Supreme Court agrees to quick review of Trump’s presidential immunity claim
Supreme Court agrees to quick review of Trump’s presidential immunity claim
The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to review a fast-tracked petition asking if Donald Trump can use his status as a former president to claim immunity from criminal charges related to his effort to overturn the 2020 election.
Blows my mind how this isn't just the most cut and dry logical answer ever.
Is the president immune from prosecution under the law? No. No one is. That's the point of the laws. If a leader is fully immune they are a dictator.
And fuck it, even if you're insane and think Trump would be a good King of the US, if this gets passed then there's no precedent stopping Biden saying at the end of his term "no, I'm staying, screw you". That is terrible regardless of your political standing.
I mean, if we're gonna have a king at all, I'd vote Charles III over this POS. And that's saying something.
Maybe we could just rescind our independence. Our problems become shared problems. Nothing really improves, but it becomes more socially acceptable for me and the boys to cry into pints every night.
King of the US
If it's going to be anyone, it's gotta be King Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Camacho.
It's indeed a bit crazy but it highlights a need we have in legislation to properly spell out enforcement. Gone are the days when it was enough to have a gentleman's agreement to report and act on certain transgressions. Now, sadly, the default action is to ignore and deny until the issue goes away and it works far too often.
Our current law system also vastly benefits those who can spend millions on lawyers.
Saw a thread yesterday where people were happy cause they think the Supreme Court is going to tell him to get fucked.
I say I wish I still had that child-like optimism.
They only fuck poor people.
I’m willing to bet that if they do cover for him, they’ll limit the scope so severely that it only applies to this specific case, and sets no precedent.
You mean like Bush v Gore which explicitly said it could never be used as a precedent, and yet commonly is?
Why would they "cover" for Trump? Do you imagine they feel beholden to him for appointing them? They are not; Past, present or future. They've already refused to hear Trump related cases, and that hurt him.
And yes, even if it goes against him, they will keep the scope of the ruling dialed in tight. That's how law and judgments work at this highest level. And should.
Look, I'm hating the conservative bent in this Court, and they seem wildly biased, but y'all are off base in many ways.
Not all their judgements are conservative. They told Alabama to fuck themselves over voting districts. They refused to hear a "pray away the gay" case yesterday, deferring to a lower court's opinion. Been a couple more that surprised me, but the cases escape me ATM. Didn't they refuse to hear a Trump related case recently? This might be what I'm thinking of.
The other weird thing I see all over lemmy, not your post!, is the idea that because Trump appointed them, they're somehow beholden to him. Nope. That's the whole idea behind lifetime appointments. A Justice can tell anyone and everyone to fuck themselves without fear of reprisal, current or future.
tl;dr: The current Court is conservative, not partisan. For this very particular job, that's a real difference.
Right, the Supreme Court that Trump personally appointed?
They don't care about law, the Constitution, or fairness, it's just 100% about party politics these days.
Yes, but granting the president too much immunity lessens the relative power of the Supreme Court. They would not want that.
Can you imagine the precedent this would set?
"I want to be a dictator. Just kidding. Nanananana you can't touch me"
It's a dangerous crossroads. The precedent would break this country...
And 3 of the judges making the decision were appointed by the guy on trial. Clarence Thomas is openly corrupt. And I wouldn't depend on Roberts for any my moral backbone.
Clarence Thomas is openly corrupt. And I wouldn't depend on Roberts for any my moral backbone.
Right there ya go. OTOH, I don't give a shit if he appointed them. They owe him nothing, he cannot do anything to them. It just doesn't work that way.
Afraid this might be a close one.
If they give him immunity I'm fucking rioting
You and everybody else that didn't vote for that sweat stain of a human being.
We'll miss you, Hombre.
No need to riot. General strike my man.
Brace yourself for legalization of dictatorship (offer valid only for R candidates).