|
Aaron Rupar@atrupar.bsky.social |
if President Biden declared today's Supreme Court ruling to be an assault on democracy and ordered Chief Justice John Roberts imprisoned indefinitely, would that be an "official act?"
42 replies 94 reposts 481 likes
|
Tim
@cthulul.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Order all 6 arrested, and declare their seats vacant. In all seriousness, Dems need to articulate a plan to address the problem. "We need to pass ethics reform" clearly has never been sufficient.
0 replies 1 reposts 4 likes
|
Roldy
@alwaysroldy.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Seems to me it would. Are we still doing the enemy combatant thing?
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
@wanderingincode.bsky.social
[ View ] |
If nothing the president does counts as a high crime or misdemeanor, is impeachment even possible?
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
@nduggar.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Why yes, yes it would!
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
@bityz.bsky.social
[ View ] |
The court is not giving the president free reign, just free reign to try anything and see if the court allows it. It is one step away from the people's court of 1934. The court is saying " you can try extrajudicial killing with impunity even if we decide after the fact it was wrong."
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Matt Johnston
@mattjohnston.bsky.social
[ View ] |
This is exactly along the lines of what I was thinking. Seal Team Six also came to mind.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
|
TheDGeneration
@thedgeneration.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Does it matter if it's an official act or not if the prosecution can't use testimony from any officials who advised against it while trying to prove intent and knowledge of the law?
0 replies 1 reposts 2 likes
|
@mechilders99.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Protect and defend the constitution seems like an open and shut case. Off to the gulag, Roberts.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
|
@intraneus.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Why did they still hesitate to pack the court?
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Bill Jank
@billjank.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Probably so.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Dave Loftis
@lofdev.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Clear and present danger?
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Chair of the Sewer Maintenance Board
@sidewalkslam.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Well, it depends on the motive, but we aren't allowed to know that
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
Jon from Rhode Island
@jonfromrhodeisland.bsky.social
[ View ] |
You’re assuming that the decision applies to Democrats. But in a textual sense, yes.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
|
@jodilh.bsky.social
[ View ] |
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Mary Kay Forster
@momsterville.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Let's try it and find out.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Mo
@moinqueens.bsky.social
[ View ] |
if he ordered assassinations of domestic terrorists- is that ok? according to the Supreme Court, yes
1 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
En Buen Ora
@enbuenora.bsky.social
[ View ] |
yes but though they don't think he can be prosecuted for the order, they would rule that he had no authority to issue that order, as only right wing judges have the authority to issue & interpret orders in our precious system of checks & balances
1 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
Carl Wilhoyte
@carlwilhoyte.bsky.social
[ View ] |
The problem is the ambiguity. They never bothered to define official. I guess the lowest bar would be acts that are blatantly unconstitutional, like preventing the electoral transfer of power?
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Rick Kane
@paintingsurfer.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Ok, what are they waiting for then? Let’s do some official acts stuff and put some guard rails in place so this shit doesn’t get out of hand if they win.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
|
@ddbbkk.bsky.social
[ View ] |
And if a court decides that it isn’t an official act, would directing the jail warden to ignore the courts ruling also be an official act? How about pardoning the warden in advance?
0 replies 0 reposts 5 likes
|
|
Stardragon The Canadian
@stardragontc.bsky.social
[ View ] |
They would quickly rule that it wasn't. He would have to leave the Pro-democracy justices in charge, so he would have to incarcerate at least four Anti-democracy justices. Which apparently is perfectly legal. Now.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Smellbringer
@smellbringer.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Good question, let's find out.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Daniel Brody
@danielwbrody.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Wish Biden had the stones to try
0 replies 0 reposts 6 likes
|
Ton Chrysoprase
@tonchrysoprase.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Only one way to find out.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Henrick ♾️🌌
@henrick.thebull.app
[ View ] |
I would think so. But that's just me.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
@guidegroup.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Seems like it. I think that would be an excellent test of the new Presidential powers just granted
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
ol tonyo
@fraustian.bsky.social
[ View ] |
He should absolutely do at least the first one.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
The chicken lady
@chickenlady.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Yes, pretty much
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
David Elwell
@drelwell.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I think the Supreme majority was thinking of some other president when they excreted up this opinion.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Red Garnet
@curiosa.bsky.social
[ View ] |
“ conservative” SCOTUS’ stupidity is astounding/alarming/unconstitutional
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Cats Working
@catsworking.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I say go for it and let Roberts sit in jail while it works its way through the courts for years until SCOTUS finally takes it up and waits until last day of term to issue a ruling that it WAS an official act. Sorry, Johnny-boy!
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Mike B
@madhominem.bsky.social
[ View ] |
if this country is going down, let's go out metaphorical guns blazing
0 replies 0 reposts 18 likes
|
Little Brown Eyed Girl
@judig.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I'm thinking President Biden should write an executive order that disqualifies anyone seeking the office of president to not be a convicted felon...just sayin'
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Gary O'Brien, DBA
@doktor-x.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Yes.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Dav Sionnach
@davsionnach.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Gotta arrest six of them.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Sean McGurr
@seanmcgurr.bsky.social
[ View ] |
No, because he’s not a Republican.
0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
Nolan Zugernat
@zugernat.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Yes but the House would impeach Biden and invertebrate Senate Democrats like Dick Durbin would vote to remove.
1 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Stephen Pimpare
@stephenpimpare.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Consult with the VP and AG first, just to be sure. But a first (admittedly quick) read suggests the answer is yes (or at least that he could not be prosecuted for the act, even if a court ordered them released). Worth a shot!
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
Bill Hill
@ozarkgraphic.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Time to do it.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
☯️Sevy☮️
@sevynsees.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Yes
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Andrew Rowe
@newfierowe.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Yes, but they know dems would never do that. They also know Trump will. That is why they ruled this way.
0 replies 0 reposts 14 likes
|
Robert Ernst. Autistic Anorak Bastard Reply Guy FROM HELL
@anorakffm.bsky.social
[ View ] |
In order to be fool-proof, arrest 50 MAGA Representatives first, in order to make impeachment impossible, then arrest 5 out of 6 GOP judges, and finally send both groups to Guantanamo because they are obviously enemy (Russian or C.S.A., your choice really) combatants. Then go full Ben Butler.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes