A group of retired four-star generals have filed a brief with the Supreme Court, urging justices to agree that Donald Trump is not entitled to immunity from criminal prosecution.
A distinguished group of retired four-star generals and admirals from the U.S. military have argued in a brief filed in the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday that Donald Trump’s claims of absolute “presidential immunity” from criminal prosecution tied to Jan. 6 is an “assault” on the “foundational commitments” underpinning democracy and if his argument is allowed to succeed before them later this month, it threatens “to subvert the careful balance between the executive and legislative branches struck in the Constitution.”
The 38-page amicus brief features 19 authors, all of them decorated retired admirals, generals or secretaries from branches of the U.S. Army, Navy and Air Force respectively. On April 25, the high court is poised to hear Trump’s question of immunity against prosecution for his alleged criminal conspiracy to subvert the results of the 2020 election. and according to the brief, these are arguments that should be approached with extreme caution.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court threw out the gerrymandered election maps. This happened only after an election shifted the balance of the court. That election had record breaking turnout, because the people were engaged and ready to fight for their rights.
Democracy isn't dead, but it is in danger. Giving up isn't going to make things better.
The lines put forward by Evers in court and passed by the Legislature Tuesday still slightly favor Republicans, according to an analysis from Marquette University Law School. But they are competitive overall and give both parties a chance to compete for a majority in both legislative chambers.
One red wave, one red governor, and the state goes right back to where it started.
The situation is untenable when one party works exhaustively to cheat on the first day in office and the other has to spend the next ten years cleaning up the mess.
As of March, we're seeing generic Republicans with a coin flip chance of winning statewide with a map that marginally favors their party.
You don't think if people stop just standing by the sidelines watching, but instead participate, specifically pushing back on their Representatives and their Senators, asking for change, that things wouldn't change? At all?
Congress does what it does because we all sit on our asses and do nothing about it, except maybe go vote every once in awhile.
They have no respect for us, because they don't see us as participating in the system, only companies that give them money are seen in their eyes to be participating.
"Democracy already failed." is total bullshit, plain and simple, and it's rhetoric that doesn't help solve any problems.
One of the ways democracy falls is if we prematurely declare it fallen. Abortion referendums in deep red states have passed. Democrats have won in Alabama suburbs. Republicans could at best tie Democrats in economic conditions that heavily favored them.
Democracy is succeeding. What we're seeing is that it takes time to change things, because there is entrenched power. That's slowly eroding away though, because they have gone too far against the people.
We are in a position to completely eliminate entrenched Republican power over the next decade or so if we remain persistent, all through democracy. It will be slow, but it will work.
One of the ways democracy falls is if we prematurely declare it fallen
You've got it backwards. Democracies fall because people assert the institutional rot can't happen to their sacred soil and refuse to acknowledge their own internal failures.
Democracy is succeeding.
When barely half the eligible voting population bothers to participate? When seats are so heavily gerrymandered that 40% of the voting public can command a super majority in the legislature? When every election is (fairly or not) considered rigged or stolen going back to the Kennedy Administration?
We are in a position to completely eliminate entrenched Republican power over the next decade
We are not. Nobody on the Dem side of the ballot wants this. Party leadership wants a strong opposition. They even state as much publicly.