every one of those fuckers resign.
I aint know that much about the SC, I just know as an outsider looking in that it’s absolutely wild and it’s some weird frat bro group that hates the gays and the blacks and the babies (after they exist). I saw when they interview that little rat man (I think they’re called opossums? The opossum guy who drank beers through his ass) and he made the cut, and that told me all I needed to know. You couldn’t work at a Burger King with an interview like that but supreme court? Welcome aboard.
The day they rule a president has imminuity from crimes he commits in office is the day they strike the fatal blow to our democracy. It will have taken a lethal dose of radiation. It will go on for a while and maybe even show some signs of recovery but its dna is destroyed and soon the whole body will collapse.
They make be asking stupid questions and saying stupid things during the hearing, but I still doubt they’ll rule for immunity. That is just a damning ruling for everyone including themselves. It’s effectively the end of democracy as we know it.
June 6th 1787 – Constitutional Convention:
Alexander Hamilton – Noted….
“Danger that the Executive by too frequent communication with the judicial may corrupt it — They may learn to enter into his passions”
The court is corrupt
It!
The Supreme Court’s job is to interpret current law and evaluate if laws are consistent with the Constitution.
There are no laws providing immunity to the President, and it is not listed in the Constitution. So the Supreme Court has no business making any sort of judgement here. They would have to manufacture that position out of whole cloth.
They continue to legislate from the bench, because they are drunk on power.
There are plenty of instances where the Supreme Court is still a needed and valuable institution. Resolving Circuit Court splits on technical points of Bankruptcy or Patent law, for example.
But when the Court seeks to turn itself into not just a political player, but the dominant political player in the whole country, that’s a different story. These folks are unelected. And furthermore, they’re not well-informed. Some of them are borderline ignorant. IMO if we want to preserve democracy we need to learn to get comfortable with the idea of ignoring the Supreme Court in some instances.
85 comments and they were all pretty interesting to read. Keep it coming y’all! (the discourse)
Leonard Leo bought the SCOTUS with money given to him by Barre Seid
Leonard Leo was subpoenaed and vocally rejected it
The Federalist Society are theocratic separatists who want to enslave women and minorities by eliminating access to reproductive healthcare and stripping them of voting rights
They are unamerican antidemocratic terrorists
Why does it seem like America is so quiet about this? We are facing the most serious threat this Nation has faced in decades and there doesn’t seem to be any active push back, nothing from the President talking about he’s on top of this shit and not to worry. FUcking nothing! Where the fuck is America?
And water is wet. Of course it’s corrupt. Anyone with a half a brain knows this.
Can someone please point me to a New York Times article discussing this utterly shocking week at the Supreme Court? I hope I’m wrong, but I have yet to see anything from the so-called “paper of record” in the United States regarding this compromised Supreme Court. Are they too high and mighty to discuss a venal and unequivocally corrupt Supreme Court? Would that be considered putting their hand on the scale? Who exactly is the NYT’s target audience right now?
I really hope this activates Americans. This is the type of shit that should stop people dead in their tracks and birth an organized protest movement. I’m not sure what more evidence Americans need but we need to wake the fuck up. I can’t sit idly by while these smug pricks remake this country in their own sniveling images. John Roberts is a judicial terrorist.
So is the supreme court saying that biden has the right to…
No shit, anyone that’s been paying the slightest bit of attention could have told you that.
What a stupid institution. Lifetime terms, unelected. The Founders really fucked on this one.
28 comments
The court is corrupt.
No shit. It’s been corrupt since 2000 at least
Stealing the election from Gore was the official end of America.
It has been broken since Bush v. Gore.
If the conservative Supreme Court Justices find that Presidents have (Edit: *practically*) unlimited immunity, Joe Biden should exercise that power by firing the conservative Supreme Court Justices.
I say that sarcastically, but it seems to me that he would have the authority to do it. As long as Congress and the Senate don’t impeach him afterwards, he’s free to do whatever he wants, presumably that including liquidating any Congresspersons or Senators who express support for impeaching him. It’s all in the name of national security, after all, the President needs that kind of immunity in order to do their job.
The conservative Supreme Court justices say they are concerned that allowing the prosecution of a former President would lead to a slippery slope, I’m more concerned about the fast fall off a sheer cliff if they give the President this kind of power.
This country was founded on the desire to get *away* from petty tyrants and jealous dictators; if the Supreme Court finds that Trump has anything like unlimited immunity… I’m not going to finish that thought, but the worst case scenario is easy to imagine.
Edit 2: [The New Republic says it better, if you prefer.](https://newrepublic.com/article/181032/supreme-court-trump-immunity-sealed-fate)
Edit 3: A bit more context, for good measure.
>The conservative justices did not seem concerned that Mr. Trump’s lawyer, D. John Sauer, said his client was free during his presidency to commit lawless acts, subject to prosecution only after impeachment by the House and conviction in the Senate. (There have been four presidential impeachments, two of Mr. Trump, and no convictions.)
>Prompted by Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, Mr. Sauer added another requirement to holding a former president accountable. Not only must there first be impeachment and conviction in Congress, but the criminal statute in question must also clearly specify in so many words, as very few do, that it applies to the president.
>Returning to “Justice Kagan’s example of a president who orders a coup,” Justice Barrett sketched out what she understood to be Mr. Sauer’s position.
>“You’re saying that he couldn’t be prosecuted for [ordering a coup], even after a conviction and impeachment proceeding, if there was not a statute that expressly referenced the president and made it criminal for the president?”
>Correct, Mr. Sauer said.
[New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/26/us/politics/supreme-court-trump-immunity-election.html)
If the court finds in Trump’s favor, that’s the argument they would be endorsing.
Been corrupt from the start.
>The text of the Constitution does not contain a specific reference to the power of judicial review. Rather, the power to declare laws unconstitutional has been deemed an implied power, derived from Article III and Article VI.
>Marbury was the point at which the Supreme Court adopted a monitoring role over government actions. After the Court exercised its power of judicial review in Marbury, it avoided striking down a federal statute during the next fifty years. The court would not do so again until Dred Scott v. Sandford
Wow so they grabbed power for themselves and then the next time they used it was in Dred Scott.
>a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that held the U.S. Constitution did not extend American citizenship to people of black African descent, and therefore they could not enjoy the rights and privileges the Constitution conferred upon American citizens.
Yep, ass from the start.
If they say a President should have absolute immunity that will seal the corruption!
I feel sorry for the three non-conservative justices who get tarred with the corrupt brush every time someone rails against SCOTUS.
Anyone from outside reads about the ‘Federalist Society’.
Then looks at a blind lady justice and wonders what the fuck y’all are doing.
The court is corrupt and illegitimate having been corrupted by an illegitimate pos potus who cheated his way into office illegally. Say it with me, they are illegitimate.
Despite how much I may agree with the subject the “Say it With Me” headline style just needs to die forever. I see it over and over again.
i’m just sitting here, eating popcorn and waiting for scotus, 45 and the whole maga lot to appear on r/leopardsatemyface , one by one.
giving immunity to anyone, anyone really, *will* eventually backfire.
Does this motherfucking corrupt supreme court not deserve a terrifying nationwide protest of the likes of the George Floyd tragedy or a lot bigger, the big one that has never been seen before. There must be at least 150 million pissed off people at this point? These are 6 fragile individuals holding a country of over 300 million people hostage. They should fear the citizenry not the other way around. These actions and comments deserve a mass protest march to Washington. Nobody leave until every one of those fuckers resign.
I aint know that much about the SC, I just know as an outsider looking in that it’s absolutely wild and it’s some weird frat bro group that hates the gays and the blacks and the babies (after they exist). I saw when they interview that little rat man (I think they’re called opossums? The opossum guy who drank beers through his ass) and he made the cut, and that told me all I needed to know. You couldn’t work at a Burger King with an interview like that but supreme court? Welcome aboard.
The day they rule a president has imminuity from crimes he commits in office is the day they strike the fatal blow to our democracy. It will have taken a lethal dose of radiation. It will go on for a while and maybe even show some signs of recovery but its dna is destroyed and soon the whole body will collapse.
They make be asking stupid questions and saying stupid things during the hearing, but I still doubt they’ll rule for immunity. That is just a damning ruling for everyone including themselves. It’s effectively the end of democracy as we know it.
June 6th 1787 – Constitutional Convention:
Alexander Hamilton – Noted….
“Danger that the Executive by too frequent communication with the judicial may corrupt it — They may learn to enter into his passions”
The court is corrupt
It!
The Supreme Court’s job is to interpret current law and evaluate if laws are consistent with the Constitution.
There are no laws providing immunity to the President, and it is not listed in the Constitution. So the Supreme Court has no business making any sort of judgement here. They would have to manufacture that position out of whole cloth.
They continue to legislate from the bench, because they are drunk on power.
There are plenty of instances where the Supreme Court is still a needed and valuable institution. Resolving Circuit Court splits on technical points of Bankruptcy or Patent law, for example.
But when the Court seeks to turn itself into not just a political player, but the dominant political player in the whole country, that’s a different story. These folks are unelected. And furthermore, they’re not well-informed. Some of them are borderline ignorant. IMO if we want to preserve democracy we need to learn to get comfortable with the idea of ignoring the Supreme Court in some instances.
85 comments and they were all pretty interesting to read. Keep it coming y’all! (the discourse)
Leonard Leo bought the SCOTUS with money given to him by Barre Seid
Leonard Leo was subpoenaed and vocally rejected it
The Federalist Society are theocratic separatists who want to enslave women and minorities by eliminating access to reproductive healthcare and stripping them of voting rights
They are unamerican antidemocratic terrorists
Why does it seem like America is so quiet about this? We are facing the most serious threat this Nation has faced in decades and there doesn’t seem to be any active push back, nothing from the President talking about he’s on top of this shit and not to worry. FUcking nothing! Where the fuck is America?
And water is wet. Of course it’s corrupt. Anyone with a half a brain knows this.
Can someone please point me to a New York Times article discussing this utterly shocking week at the Supreme Court? I hope I’m wrong, but I have yet to see anything from the so-called “paper of record” in the United States regarding this compromised Supreme Court. Are they too high and mighty to discuss a venal and unequivocally corrupt Supreme Court? Would that be considered putting their hand on the scale? Who exactly is the NYT’s target audience right now?
I really hope this activates Americans. This is the type of shit that should stop people dead in their tracks and birth an organized protest movement. I’m not sure what more evidence Americans need but we need to wake the fuck up. I can’t sit idly by while these smug pricks remake this country in their own sniveling images. John Roberts is a judicial terrorist.
So is the supreme court saying that biden has the right to…
No shit, anyone that’s been paying the slightest bit of attention could have told you that.
What a stupid institution. Lifetime terms, unelected. The Founders really fucked on this one.