Ongoing discussion of SCOTUS cases (1 Viewer)

[MT15]

With the increased scrutiny due to recent revelations in the press I thought maybe we can use a SCOTUS thread. We can discuss the impending Senate investigation and the legislation proposed today by Murkowski and King in the Senate that will formalize ethical guidelines.

We can also use this thread to highlight cases that possibly don’t deserve their own thread, like the following.

I saw this case today, and I cannot believe the US Government is allowed to do this. Unreasonable search and seizure? The examples he gives in the rest of the thread are just sickening:

 

[DaveXA]

So did they do way with the impeachment clause?

No, that's entirely separate and Congress still has the power to impeach the President.

 

[MT15]

No, that's entirely separate and Congress still has the power to impeach the President.

How? There would have to be high crimes and misdemeanors, right? They can’t try to figure out his intentions, they can’t ask what he told anyone at DOJ to do,

Let’s face it - the impeachment clause doesn’t really work anyway - there has never been anyone who needed to be impeached and convicted more than Trump, he was as guilty as sin, and they wouldn’t do it. Times 2.

But now they may as well just forget the whole thing. POTUS has immunity for any and all criminal acts as long as he says they were part of his official duties. Trump would abuse that to high heaven and nobody would raise a finger to stop him.

 

[MT15]

The six Justices are out of their freaking minds. They are giving this man a total green light.

 

[MT15]

 

[MT15]

 

[MT15]

Here we go.

 

[DaveXA]

How? There would have to be high crimes and misdemeanors, right? They can’t try to figure out his intentions, they can’t ask what he told anyone at DOJ to do,

Let’s face it - the impeachment clause doesn’t really work anyway - there has never been anyone who needed to be impeached and convicted more than Trump, he was as guilty as sin, and they wouldn’t do it. Times 2.

But now they may as well just forget the whole thing. POTUS has immunity for any and all criminal acts as long as he says they were part of his official duties. Trump would abuse that to high heaven and nobody would raise a finger to stop him.

He asked and I answered. It has no bearing on rules of impeachment. It will alter the investigation and fact finding, but the the rest is the same.

But you're right, as long as Congress is split the way it is and as polarized as it is, no President is getting impeached anytime soon whether it's Biden or Trump in office.

 

[DaveXA]

Here we go.

That's definitely going to get litigated regardless. It's clearly not an official act because it violates the Constitution, so I don't see it holding up, but I wouldn't put it past this SCOTUS to agree with Trump's legal team. We'll see.

But hey, it's in the open. They're openly admitting they attempted to overthrow the election.

And fwiw, if I'm Biden, I would seriously consider using the power of the office to prevent Trump from doing what he did again. Simply put, if Biden wins the election and Trump tried that nonsense again, Biden can just declare the election results can't be changed and Trump has no authority to challenge him.

Just thinking out loud anyway.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Someone on CNN (don’t know who) made an interesting point

That this immunity ruling could actually help

As in “Holy Shirt, Democracy is really on the ballot!” and the choice is either President Biden with immunity or President Trump with immunity and which president we’d be more comfortable having it and which America we want to live in

 

[MT15]

Tongue-in-cheek, sort of….

 

[DaveXA]

Tongue-in-cheek, sort of….

Hey, that would be hilarious actually. Be ironic that SCOTUS be on the wrong end of that one. Heh.

 

[Lapaz]

Someone on CNN (don’t know who) made an interesting point

That this immunity ruling could actually help

As in “Holy Shirt, Democracy is really on the ballot!” and the choice is either President Biden with immunity or President Trump with immunity and which president we’d be more comfortable having it and which America we want to live in

The problem is that it may help Biden, but with this ruling, I think it is not a question of IF a president will have an opponent assassinated, but WHEN. Trump is the immediate danger, but there will be others now that the Pandora’s box is open. Someone will test it. They could test it after impeachment is OBE.

 

[MT15]

This court is a joke.

 

[fooferdoggie]

Tongue-in-cheek, sort of….

nope, they ruled it's ok if an official gets a bribe after they do an act but not before.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Yeah, I disagree with her. This really isn't some sort of shift away from rulings in the past that I can see. The President and government employees have immunity for official acts and that's been litigated.

I would think the attempt to overthrow an election wouldn't be considered an official act, so Trump could presumably be subject to litigation there, although that might end up being a blurry line in the courts.

The classified docs case wouldn't fall under immunity provisions because this was post-Presidency and I'd argue no longer fall under official acts as President.

Possible scenario that has protection now and wouldn't have then:

"I declare NBC news the enemy of the people and a imminent threat to national security. If my official role as president I issue an executive order to have the federal agents I hand picked round up everyone at NBC news and have them summarily executed without trial."

That's clearly illegal and no president would dare try it, because they know they wouldn't be immune just because they did it in a way that gives it cover of being an official act.

I know, I know, no president, not even Trump, would actually try that because they know they wouldn't get away with it and even if he did, no one would carry out those orders.

Except you're wrong on both counts. Number one, Trump is absolutely convinced that this means he can do whatever he wants and there isn't an advisor on this planet that would convince him otherwise. I doubt that an advisor that would want to advise him not to would be able to get anywhere near Trump because of point number two.

Number two, there are a thousands of people that would be willing to carry out an order like that for Trump and those are exactly the kind of people that Trump is going to put in place if he wins.

This is a lot more dangerous than some people are willing to admit. The Supreme Court didn't just simply reinforce immunity, they've restated it a way that makes a president for anything they do under the cover of it being an official act, no matter how intentionally horrific or anti-Constiutional it is. Just got to do it as an official act and you're all good, baby.

 

[LA - L.A.]

I find some of this concerning:

“In dividing official from unofficial conduct, courts may not inquire into the president’s motives,” Roberts wrote. “Nor may courts deem an action unofficial merely because it allegedly violates a generally applicable law.”

The opinion found Trump is “absolutely immune” from prosecution for alleged conduct involving discussions with the Justice Department.

Trump is also “at least presumptively immune” from allegations that he tried to pressure Pence to reject certification of the vote, Roberts wrote.

This is exactly what I'm referring to in my previous post. When the court blocks intention as a consideration, they make anything a president does that they declare as an official act, indistinguishable from an actual official act and they have complete immunity for whatever they do.

I know it's very uncomfortable for people to admit, but the 6 Heritage Foundation judges are doing everything they can to allow the corpo-christo-facsists to go full-bore on us if Trump wins. They are not above it, they are a critical instrument of it. They were hand picked for a reason and this is that reason. They count on people refusing to see that, because it's so horrifically unthinkable.

Fascists, other flavors of authoritarians, con artists, other flavors of fraudsters and serial killers all have one thing in common. They all prey on and count on people repeatedly giving them trust and benefit of the doubt even though warning signs are popping up all over the place. People keep giving them benefit of the doubt, because they can't fathom that someone could have such vicious and vile intentions, and frankly, they don't won't to even consider it, because it's scary and uncomfortable as hell to think it could be true.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Fascists, other flavors of authoritarians, con artists, other flavors of fraudsters and serial killers all have one thing in common. They all prey on and count on people repeatedly giving them trust and benefit of the doubt even though warning signs are popping up all over the place. People keep giving them benefit of the doubt, because they can't fathom that someone could have such vicious and vile intentions, and frankly, they don't won't to even consider it, because it's scary and uncomfortable as hell to think it could be true.

When you wear rose colored glasses red flags look just like flags

 

[LA - L.A.]

When you wear rose colored glasses red flags look just like flags

I've never heard that expression before and it's brilliant. Cheers for sharing it, mate. At first, I thought you might have coined the phrase, but after a quick internet search I see it's been around. I missed out on it until now.

It's full on spot on and is the one of the biggest challenges we face right now. Without that happening, the corpo-christo-fascists have no chance of conquering and oppressing us.

I don't wear conspiracy glasses or alarmists glasses. I just also don't wear rose colored glasses.

It just occurred to me that one of the reasons for the war against "woke" probably has more to do with trying to suppress from waking up to what's happening by making the idea of waking up and bad thing.

If you tell someone to wake up to what's happening just 10 years ago, they probably consider what you have to say. If you say it to them now, they probably shut down and shut you down telling you to take that "woke" crap somewhere else.

Everyone wearing rose colored glasses needs to swap them out for They Live truth seeing glasses. What's happening now is part of what John Carpenter was trying to get us to see through metaphor. We've been herded down this past for decades and the kill chutes are not far ahead. We need to break out before it's too late.

That's alarming language, because the reality of what is happening is that alarming. People can clearly see that these same 6 Heritage Foundation justices:

• overturned decades of SC precedence to break the federal government set by striking down Chevron
• overturned decades of SC precedence by overturning Roe v Wade
• overturned SC precedence to gutcivil liberties protections
• overtunred SC precedences to gut voter protections
• have openly threatened to overturn SC precedence protecing the right of same sex marriage

Now, when these same 6 Heritage Foundation justices rule in a way that makes it impossible to hold a president legally accountablity for any intentionally heinous act they commit as long as they do it in an offical way, those same people can't see what those same 6 Heritage Foundatoin justices are setting up.

It's baffles me and scares me. For a democratic country to slip into authoritarianism and fascism, the first thing that has to happen is for the majority of citizens of that country to think that, "that couldn't possibly happen here, because no one in charge would ever do that here." The majority of people have to think that first, before the authoritarians or fascists have any chance of success.