|
Blake Emerson@blakeprof.bsky.social |
Trump v. US is one of the most authoritarian decisions I’ve ever read. This is Roberts explaining why the president can’t be prosecuted for various crimes in office. Criminal accountability would take away his power and we can’t have that.
7 replies 16 reposts 75 likes
|
Wearing a HR Monitor while taking a poo
@davidbyrneenjoyer.bsky.social
[ View ] |
They’re just dabbing on us
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
David M Weigel
@spdbump.bsky.social
[ View ] |
You can't be above the law when you are the law. QED.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
|
VT Moderate
@vtmoderate.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Roberts really speaks out of both sides of his mouth. There is nothing in the Constitution or the Federalist papers to justify his ruling. He’s just making stuff up now.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
brockmeyer.bsky.social
@brockmeyer.bsky.social
[ View ] |
God, I've been trying to formulate a succinct formulation of the unitary executive theory all morning, and "the President is a branch of government" was right there for the taking.
1 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
James Debord
@jamesdebord.bsky.social
[ View ] |
"The framers absolutely intended that the president should have absolute immunity but never specified it" is....something.
0 replies 0 reposts 4 likes
|
Rob Shearer
@r.v.cx
[ View ] |
We’ve been arguing over “the unitary executive” like suckers, and Roberts is just “the President is a branch of government”. So much for the mountain of law pretending it was anything more than that.
1 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
This Sandwichman is Tom Walker
@thesandwichman.bsky.social
[ View ] |
On the plus side, "Trump v. U.S." is aptly named.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes