There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

RememberTheApollo_ ,

He could “officially” shoot someone on 5th Ave.

MyOpinion ,

The Supreme Court does what ever the hell they want so I guess the president should be able to do the same.

whotookkarl ,
@whotookkarl@lemmy.world avatar

2021-01-02 Trump on a call with Georgia election officials asked them “All I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state.”

Not an official act on any planet in this solar system, how is this not a loss for Trump?

Zaktor ,

The court decides which acts are official. They will declare whatever they want official. “He was doing it in his capacity as president to protect the election. He knew he won, so the votes must just be missing.”

irotsoma ,
@irotsoma@lemmy.world avatar

Problem is that with this, proving that it fell under one power basically means all other laws, even ones that specifically were meant to restrict that power, are meaningless. What he did could be 100% illegal, but he can’t be prosecuted for it, so he can’t be removed from office or punished after he leaves office.

If he was making that call as the official president of the United States, speaking in an official capacity, then it doesn’t matter if the order he gives is illegal if it was within his power to order the Governor of a state to do anything at all. If it’s not in his power for him to give an order to the Governor, then he just has to say it was an official suggestion as the president of the US. There’s no restriction that says a president can’t suggest that the Governor of a state does something to benefit the president. Doesn’t matter that the thing he asked for was illegal because it can’t be questioned in court at all to determine its legality.

Now it depends on if the Governor were to actually do it. And if as president Trump decides to order the assassination of that Governor once he refused, that would not be prosecutable. The assassin would be the only one who could be punished for the illegal act.

Immunity from prosecution doesn’t mean the thing you’re doing isn’t legal, it means that no one has the right to punish you for that act. It’s still unethical to break the law, but there is no enforceable consequence.

LordOfTheChia ,

They also included in the ruling that:

“Chief Justice Roberts determines that “official conduct,” which garners presumptive immunity under the Court’s framework, may not be used as evidence of other crimes when prosecuting former presidents.”

lawfaremedia.org/…/the-supreme-court-s-presidenti…

My understanding, a president having an “official” meeting with his staff regarding commiting a crime that falls outside of his normal presidential duties is no longer admissible as evidence for the criminal act.

Corvidae ,

Laws are only for little people.

TheReturnOfPEB , (edited )

“My grandfather rode a camel, my father rode a camel, I drive a Mercedes, my son drives a Land Rover, his son will drive a Land Rover, but his son will ride a camel,”

This was the moment for the the United States where we all start “ride a camel” again. “The American Republic” Apex is over.

nomous ,

I tell people as often as I can, especially my trans and bipoc friends; now is the time. Get a couple guns (a long one and a short one) and learn how to use them. Learn some basic first aid, you really just need to know how to stabilize someone. Start networking with like-minded people in your communities. The police will not protect us, they’ve proven they’ll happily club senior citizens to the ground and shoot any protesters in the face with rubber bullets while escorting a rightwing murderer to safety.

Iran was a secular, liberal state until almost 1980 when they (mostly legitimately) elected an Islamist theocracy; it could happen here

fubarx ,

And going forward, who decides what’s an official vs. unofficial Presidential act?

azimir ,

Why that’s easy. It’s the top elected official, of course.

Zaktor ,

It’s actually the Court, which is a convenient aspect since it means only Republicans get immunity.

Evilcoleslaw ,

The courts

LordCrom ,

Which means every case about presidential actions is appealed up to the supreme Court from now on

irotsoma ,
@irotsoma@lemmy.world avatar

Pretty much everything the president does while in office is official. So the more important question is what is within the president’s powers.

The problem with immunity rather than changing the law is that all he has to do is prove that in some circumstance he has that power and that he believes that circumstance existed at the time and he used that authority to do it.

For example, he has the power to order the military to assassinate, so the specifics of whether it was legal to assassinate a certain person can’t be questioned in court, only whether he has the power to issue that type of order. Because once it’s established that it is within his power and he states that he used his authority as president to issue the order, he is immune to any further prosecution. Also, it doesn’t matter if he ordered the CIA to do it and they don’t have that legal authority to act inside the US. In that case the president is breaking the law, he just can’t be prosecuted for it, only the CIA agents involved could be. It’s not presidential authority that is being violated in that case so it’s off the table for prosecution regardless of how illegal it is.

NotMyOldRedditName ,

So, has there been a more monumentally catastrophic series of rulings like we’ve had this week?

Presidents are kings and immune to the law

Kickbacks are now legal

Executive agencies completely destroyed

I know other individual rulings may be worse, but in this case the series of rulings.

EatATaco ,

And they are all thanks to the fact that trump, not Clinton, got to appoint 3 to justices.

And there are still people who think voting for a third party is a good idea.

jorp ,

Take some responsibility for how shitty the Democrats are. They’re not entitled to people’s votes they have to earn them. If my options are shit salad and shit sandwich I’m not worried about carbs.

xenoclast ,

You’re entire comment is a shit sandwich and you’re a fucking moron…eat that.

jorp ,

oh no you got me! enjoy the collapse of your nation

wanderingmagus ,

You do realize that if the USA goes to shit, the rest of the world will also go? Not because the USA went to shit, but because the shit-in-chief will be bound and determined to bring said shit to the rest of the world and cram it down y’all’s throats while shaking hands with Putin and Kim? He already talked about withdrawing from NATO and telling Putin he has carte blanche to just roll over Europe, and don’t be surprised if a few lobbyists in the military-industrial complex convince him that taking a second look at colonization of the Global South for their minerals might just be a good idea while he’s at it.

jorp ,

sounds like the American far-right is united behind their preferred candidate, I wonder why Democrats aren’t trying similarly to court the left with a good candidate?

aren’t you tired of bouncing between right and far right?

EatATaco ,

I said nothing about entitlement, only pointed out the facts. You can both sides it all you want, but the last 10 days has exposed how absolutely ridiculous that position is. Although it’s long since been obvious.

jorp ,

there are more than two sides, Democrats would do well to realize that instead of making every election about how not Republican they are.

one of these parties will be gone in the next decade

Zink ,

There are a multitude of sides within the population. Unfortunately, our voting reinforces the two-party status quo.

NotMyOldRedditName ,

So…

Fuck Trump obviously. And everyone who voted for him. (Edit and fuck everyone in the voting doesn’t matter camp)

Also fuck Mitch McConnell

But god damnit, fuck Obama for not fighting Mitch, and fuck Ruth for not retiring when she should have.

jorp ,

isn’t it fun how American politics is all about the action or inaction of 80+ year old fossils? people society at large ignores when they’re family or neighbors but they’re running the whole fucking thing

EatATaco ,

I don’t know what Obama could have done, but i absolutely agree that rbg should have stepped down in the middle of her term.

NotMyOldRedditName , (edited )

I’m sure he could have done more than he did. Ultimately, they didn’t think Trump would win and didn’t fight back hard enough because they were worried about the backlash that might cause on the upcoming election.

Now, Republicans have shown that they won’t allow votes in the last year, but only if the dems have the presidency. It also set the precedent that they can even do that in the first place.

I guarantee you someone who needs replacing further out than a year will now be denied in the future for some other bullshit reason.

Edit: here’s my worst outcome guess. For all future terms where the dems hold the presidency, but not the senate, all future SC nomination votes will be denied since congress and the presidency is conflicted and we can’t have a vote while it’s in conflict.

CaptPretentious ,

And there are still people who think voting for a third party is a good idea.

Well it is. Because far to many people are simply voting for the lesser of evils, because our options have been terrible for decades. And the longer we keep perpetuation this broken system, the worse it’s going to get.

Lets say Biden wins… this exact same shit show is coming about in 4 years again. And when that orange clown was in office, people were already trying to set up a Trump dynasty… that for some fucking reason that family should just be in power. This pattern cannot continue. We need to get out of “lets go with what will hopefully do the least damage” and start voting in people that are actually going to represent the people. Sure maybe POTUS might not be the best place to start with that, but it needs to start somewhere.

And if not the Trump family, it’s going to be some other bozo like Elon (somehow) or Bezos because our political system has become that much of a joke.

The rich keep getting away with shit, nothing happens. Corrupting in our government, nothing happens. Corruption in our police, nothing happens. Rights are being taken away from people, nothing happens. In some areas of the country, public schools are now displaying the 10 commandments for some reason. Oh and public taxes are going to help fund private schools. And school shootings… and nothing happens. Our national debt is out of control. And the state on how veterans are taken care of is pathetic. I’m sick and tired of incompetent and inept leadership. So yeah, maybe a 3rd party might be a good idea. Or we can keep this shit show up until it’s too late, which is the most likely outcome.

EatATaco ,

Well it is.

Even in the outside chance that the third party wins, we still immediately revert to a two party system. It solves nothing as the nature of our voting system is to turn into a two-party system. It’s a vanity vote, that’s it.

This pattern cannot continue.

And voting third party in the presidential election does not stop it from continuing. At best it just switches what “two parties” we are voting for. If you want to stop this from continuing, you work locally to get how we get local candidates elected (like STAR or ranked) and then you work up from there. But you don’t want to. You want to just do the simple thing of casting a vote and believing you’ve “done your part” which is why it’s a vanity vote.

The presidential vote is a strategic one that you use understanding the rules of the game you are actually playing, not the one you (and I) wish you were playing.

njm1314 ,

This is so much broader than the title is suggesting

dhork ,

When this first dropped, all the news media had kind of cautious titles. It wasn’t until after their legal reporters actually read it that they started getting the point.

njm1314 ,

I’m kind of scared to listen to the next episode of strict scrutiny, I’m worried for all of their Mental Health.

Fades ,

Another day another step closer to the end of American democracy. I just hope trump doesn’t decide to throw me in jail for voting D

njm1314 ,

Step? This is it. We’re done. Democracy just ended.

ToastedPlanet ,

The rule of law just ended. Democracy will be next if Trump wins. So vote Biden!

dhork ,

After mulling this over for these few hours, I realize what this ruling really does is render the President unaccountable to his Oath of Office. Any official act is presumed to be totally legal by the courts, unless he is impeached and removed from office over it. Much of his communications with his staff is now also not subject to review anywhere but Congress, as part of a formal impeachment proceeding.

A President is now officially a king, restrained by no law in what he can use his office to do, as long as he has the support of half of the House, or 1/3 of the Senate.

probableprotogen ,

Yeah we are sooooo fucked

P1nkman ,

America just got a MASSIVE step towards a dictator. WTAF is going on? I’m in the wrong timeline…

BigMacHole ,

According to the Supreme Court it’s LEGAL for Biden to order the Assassination of Supreme Court Justices!

EmptySlime ,

Biden has the chance to do quite possibly the funniest Thing™ in American history.

dogslayeggs ,

This ruling sounds good on its face, but it’s mixed at best and somewhat bad in the broad view.

  1. It doesn’t define what is or isn’t an official duty or act. It gives some examples and then says it’s up to the lower courts to decide what is or isn’t on a case by case basis. It specifically said some of the current allegations are official acts that can’t be prosecuted and said some of the others are probably not official acts but the lower courts will have to rule on them. I’m sure that will be a speedy process that gets done before the election!
  2. It also says it is the government’s burden to prove an act isn’t official, which will slow everything down and bring the cases back to SCOTUS again on a case by case basis. This also opens the possibility of political assassinations as being argued as official acts.
  3. It mentions Presidents having limited immunity from having to make documents available. It does say it isn’t absolute, but it definitely leaves the door open to block current court cases from using many documents as evidence and also leaves the door open to claim immunity for the classified docs case. Evidence fights at the current criminal cases are about to be much harder for the prosecution to win. Now, it does say that former Presidents no longer have this immunity but isn’t clear whether that is for all docs or only docs for after they are former Presidents.
  4. Maybe the worst is that it rules INTENT cannot be questioned. That is a core concept of criminal cases: intent matters! They are holding that it would bog down a President to be constantly asked about his/her intent when doing official acts, so therefor courts cannot question it. This REALLY opens the possibility of political assassinations, since intent behind the act cannot be questioned (e.g. it presupposes the person who was assassinated was committing treason or planning a terrorist attack and therefor the Presidential act was official). It does not say that former Presidents no longer have the Intent immunity, so this might be rough to clear in courts.
  5. It specifically ruled that it is 100% OK to fire a person if they don’t do the illegal thing the President asks them to do, as long as that person’s job is something the President can hire/fire. It also ruled that if the illegal thing the President asks them to do falls within their job duties, then the President is immune from prosecution for asking for that illegal thing.
Zaktor ,

Read the dissents, they’re very clear in this not being only somewhat bad.

jwiggler ,
@jwiggler@sh.itjust.works avatar

When are we going to protest. This is insanity.

Here is an excerpt from the dissent:

Looking beyond the fate of this particular prosecution, the long-term consequences of today’s decision are stark. The Court effectively creates a law-free zone around the President, upsetting the status quo that has existed since the Founding. This new official-acts immunity now “lies about like a loaded weapon” for any President that wishes to place his own interests, his own political survival, or his own financial gain, above the interests of the Nation. Korematsu v. United States, 323 U. S. 214, 246 (1944) (Jackson, J., dissenting). The President of the United States is the most powerful person in the country, and possibly the world. When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in ex- change for a pardon Immune. Immune, immune, immune.

Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority’s message today.

Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done. The relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •