|
Mitchell Epner@mitchellepner.bsky.social |
1/ Let me explain one way that today's Trump immunity decision threatens the survival of the Republic. Under today's ruling, a President would be immune for any way in which he used the military (a "core function"), even to kill American citizens in America. Theoretically, the soldiers who . . .
14 replies 203 reposts 518 likes
|
marcosantana
@marcosantana.bsky.social
[ View ] |
If Trump puts troops on the street there will be basically the 21st century of civil war. Protests with weapons on both sides. It will go on for years.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Ric Steinberger
@ricst.bsky.social
[ View ] |
We will no longer have presidents. Will will have emperors who rule until their death.
0 replies 2 reposts 28 likes
|
Kevin J. Rogers
@kevinjrogers.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Didn't then-Chief Justice Burger try the "core functions" gambit to get Nixon off the hook in the Watergate case? If I remember correctly, even the Republican-appointed justices dug in their heels until he dumped it.
2 replies 1 reposts 21 likes
|
Danny Rubin
@dannyrubin.bsky.social
[ View ] |
1/ Does the immunity also make the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 moot? Can Biden defund the Supreme Court and use the money for anything he pleases. Serious question. Does the President now control the power of the purse? Because I’m pretty sure that’s how Trump would see it.
1 replies 0 reposts 10 likes
|
Caroline Elletee
@kionazuul.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I sat and cried about the Dirty Wars today. We are no longer safe in any way. Some President will do unspeakable things. There is no rule of law when someone is above the law.
0 replies 0 reposts 6 likes
|
Jon from Rhode Island
@jonfromrhodeisland.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I have been thinking of this all day and it terrifies me. Thank you for articulating it.
0 replies 0 reposts 8 likes
|
|
Mitchell Epner
@mitchellepner.bsky.social
[ View ] |
2/ . . . carried out such illegal orders would be subject to criminal prosecution, even if the President was not. BUT (HUGE BUT) the President has an absolute and unreviewable power to pardon anyone for federal crimes. So, he could promise all soldiers that (a) if they carry out the illegal . . .
6 replies 49 reposts 302 likes
|
Ethan Jacobs 🇺🇦
@ethanjacobs.bsky.social
[ View ] |
He doesn’t even need to make the Armed Forces do it. He can run a nationwide pogrom using militarized Border Patrol or deputized paramilitary thugs.
2 replies 1 reposts 25 likes
|
Blake Mitchell
@blake.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Would it be easier to go about it this way? What CAN’T the president do now?
2 replies 1 reposts 2 likes
|
@highelfmage.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Serious question, is Dred Scott still the worst decision in SCOTUS history? This one has to at least be close.
0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
Heather e^-1/x^2
@heathermoandco.bsky.social
[ View ] |
How is this ruling not clearly setting up the pins for #Project2025?
Everyone was so shocked after the Dobbs decision. But this? This ruling is like something the Kremlin could’ve crafted. It’s shock troops stuff.
1 replies 0 reposts 7 likes
|
@philomorph.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Am I misunderstanding the ruling? Can't a president still be impeached for basically anything? They wouldn't go to jail, but the new ruling doesn't shield the president from being kicked out of office by congress, right?
2 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
|
@drunkenlobster.bsky.social
[ View ] |
There must be some sort of malicious compliance that Biden can do that isn't evil. Maybe ordering federal employees to camp out on the lawns of Scotus justices?
2 replies 0 reposts 13 likes
|
Bijan Moini
@bijanmoini.de
[ View ] |
But using the military within the US to kill US citizens (let alone rivals) is not a core constitutional function of the executive, is it? Only using military force abroad would be.
1 replies 0 reposts 1 likes