Force them to do it. Don't surrender preemptively.
And also assert that whatever the DoJ does--as a part of the Executive--is presumptively legal under new Supreme Court precedent. Up-to-and-including ignoring Judicial Branch dicta.
1 replies
2 reposts
27 likes
I think they were testing the waters with the disqualification case. They just wrote out part of an Amendment, and everyone accepted it. So why not just write out other parts of the Constitution?
0 replies
0 reposts
7 likes
Reposted by KC Momkin
Either the Democrats will run Biden, or he'll say he can't continue the campaign and Democrats will run Harris. Either is newsworthy, but neither is nearly as radical as running a pro-insurrection convicted felon with legal immunity he's eager to use.
17 replies
297 reposts
1114 likes
I would like Jack Smith...in his briefing to the Judge...to point out that SCOTUS doesn't have the power to rewrite the Constitution by removing the separation of powers, checks, and balances. As such, anyone who swore an oath to the Constitution needs to rule as faithfully as possible to that doc.
1 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
Against enemies foreign and domestic. I don't want my child growing up in a world where this SCOTUS and Trump can just bulldoze the Constitution.
0 replies
1 reposts
7 likes
I don't think the Constitution was blank. It says Presidents can be held accountable. Roberts doesn't have legislative power, and this was a gross usurpation of ordinary process.
2 replies
1 reposts
20 likes
I for one think shrugging and laughing when we only have a few months is not a productive use of our time. We can let them do this easily by abdicating in advance, or we can make it very, very hard.
2 replies
0 reposts
5 likes
Look, we routinely say generals shouldn't follow illegal orders that involve the slaughter of civilians. There are already governors who have ignored court orders. This opinion knowingly destroys the separation of powers on the Constitution. So should all officials who tool oaths shrug?
1 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
It happened, but the Judicial Branch relies on the Executive Branch for all enforcement. They take it for granted that all lower court judges, governors, prosecutors, and so on will respect their decisions. But this puts pressure on all officers who swore an oath to the Constitution to defend it.
1 replies
2 reposts
10 likes
I mean, that didn't stop them from trying. I think a large number of lower court judges (and Jack Smith) should state they cannot follow a decision that side-steps the Constitutionally mandated process for changing core elements of the Constitution. It would be contrary to their oaths of office.
2 replies
5 reposts
34 likes
The courts do not have the legislative authority to write out core elements of the Constitution. That would need to be done via amendments and bills signed into law.
11 replies
1 reposts
23 likes
It is the difference between expecting to "find" a pre-built perfect community vs. someone who expects to "build" a community over time through exploration and trial and error.
0 replies
1 reposts
2 likes
2/... time consuming, unclear, difficult, and vulnerable to routine reinterpretation by SCOTUS. This was an overreach, as you cannot IMO alter the Constitution this significantly without a legislative process.
0 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
The opinion wasn't written to clarify things for the lower courts based on a good faith interpretation of Constitution (which they swore to uphold). It was written to "legally" undo Constitutional limits on the president that are the bedrock of our system. By making accountability extraordinarily...
1 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
Sue autocorrect for negligent infliction of emotional distress.
0 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
Your phrasing captures things more descriptively.
0 replies
0 reposts
3 likes
Reposted by KC Momkin
I think it's funny that there have been all these close reads of the DNC rules about their candidates as if they are somehow set in stone. It's the party's rules! They can just change them completely! It's not the law!
7 replies
5 reposts
82 likes
It will get harder the longer we wait. It is much safer to raise one's voice when Biden is president and is in charge of DOJ.
1 replies
0 reposts
1 likes
www.cnn.com/2024/05/01/p...
0 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
It is just a fig leaf for those who are in the know and a talking point for the rubes silly enough to think they are smart.
0 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
I hope it doesn't come to this, but the book "Wilmington's Lie" is a warning. www.npr.org/2020/01/13/7...
0 replies
1 reposts
1 likes
But Ashley Babbit was a white conservative, so that isn't even true.
0 replies
0 reposts
2 likes
Reposted by KC Momkin
Everyone else is focused, rightly, on the threat, so let me just remind you that it will not remain bloodless, whatever the left decides to do or not to do.
18 replies
207 reposts
699 likes
Reposted by KC Momkin
Do you remember folks were picketing Supreme Court Justices' homes a couple of years ago? They're back! At Justice Roberts' home today.
Short thread with video on Twitter:
x.com/LiteraryMous...
20 replies
146 reposts
715 likes
Well, there are an awful lot of movies and books about how horrible things are under dictators and wackos, many of them based on true stories. So lots of people do know cause they found out. It's why the evil queen or evil king in kids flicks is always yelling "off with his head!"
0 replies
0 reposts
0 likes