U.S. Supreme Court: Post-Ginsburg Edition

So the killing of protestors could potentially be an unofficial illegal act, but the order to kill the protestors could be an official act, as long as it was made to the military instead of to, say, a hitman? And even if the President did hire a hit man, if he did it by telling someone who worked at the White House to go hire a hitman for him, that conversation would be inadmissible because it was an "official act"?

No, I don't think a US president can issue an order for US military/national guard to kill specific people/groups on US soil.

I don't like the term "court stacking"/"court packing" because it makes it sound like there's something underhanded or improper about expanding the Court. There isn't. There's no rule that it has to be 9 justices. It doesn't even make sense that it's 9 justices when we have 50 states and 300 million people.

Not to mention the increase in life expectancy

xxpost But what if he writes a memo that says the specific people are a "clear and present danger"?

hmmm

The Supreme Court has become consumed by a corruption crisis beyond its control.

Today’s ruling represents an assault on American democracy. It is up to Congress to defend our nation from this authoritarian capture.

I intend on filing articles of impeachment upon our return.

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) July 1, 2024

xp more to the point imo a Predident doesn't need to order it directly, it can and did happen anyway (and the President, who didn't order it directly, gloated about it as 'retribution' afterwards).

xposts -- sure, a president "can't" order the military to murder people, because that's illegal. But say he did it anyway? He can't be prosecuted.

I mean, a court properly interpreting things would say that because it's not within his official power to issue a kill order, he can be prosecuted. The Court's ruling is disconcertingly ambiguous though. I don't think even this Supreme Court would consider it to be under the first category of things granted "absolute immunity" since it's clearly beyond the scope of its powers, but it could be within the second murkier category of "presumptive immunity" under some circumstances, making it at least harder to prosecute.

pic.twitter.com/kurSdLlEfX

— Dave Itzkoff (@ditzkoff) July 1, 2024

Palpatine was a SINO (Sith in Name Only)

this is apparently real??

Trump is wilding out even for him pic.twitter.com/Tf3wr4BYd7

— Ken Klippenstein (@kenklippenstein) July 1, 2024

playing right to the base. they love that shit.

Kevin Kruse says congrats Roberts Court, you're the literal worst ever

https://substack.com/home/post/p-146170415

The advisors part of that ruling is freaking insane. The rationale for that is presumably a form of the attorney-client privilege, which under normal circumstances has an exception for crime/fraud.

On the bright side, I think the head of the Biden crime family is going to skate

Morbid, from Jackson, but I laughed out loud. pic.twitter.com/FqYT9insge

— emptywheel (chicklet) (@emptywheel) July 1, 2024

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/07/05/magazine/05mag-sessions-07/05mag-sessions-07-mediumSquareAt3X.jpg

Honestly, I think most blue states will just outright ignore the Supreme Court, as they well should. Pack the court and have term limits, you fucking cowards

Constitutional crisis is probably inevitable, with like CA saying, "We're banning assault weapons. You guys are nuts."

i'm guessing if trump wins people will just start civil suits against him while he's in office for anything that they think is illegal or not an official act, no? which could be a lot of things knowing him...

Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in September 2018:

“Under the Constitution, the president is not above the law. No one is above the law…The president remains subject to the law.” pic.twitter.com/wx6VcHr4VV

— Republican Voters Against Trump (@AccountableGOP) July 1, 2024

well geez, good thing they nailed him down on that, he's gonna be so embarrassed when they play the footage for him

"Hypocrisy!" I cry

That fucking rapist needs a pineapple up his ass in hell

No Democratic president is above the law.

Honestly, I think most blue states will just outright ignore the Supreme Court, as they well should. Pack the court and have term limits, you fucking cowards

Doesn't matter if blue states disobey when the inevitable lawsuits go to red federal courts and law enforcement is largely red everywhere

idk if you can just keep such a blatantly unconstitutional policy on the books like this

The Supreme Court’s immunity decision directed the trial court to hold hearings on what portions of the indictment can survive — a possible chance for prosecutors to set out their case in public before Election Day.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/01/us/politics/supreme-court-immunity-trump-jan-6.html

I have to keep reminding myself today that not all is lost.

they're saving that decision for tuesday

lol, i had forgotten that at trump's second impeachment trial, part of his team's defense was that he shouldn't be impeached because he could already be subject to criminal prosecution.

At least they shot down that particular absurdity, in the course of committing much great absurdities.

(I mean the idea that he couldn't be prosecuted unless he'd been impeached and convicted.)

But because Roberts did not send the case back to lower courts “forthwith,” as the special counsel had asked, Chutkan will have to wait until early August to begin those determinations.

A weird and frustrating detail from the decision that I just read in the Washington Post

i learned earlier today that even if chutkan rules that all the "unofficial" stuff trump did should actually be "official", trump can appeal that decision...back to the supreme court

i heard they're good up there on the supreme court

The thing I just still have so much trouble wrapping my brain around is the idea that so many people are willing to blow up American democracy for a two bit shill like Donald fucking Trump. Like, really? THIS is the guy you want to risk it all over?

I think it's only about Trump himself for a minority, the hardcore MAGAs. For a lot of people like Bannon or Alito, he's just a vehicle — it's the blowing up the democracy part that really gets them hard.

i learned earlier today that even if chutkan rules that all the "unofficial" stuff trump did should actually be "official", trump can appeal that decision...back to the supreme court

― z_tbd, Tuesday, 2 July 2024 01:55 (forty-five minutes ago) link

Well, he can petition them to hear it. They don't have to. TBH, while I'm not saying they won't, it would seem kind of weird to punt back to the lower court on those issues only to then accept an appeal on the same issues.

i might just be on a different wavelength but i think they're corrupt, i think it's very clear that they would delay things as long as possible to give trump every advantage, regardless of the merit. who are they accountable to?

stepping back, do you think they're corrupt or that they're still acting in a disinterested way?

Well the decision says the court isn't ruling on the exact parameters of the immunity right now, but clearly leaves it open for them to consider later. Maybe they're anticipating several years of the appeals courts sending up rulings in this case that they send back saying, "not quite, try again."

Also they are obviously corrupt, in the literal financial and also intellectual senses.

One of the things that really gets my goat in all of this is that these same pigfucking assholes will talk endlessly about lawlessness on our nation’s streets or whatever, when they are the ones setting the example. It’s breathtakingly hypocritical, and they all deserve the rack.

The conservatives both sides and twist things to try to make their hypocrisy seem less bad. They are in the fantasy world Trump espoused in the debate where Portland was was burned down and destroyed in 2020 but the J6 folks didn’t obstruct the constitutional election process , didn’t cause police to die, and caused no damage. In their world getting rid of Chevron is just getting rid of the opinions of pointy head elitist woke geeks at agencies and democratizing the process. Plus much of the Supreme Court majority worked for Presidents like the Bushes and therefore they see what they’re doing as just restoring the imperial rule sought by those who worked in the executive branch then.

I don't think its hypocrisy exactly. Conservatives are perceived as pro "Law and Order' but I don't think this is true at all, they are explicitly pro-Order but anti-Law.

Order is hierarchical and top-down whereas law is bi-directional, or at least has the potential to be. Laws and regulations must be swept away as they get in the way of order and in the way of the big man who will impose order. Power must exist in the man not the office and rules should not be written down or codified where people might use them and access them. It is better for the rules to be hidden from view

I realize the terms are used interchangeably and conflated, but I don't see these as synonymous at all, I think they're opposites

https://www.thedailybeast.com/clarence-thomas-accepted-yacht-trip-to-russia-chopper-flight-to-putins-hometown-democrats

Thomas trip to Russia included in list by Dem Senators Whitehouse and Wyden referral to Attorney General requesting appointment of a Special Counsel to investigate Thomas .

Also , AOC has introduced articles of impeachment against Thomas and Alito . With Republicans controlling House this won’t go anywhere for now , but along with the steps taken by the Dem senators it may get some attention

Thomas had to visit Putin for some advice on getting the country in line.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KZy3NSqnkg

go Wyden go