politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Stack the supreme court to better represent a 50+ state country of 340 million people. Or, as of the recent ruling, use an Official Act or two to fix the fucking courts.
Needs Congress, and there's barely a Senate majority. You think Manchin is going to play ball for that? We couldn't even get rid of the filibuster.
I think this is the kind of situation where you pull out every single stop because it is literally the future of the country. I don't care what back room deals are being made. I care about there being a future.
You know, rather than having a ruling that is basically "Anything that is an official act is legal and if there is a dispute we'll eventually rule in favor of the republicans when it gets to us". Which... opens up the kind of options that this article is saying would help trump even though they clearly wouldn't.
Stack the court how? Congress can set a different number, what's the plan to get it through the House and Senate?
Like what? You don't have the numbers. This is my issue, this is the equivalent of saying "stuff, just do stuff".
The President no longer needs to get anything through Congress. He can just do it unilaterally and dare SCOTUS to overturn its own recent opinion.
But he actually can't. He can't expand the court and he can't seat justices. You're just saying nonsense.
You really need to read Sotomayor’s dissent in Trump v. United States.
He may need Congress' "consent" for some things but he can Seal Team Six any Congressperson who doesn't "consent," so effectively he can do whatever he wants.
You're completely missing the fact that the final arbiter of what consists of an "official act" is SCOTUS. They can unilaterally decide (and will) that Biden's actions are not official acts and therefore not immune. They won't apply the same standard to conservatives, I promise you that.
The SCOTUS is the final arbiter.
The SCOTUS that got smeared across the wall by seal team six and are being replaced by people who will say "Well, that was legal at the time so no harm, no foul. Now let's get rid of that fucking insane decision and fix this country, shall we?"
You're completely missing the fact that if Biden were to actually use the powers SCOTUS granted him to their fullest effect, the three liberal justices would be the only ones left alive.
No I'm not missing that at all, it's insane and not remotely helpful. It's pretty goddamn naive to think that assassinating 2/3 of SCOTUS somehow puts us in a better position to fix the country but you do you.
First, do you think Seal Team Six would carry that order out?
Do you think Seal Team Six wouldn't possibly take Biden out after he gave that kind of order?
Do you think that some members of Seal Team Six might be highly Conservative and loyal to Trump and the Supreme Court, and not to Biden and an order to take out the Conservative Justices?
Do you think Team Red would idly stand by while Biden orders the assassination of the leaders they knuckled down for TWO DECADES to get installed?
Pro-tip: You're on loony island right now. What will happen here is that Seal Team Six would reject the obviously illegal order, report it, and Biden would have horrible egg on his face. There's a damn good chance that he'd then either be 25ed away, or outright impeached for illegal orders, and then arrested and tried for attempted murder, completely bereft of any of the protections you think he has. Trump would then sail easily to election over a Harris ticket, simply by pointing out that he was right all along and Biden and the Democrats were bloodthirsty murderers just looking for an opportunity to kill Republicans and impose a Socialist Communist Dictatorship on Mama's Apple Pie and all the Bald Eagles in the world. And then we'd get a REAL Fascist Dictatorship where Republicans could roam the country looking for people they don't like and oppressing them.
And you really have to disrespect Biden to think he'd even BEGIN thinking about doing this. The man's a good person. He's not looking to join Team Republican in the new Fascist paradigm.
I have.
So please stop.
By who, a SCOTUS well within Seal Team Sixing distance?
You claim you read that dissent, but you clearly do not fully understand it.
No no no, you see: Democrats can't do that because it is... perfectly legal?
And obviously the replacements would vote along republican party lines to make it clear that ruling was specifically for trump.
I don't know what that person's problem is but it is pretty clear they are actively arguing in favor of rolling over for the republicans.
No, the DoJ and the FBI, you know, the entities that prosecute people.
Immunity doesn't make something legal, it simply puts the person beyond the reach of the law. You're talking about a commander-in-chief using the military against citizens on US soil. All members of the military are trained to reject unlawful orders.
So first you're assuming seal team six accepts and carries out an unlawful order. Then the entire DoJ ignores it, or is murdered, until they accept it. Then any legislators or justices that attempt to rein in such power are also assassinated. That's what is required for your idea to make sense.
Guess what, SCOTUS is irrelevant to the calculation. Assuming you have all those things above, it doesn't matter if SCOTUS conveys immunity or not. That president is beyond the bounds of the law anyway, with or without immunity.
You mean the entities that Biden, as head of the executive branch, could control as he sees fit (under the "unitary executive" theory underpinning the conservative SCOTUS judges reasoning)?
You're really, really relying on this notion that the noble bureaucrats won't comply, and also won't get replaced with lackeys who would. With Biden as president, you're likely right -- but the power is there for the next person to hold that office to take. Unless Biden does something drastic to force SCOTUS to overturn themselves, anyway.
No, I'm being realistic. It's a system of checks and balances, but it only works when you have a sufficient number of good faith actors. When you have a sufficient number of bad faith actors, or those willing to go completely over-the-top in their corruption, the system doesn't work. Immunity, at the end of the day, is a moot point against that level of bad faith malfeasance, a point you choose to seemingly ignore.
WTF? I'm not ignoring it; the entire point of my comments has been pointing it out. SCOTUS enshrined that bad faith malfeasance, and Biden using it against itself is now the only way to stop it.
You're ignoring that Biden won't do it, Dems wouldn't allow him to do it, and the bad faith actors in place aren't Democrats. So no one, at any level, is going to allow Joe Biden to take any of those steps.
Exactly congress will atleast control some things, like the flow of money.
At the end of the day, republicans and dinos are just looking out for their own self interest. I don't care if we need to rebuild Epstein's Island and dedicate most of an annual military budget to get them on our side, we do it.
But also? As I have repeatedly alluded to: The Supreme Court just ruled that anything the president does is legal. Up to and including siccing seal team six on a political rival.
Yes, the Supreme Court are the ones who eventually decide if something counted as an official act. But there are supreme court approved ways to create openings to get more legal minded justices on the bench.
Here's the problem, they understand the power of the Supreme Court. There's nothing you can offer them to untie this particular knot, none of them are voting to expand the court.
And you continue to ignore the supreme court sanctioned method of "cutting the gordian knot" with seal team six.
So it is very clear you are not arguing in good faith since you continue to focus on how there is nothing that can be done so let's turn the other cheek so that we leave nice corpses for the republicans.
This isn't a thing. If Biden ordered the assassination of justices he'd be prosecuted by the DoJ and the FBI. You're insane if you think otherwise.
Not arguing in good faith? You cannot give a specific example of what Dems could have done to avoid this or what they can do now. You backed yourself into a corner and are now screeching seal team six nonsense.
Biden wouldn't do it, Dems wouldn't stand for it, and SCOTUS wouldn't sanction it. It's a nonsense argument to distract from the other vague nonsense you've said.
What part of "SCOTUS just made the President a King" do you not understand? Biden could literally kill Manchin (and any other Congressperson who refused to rubber-stamp his plan) and it would be legal.