|
b-boy bouiebaisse@jbouie.bsky.social |
roberts’ reasoning is fundamentally (lower-case “r”) anti-republican. i know we dunk on the framers here but roberts has issued a rebuke of the revolutionary assumption that concentrated, unaccountable power is a fundamental threat to liberty.
21 replies 446 reposts 1918 likes
|
Michael Artz
@michaelartz.bsky.social
[ View ] |
When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty
0 replies 0 reposts 6 likes
|
Keith Hamilton Putnam
@keithputnam.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Well it's not a threat to *his* liberty, probably, so how could it be to anyone else's?
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
Dan Shay (he/him)
@dfs4114.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Taking the framers' view, there existed at the founding a history and tradition of beheading tyrannical rulers in England.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Mandoqueer
@mandoqueer.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Also the republican assumption that Liberty is a good thing
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
amdiamanti
@amdiamanti.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I would joke that they've declared the Declaration of Independence unconstitutional, but it doesn't feel like a joke. These were all "official acts" as well.
4 replies 24 reposts 72 likes
|
|
b-boy bouiebaisse
@jbouie.bsky.social
[ View ] |
roberts essentially ignores the purpose of separation of powers, which was not to create entirely separate spheres of action but to prevent the emergence of unchecked authority. instead, he says, separation of powers *demands* unchecked authority.
28 replies 299 reposts 1460 likes
|
@dirtydancing2hn.bsky.social
[ View ] |
It’s wild that he said a president violating federal law is a hypothetical. What does he think the safe he’s ruling on is about?!
1 replies 0 reposts 18 likes
|
mikevagomikevago
@mikevago.bsky.social
[ View ] |
That's what's really striking about this decision. They're just not attacking our legal and constitutional framework. They're attacking the deepest philosophical underpinnings of our country — that power comes from the consent of the governed, and that no one is above the law.
0 replies 2 reposts 10 likes
|
GOLIKEHELLMACHINE
@golikehellmachine.com
[ View ] |
have been imagining john adams' bones spinning themselves into a ball of flame hot enough to power the eastern seaboard for a month
0 replies 4 reposts 37 likes
|
McIrwin
@mcirwin47.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Roberts, Alito, Kavanaugh, ACB and Thomas probably think this will usher in some kind of American Hapsburg Catholic Monarchy or something. They’re still fighting the 30 Years War here… (I can say this, I’m Confirmed!)
1 replies 0 reposts 12 likes
|
Innocent🕷Abroad
@jjgass.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Accusing the dissent of claiming "infallibility," when it's the majority that is tying the hands of both other branches irrespective of what happens in the future, is such extraordinary projection
0 replies 1 reposts 3 likes
|
Kye
@kyebarker.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Roberts court: “Arbitrary power is actually very very good. That’s what they meant by ‘energetic’, you see. We are very smart.”
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
Ham Elliot
@r0wdy.sk33t.expert
[ View ] |
The opinion that power given without constraint won't be abused 3 days before the Fourth of July......
1 replies 0 reposts 5 likes
|
❀°。der Siebenschläfer *.ﾟ✿ ⋆
@sababausa.bsky.social
[ View ] |
makes Roberts' past mockery of the French Revolution hit a little different
www.semafor.com/article/02/2...
2 replies 0 reposts 6 likes
|
|
@gmoke.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Chief Justice John Marshall in 1807 ruled that the President was subject to a subpoena, just like any other citizen. That was during Aaron Burr's treason trial, an attempt, I believe, of Jefferson to kill or punish his former Vice President. Once again, history rhymes.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Frank Lynch
@fplynch.bsky.social
[ View ] |
The commenters over at some RW blogs constantly complain about how Biden oversteps his authority. So now impeachment is the only remedy.
1 replies 0 reposts 7 likes
|
Jon Pennington
@jonpennington.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Trump is already a paradigmatic example of what the Federalist Papers said a tyrannical demagogue would be like.
0 replies 0 reposts 5 likes
|
Micah
@rincewind.run
[ View ] |
I keep coming back to the fact that these people make such a big deal about calling themselves originalists and the framers could not possibly have been more clear on this specific issue I know the hypocrisy is the point, but still
3 replies 3 reposts 86 likes
|
Genderflux Superfluid
@rewhan.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Completely counteractive to his own country's mythology.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Vituperative Erb
@vituperativeerb.bsky.social
[ View ] |
The British monarch could be punished for official acts!
0 replies 0 reposts 5 likes
|
Casmilus
@casmilus.bsky.social
[ View ] |
The triumph of Hobbes
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes