this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2024
401 points (98.3% liked)

politics

19153 readers
2696 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The U.S. Supreme Court's immunity decision has reportedly emboldened the presumptive GOP nominee to pursue his far-right agenda and authoritarian aims "without fear of punishment or restraint."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 months ago (1 children)

No. The ruling seems to have said that he can do anything he likes in his capacity as president, and he can't be convicted of any criminal offence for it. It didn't say that the people around him would have to go along with it, or that they'd be immune from prosecution.

It also left convenient wriggle room for the court to arbitrarily decide what constituted "official" actions, rather than him doing something privately, so they've effectively granted themselves a get out of jail free card to decide case-by-case in the future

[–] xenomor 10 points 5 months ago (2 children)

The president has the power to pardon the people around him.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

True, I didn't consider that. He'd still have to convince them though, which would be easier said than done if he wanted to entirely disregard the constitution

[–] xenomor 3 points 5 months ago

I have confidence in the ability of someone like trump to surround himself with exactly the type of people who would gladly take such leaps.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

As someone pointed out to me, it's federal crimes.

So if he asks you to do something that he's shielded from, but is a state crime, youre SOL

[–] grue 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Murder is generally a state offense, but since D.C. is a Federal district, I'm pretty sure murders that occur there would be pardonable.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Dear Mr Person I Want to Murder

It would be lovely if you could come visit me in DC. I have a great ~~murder~~ opportunity I'd like to discuss with you

Sincerely Trump

[–] grue 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I think you lost the discussion thread a little bit. We're talking about what Biden could do about the corrupt Supreme Court justices. They're definitely in D.C. already.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Not really.

Pardons come up, I mention federal only, you mention murder, and then I make a joke about it.

You think Biden is gonna murder someone?

[–] grue 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You think Biden is gonna murder someone?

LOL, no.

But I do think that the fascist SCOTUS judges just gave him that power, and that Biden demonstrating just how terrible a power it is by using it to get rid of them might be the only way to get the decisions overturned and stop the US from becoming a dictatorship.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The only two ways are pretty much what you said, or a massive blue wave in November that gives the dems a supermajority in the senate and a majority in the house.

AKA the USA is fucked.

[–] grue 2 points 5 months ago