Yes, because a court that found immunity in the constitution where there is none will give one flying fuck about a statute.
Do something real like campaign on adding non corrupt justices.
this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2024
236 points (98.8% liked)
News
22197 readers
4436 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Or arrest them for being terrorists. And then toss them in gitmo. No laws in gitmo. They made sure of it. And when a president does it, it isn't a crime. So go on Dark Brandon, toss em in the brig. Don't forget the forced rectal feeding! Doctor Describes and Denounces C.I.A. Practice of ‘Rectal Feeding’ of Prisoners
If they're in gitmo they're still technically justices. Better for Biden to just kill them outright so that there are six "vacancies" for him to appoint new people to.
Take the shot Papa Joe. Take the shot.
I don't see how that would work.
Setting aside the question of whether Congress can alter the matter short of a constitutional amendment, doing so using something like federal legislation, if the bill would actually apply to the incidents of Jan 6, I have a hard time seeing how that wouldn't amount to being an ex post facto law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law
An ex post facto law is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions that were committed, or relationships that existed, before the enactment of the law. In criminal law, it may criminalize actions that were legal when committed; it may aggravate a crime by bringing it into a more severe category than it was in when it was committed; it may change the punishment prescribed for a crime, as by adding new penalties or extending sentences; it may extend the statute of limitations; or it may alter the rules of evidence in order to make conviction for a crime likelier than it would have been when the deed was committed.
Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the United States Constitution in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 3 (with respect to federal laws) and Article 1, Section 10 (with respect to state laws).
Uh ... because:
In remarks on the Senate floor, Schumer said that Democrats are seeking to classify Trump’s election subversion acts as “unofficial” acts that are not subject to legal immunity.
That removes immunity by explicitly saying those acts cannot be official. It doesn't change their atatus, it clarifies it.
Whether a crime was committed there is a different story for a trial court to determine.
Hey look it's the liberals forming subcommittees while the boots thunder down the hall.
From now on I'm going to call these articles and the related actions a "Boots Subcommittee".
Schumer called a Boots Subcommittee. It wasn't very effective.
Once they are all in camps together they will write strongly worded letters to the camp overseer. You can bet on it!
If they need to make what he did legal and official then what he did was illegal.
They need to do a shit ton more than just hint.