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.

'There Are No Kings in America': Biden Blasts Supreme Court, Issues Dire Warning After Immunity Ruling

“(With) today’s Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity, that fundamentally changed. For all practical purposes, there are virtually no limits on what the president can do. It’s a fundamentally new principle and it’s a dangerous precedent because the power of the office will no longer be constrained by the law even including the supreme court of the United States.”

Throughout his address, Biden underscored the gravity of the moment, emphasizing that the only barrier to the president’s authority now lies in the personal restraint of the officeholder. He warned vehemently against the prospect of Trump returning to power, painting a stark picture of the dangers such an outcome could pose.

riodoro1 ,

He’s so pissed about it he’s gonna do absolutely nothing!

TrickDacy , (edited )

You apparently want him to do illegal things because he can now get away with it?

edit: are basic norms being downvoted here because if republicans are corrupt af, we should not have any standards either?

Edit 2: you’re not teaching me anything by telling me the Republicans did something more fucked up first. Do you people honestly think Biden would/could murder political opponents. He obviously won’t. He shouldn’t. Jfc

Edit 3: yup I’m totally saying let’s do nothing about this. You people are brilliant.

catloaf ,

Apparently “when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal” is now law.

Beetschnapps , (edited )

So again it’s now a matter of “what is allowed” vs “what is ethical or moral”…

We all joke about the high road of democratic vs gop approaches. But how much does the difference matter?

The hard part is we all get it, Biden is now technically allowed to do whatever. Is that a reason to immediately do the worst possible thing?

Should he now cast aside the law and commit hate crimes purely to prove a point?

The courts will never allow such a performative action, but they’ll allow the creep of fascism.

CaptainSpaceman ,

There are way worse thing biden could do withthis nearly unlimited power

Beetschnapps ,

And we’re still holding on to imagination.

TrickDacy ,

These people are proving that anarchy would never work. The second murder became “legal” they all jumped to suggest it.

TopRamenBinLaden ,

Murder happens all of the time in Capitalist society, too, you know? Even though it’s ‘illegal’ and all that.

Anarchy does not mean no rules, it just means there is no state to enforce those rules. Communities can still enforce their own rules in Anarchist society, and one of those rules can be ‘don’t murder’.

TrickDacy ,

I know what anarchy is. You’re assuming murder would be forbidden in every community, but if a lot of people in this thread started communities, (at least they themselves) would be allowed to murder. That was my point.

Gigagoblin ,
@Gigagoblin@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

oh, look, it’s one of these again.

Sanctus ,
@Sanctus@lemmy.world avatar

Yeah he should. Shock everyone. Show them how bad this ruling is. I’m sure there are impermanent ways to display this.

Johnmannesca ,
@Johnmannesca@lemmy.world avatar

Does this mean a president can make their tax filing an official act?

sik0fewl ,

Turns out Nixon was right this whole time.

cabron_offsets ,

“Illegal” my left asshole.

kevindqc ,

How many assholes do you have?

ArmoredThirteen ,

Thirteen of them and they’re all well guarded. How many do you have??

Hadriscus ,

Only 12

Duamerthrax ,

Sure. Why not? It’s not like the next R in office wont do exactly that anyway.

TrickDacy ,

Because morality and norms exist whether those corrupt fucks care about them or not.

DeadTestament ,

The problem is that action must be taken now or those norms could go away forever.

Reverendender ,

Not for long they don’t

echutaa ,

Yes tie your hands while your opponent cleans their gun

lone_faerie ,

You can’t use norms and morality to defeat fascists

TrickDacy ,

Murder it is then

ALoafOfBread ,

Not illegal anymore bucko

Tja ,

They are literally not illegal anymore. He can declare Trump to be a danger and send seal team six to execute him. He can forgive half of all student debt and transfer the other half to an unlucky dude in Oklahoma. He can forbid to be called Joseph to everybody else. He can cancel the elections. Very legal and very cool.

SuddenDownpour ,

The Judiciary has decided that the Executive must not be beholden to neither the Legislative nor the Judiciary. This is terrible, because it breaks the separation of powers. Now, if only the Executive wasn’t beholden to any of the other powers to force the Judiciary to go back to reason… Oh, wait.

Irony aside: no, this isn’t a matter of not having standards, this is a matter of making sure that democracy is capable of perpetuating itself. If the organism gets infected by a virus that intends to mutate the whole thing into a degenerated parody of itself, it must send its antibodies. Not doing so means letting the last line of defense fall all by itself, which is even against the very spirit of the law.

Squirrel ,
@Squirrel@thelemmy.club avatar

He needs to act to safeguard our democracy, because others will not have the same hangups in doing the opposite. Acting with the power they have granted him in order to prevent future issues is not corruption.

CheeseNoodle ,

When the other guy is willing to knife you its no time to stick to the rules of debate.

Milk_Sheikh , (edited )

No, I want him to call their bluff and rise to the challenge of meeting this constitutional crisis. The top court in the land has gone off the rails, and seemingly in collusion with a concerted effort to destroy the rule of law.

Blithely waiting until the election to “let the people defeat Trump” is dereliction. This ruling may be curated in deference for Trump, but unless it is challenged forcefully it will not just go away on January 7th 2024 if Trump loses again. Because when the question of “What are ‘official acts’ v ‘private acts’ then?” comes up, it’ll go right back to the SCotUS the Heritage Foundation and their interpretations.

TrickDacy ,

It’s a straw man to imply I said we should do “nothing”

skulblaka ,
@skulblaka@sh.itjust.works avatar

Fucking lol,

This entire thread is people giving you answers that range from reasonable to nuanced, and you sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming about how the only options are murder or nothing.

I don’t get to pull this quote out very often, so please, feel honored.

What you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

TrickDacy ,

The only thing I’ve refused to accept is murder. Lying about that doesn’t change it. Btw practically no one suggested anything, but everyone who did and said something besides murder seemed somewhat reasonable to me.

pyre ,

we should have standards. my standard for a fascist is that he should not exist.

neidu2 ,

BoTh SiDeS aRe EqUaLly BaD

Jiggle_Physics ,

would you care to elaborate on what you believe should be done about this?

TrickDacy ,

Given that I’m a programmer who hasn’t even had time to think about it I wouldn’t know.

Things that should not be done about it: murder. I can’t tell if the people suggesting that are all joking or not, but it’s sort of shocking if anyone is being serious.

andrewta ,

I’ve given up on this crowd. You didn’t say do nothing.

This crowd only understands their echo chamber. Unless you are 100% in agreement with them then you must 100% be against them.

In another post I challenged them to give one specific thing Biden can/should do to fix this. They couldn’t even come up with one item.

TrickDacy ,

Unless you are 100% in agreement with them then you must 100% be against them.

I know what you mean. It’s pretty freaking sad. This isn’t facebook, where there’s an 80% chance I have horrid views if you think I might have them. Yet they behave like it’s facebook.

Lightor ,

Or maybe your views are just wildly unpopular, that’s a possibility too.

TrickDacy ,

deleted_by_moderator

    •
    Lightor ,

    Yah, I mean you’d hate to have any introspection, easier to insult everyone else.

    TrickDacy ,

    deleted_by_moderator

    •
    Lightor ,

    And you calling them idiots doesn’t make it so either. It’s just easier to call everyone dumb than genuinely consider their opinion.

    Everyone hating your opinion doesn’t make them automatically right, but it also doesn’t make them automatically wrong. Either way, only an idiot has everyone tell them they’re wrong and never considers that they just might be.

    TrickDacy ,

    deleted_by_moderator

    •
    Lightor ,

    Nope, that’s not at all what I said. See that’s your issue, you want to get mad and hyper defensive about everything instead of just having some introspection when people are telling you you’re wrong. I basically said “if everyone is telling you you’re wrong, that’s a good indicator that you should at least reevaluate your position” and you had to take that and get defensive. If this is how you handle someone else’s views then ya, I get why you’re down voted.

    You’re building a straw man and then trying to use that straw man to back your point. I clearly stated that other people’s opinion does not make you right or wrong. This is a great example of your problem. You’re not even trying to understand the point I’m making, you’re just getting upset because someone suggested the idea that you might, just maybe, be wrong. So you make super hyperbolic statements and misrepresent what I said.

    TrickDacy ,

    deleted_by_moderator

    •
    Lightor ,

    Man, you really do just toss insults instead of taking a few seconds to think. I’ve gone from trying to express my thoughts on your situation to being on board with everyone else. You’re an insufferable child that is unable or unwilling to understand basic concepts. Being called a weirdo by someone with your cognitive rot is a compliment.

    TrickDacy ,

    deleted_by_moderator

    •
    Lightor ,

    “Your bizarre lecturing couldn’t be less important to anyone, least of all, me.”

    Yah that’s kinda my point. You don’t care what anyone else thinks lol. And it’s only bizarre to you because the idea of a little self reflection is a foreign concept to you.

    Also, how do I have no idea what I’m talking about. I said consider having some introspection if everyone is telling you you’re wrong. If you think that’s “having no clue” well then that’s clearly part of your problem.

    “Maybe you should take your own advice and take a long walk somewhere contemplating some stranger’s comment on the internet about your deep need for introspection.”

    More misrepresention of what I said. Also you never once mentioned that I need introspection. See you’re just being defensive and lashing out in ways that don’t make sense because you can’t process your feelings.

    I’ll tell you this, if I made multiple comments on subjects that were constantly shit all over, like you claim is happening with you, I very much would take a beat to do just that: take a walk and have a little introspection. Because unlike you I’d rather be right than proud.

    TrickDacy ,

    deleted_by_moderator

    •
    Lightor ,

    Lol, now people who disagree with you are automatically bloodthirsty, Jesus the victim complex is strong with this one. And let’s be honest, I’ve disqualified my opinion in your eyes the second I disagreed with you. You’re not interested in convos outside your echo chamber bud.

    “I didn’t read the rest. Can you stop?”

    I love this sentence for so many reasons.

    • It shows your unwillingness to consider other people’s opions
    • It’s putting your narcissism on full display. Even though you want the convo to be over and aren’t even reading what the other pain says you just can’t stop yourself from responding.
    • You not only didn’t read it, but felt the need to tell me you didn’t read it, the confidence in ignorance is kinda impressive.

    Why oh why might people down vote and disagree with you. Such a mystery.

    TrickDacy ,

    deleted_by_moderator

    •
    Lightor ,

    My ignorance keeps expanding. Ignorance is a lack of knowledge, am I somehow forgetting things in real time or are you ignorant to what the term ignorance means? How tf would ignorance expand lol.

    I’m literally just telling you what I see, and you don’t like it. This really gives me a lot of insight as to why you don’t want a shred of self-reflection, you wouldn’t like what you see.

    “I’d appreciate it if you’d stop flooding my inbox. Because, unlike your ignorant take, I actually do want other perspectives. Even when they are from people who want to be my enemy. Otherwise I’d just block you.”

    Omg, what a pathetic victim complex again. You’re a big boy, if you don’t want my responses in your inbox just bock me or stop responding yourself.

    Wait, wait, wait. You want me to stop talking to you, but you also want other perspectives, even from me. But why do you want me to stop if you want my perspective? And if you did actually want me to stop, you could just block me, but you don’t want to do that. So you want me to stop but are taking no actions that would make me stop but also you don’t want me to stop because you want my perspective. You’re getting tangled in your own mental gymnastics bud.

    TrickDacy ,

    deleted_by_moderator

    •
    Lightor ,

    Oh no, you think a 1-minute read is a novel… I timed myself bud, less than a minute… Guess you don’t read a lot of books, or anything, which actually explains a lot.

    Every word you read is wrong? Every word? I said, “Ignorance is a lack of knowledge,” which is the dictionary definition. But I’m sure you know better than the dictionary too lol.

    “but trust me I am not reading most of this shit” Wow, this you: “Because, unlike your ignorant take, I actually do want other perspectives. Even when they are from people who want to be my enemy.” Looks like someone is losing track of their BS.

    TrickDacy ,

    Just want to let you know that I didn’t read any of this. You failed at wasting as much of my time as you wanted to

    Lightor ,

    And you’re wasting yours, but only one of us is outting themselves haha.

    I always found it kinda pathetic when people have to say “I didn’t read that” like it’s a slam, when it’s actually embarrassing. You’re addimitting you’d rather yell nonsense and plug your ears than walk away or have a convo. It’s really sad.

    TrickDacy ,

    You’ve probably spent 30 minutes this morning tearing into me. I spent like 5 minutes rolling my eyes and telling you it’s useless.

    But you win.

    Lightor ,

    Lol, nope, I’ve spent about 30 min expressing why your stance is wrong; a nice little story anyone who interacts with you can read and see how you REALLY feel about differing opinions.

    You’ve done nothing but reinforce everything I’ve said by plugging your ears and refusing to have an actual conversation. Maybe it only took you 5 minutes, but you painted a very clear picture of yourself. I mean ya, if you only talk at people and never listen, you don’t really have to invest a lot in a conversation.

    Lost_My_Mind ,

    I got one. Present a new bill that says supreme court judges are not for life with no chance to remove them.

    Every 4 years on election years, but months before the presidential election, (so maybe spring/summer) they allow the general public to vote on their performance. If they get less than 65% approval rating, they’re out. They’ll be replaced by the new president, technically next year (since the election happens in November, but the inauguration is in January).

    So if a court judge is less than 65% popular with the public, they’re gone.

    And yes, I see the problem of “but the nation is so divided right now that neither side could get that approval rating, and all 12 judges would just be replaced every 4 years…”

    Which is partially by design. We need a system that fundamentally breaks all systems that keep corrupt people in power, and actively discourages the media, and politicians from taking this “us vs them” mentality.

    A republican SHOULD be presenting their set of ideas that benefit ALL Americans.

    A democrat SHOULD be presenting a different set of opposing ideas that benefit ALL Americans.

    And the public should vote on what will benefit them most. There should be no such thing as career democrats, or career republicans. It should be a free flowing liquid set of ideas that get catagorized as democrat this time, but based on the people in the election, maybe next time you’re catagorized as more republican than the other guy. So, this election you’re republican instead.

    Because everybody is so concerned about “The other side”, that everybody forgets one key thing. It may be two sides, but they’re two sides to the same coin. That coin is America. Right now, and for the past 8 years, that coin has been just falling to the ground.

    andrewta ,

    thank you for presenting at least a decent idea. the ideas of shoot trump is just stupid. yeah biden can’t be prosecuted for it but the person who shoots trump can be. it’s still against the law and would basically guarantee a civil war in this country.

    while the bill is a good idea. would it actually pass? i mean think about it. right now the republicans own the court and will own it until the current batch dies. why would they vote for the bill? but on the face of it . it’s a good idea.

    AmbiguousProps , (edited )

    In another post I challenged them to give one specific thing Biden can/should do to fix this. They couldn’t even come up with one item.

    Nice to run into you again, still posting this tired line huh? And you’re lying, because not only did I provide specifics, so did multiple other people (there’s more than just these, I’ve seen a ton). It seems that you might be caught in some sort of personal echo chamber.

    Is there a reason you stop responding to people once they provide specifics?

    andrewta ,

    I kept checking and no one would give specifics. I gave up on the conversation. But I’ll go look

    ZILtoid1991 ,

    The precedent shouldn’t be “they go low, we go high”, but “play stupid games, win stupid prizes”. He probably wouldn’t do anything because the aforementioned issue, but should just send an assassination squad on the 6 supreme court judges alongside with other politicians.

    Lost_My_Mind ,

    You’re suggesting Biden sends a government hit squad to assasinate supreme court judges?

    Are you high?

    Womble ,

    I mean, apparently he could now order a hit team to burst into Robert’s house at night, put a gun to his his head and say “Joe sends his completely legal regards” before leaving. Obviously killing them would be wrong but maybe it wouldnt be so bad to make them feel a bit of what they are unleashing, since conservatives often dont have empathy for things that dont happen to them or those close to them.

    Lost_My_Mind ,

    So…the hypothetical of trump using these new “standards” (for lack of a better word) that his judges set is justification for calling for the current president to beat him to the punch?

    Do you know what would happen if Biden did that? Best case scenario, is he IMMEDIATELY loses the 2024 election, and trump then continues the practice with the justification of “he did it first!”. That’s the BEST possible outcome.

    But it could go SOOOOOO much farther than that. It could honestly be the thing that starts the civil war 2 in this country before we even GET to the election. A government using it’s own resources to kill it’s own government officials. How is that not EXACTLY what russia does???

    Why stop at supreme court judges? Why not kill trump? Why not kill every political opponent you face?

    You tried to stop trump from introducing facism by saying it’s ok for Biden to introduce facism. Either way, this country falls to facism. You’re just debating which side is the new dictator.

    Womble , (edited )

    Did you missread what i said or just choose to argue against what you wanted to read? I even included the words “obviously killing them would be wrong”, and its not like that was burried in dozens of lines nobody will read through.

    I suggested showing the judge he could be targeted with his own ruling not killing him.

    TrickDacy ,

    You’re actually being serious

    draughtcyclist ,

    It’s the tolerance paradox. We can tolerate all except the intolerant.

    UltraGiGaGigantic ,

    Can you tolerate electoral reform?

    ShepherdPie ,

    But they’re not illegal things according to the highest court in the nation. That’s the entire point.

    TrickDacy ,

    That doesn’t matter. I understand that premise and yet it still doesn’t matter

    ShepherdPie ,

    If it was as unimportant as you think it is, it wouldn’t be getting ruled on by SCOTUS. It absolutely does matter, especially with groups like the right who continually challenge laws to find ways to loosen or completely negate them.

    TrickDacy ,

    Never said it was unimportant

    ShepherdPie ,

    Right you said it “doesn’t matter” which is another way of saying that something is unimportant.

    Duamerthrax , (edited )

    The only thing you’re interested in is showing how much of a bigger person you are on the internet. What we’re doing is speaking about all the ways this is fucked up and hypotheticals about how it can go wrong. For a lot of us, this isn’t new. I my political life time alone, I saw 8 years of rights being eroded by the Bush II administration with no real push back and once Obama got in under the promise of fixing things, a whole lot of inaction on rolling back any of the rights violations.

    The powers that be are taking advantage of how distributed the responsibilities of government are. If it’s so easy to lose rights, why is it so hard to gain them back. There’s always someone else to point at for why that is the case. In Nazi Germany, that was called The Banality of Evil. I see that everyday when some injustice is hand waved away as being too ingrained to do anything about. Police Reform? Too hard. Effective Climate Action? It would hurt the economy. The SC is eroding our rights? Have to wait for someone to die or retired(lol).

    PlainSimpleGarak ,

    You’re wasting your time, Best Friend.

    TrickDacy ,

    I will consider this harassment and report you if you do this again

    PlainSimpleGarak ,
    1. Lemmy is a rather small community by comparrison. I’m bound to run into you frequently.
    2. I don’t care what you do. It has no impact on me.
    3. If it truly bothered you, you would block me. It’s ridiculously easy.
    todd_bonzalez ,

    yup I’m totally saying let’s do nothing about this. You people are brilliant.

    What should we do then? The default assumption is nothing, give us something to actually work with or the assumption is true.

    TrickDacy ,

    Not murder. I’m not knowledgeable enough to know. I know, no one ever admits this online so it’s probably weird to read

    The default assumption is nothing

    That is on you

    todd_bonzalez ,

    Republicans have spent the past 50 years screaming that guns exist to thwart a tyrannical government. Not that they bring tyranny to our doorstep, I’m not writing off the one thing they’ve admitted could stop them.

    The current brand of right wing fascism taking over in this country will kill millions if left unchecked. I’m not encumbered by the trolley problem here, the people who want to bring fascism to America should die if that’s what it takes to stop them.

    TrickDacy ,

    Calling for civil war is always good

    todd_bonzalez ,

    I don’t intend to start it, I intend to finish it.

    Sanctus ,
    @Sanctus@lemmy.world avatar

    Protest. We should flood the streets and not go to work.

    lone_faerie ,

    We know for a fact Trump will use this to abuse his power as much as possible. The high road isn’t sitting down and taking it, it’s using the power that was just handed to you to do something about it. There practically is no such thing as “illegal” now when it comes to the president. Biden doesn’t need to commit murder to make a difference. He could, for example, expand the Supreme Court so the conservatives no longer have the advantage, or cancel student debt to get more supporters, or do anything other than cry about it.

    TrickDacy ,

    Nah, murder is the popular idea here so let’s do that

    lolrightythen ,

    Look in the mirror, dawg

    Corkyskog ,

    I would love to see him detain every scotus justice and stash em in a safe house for their protection/national security. Give them no freedom of movement or agency over their lives… see if they change their tune.

    Mango ,

    This sounds like it would be way more effective than the obvious bullshit that came to my mind. I’m with you.

    Mango ,

    Official act Trump right in his cake hole.

    StaySquared ,

    Biden and Co. sweating, payback’s a bitch.

    Freefall ,

    Holding back from using his newly granted power to demolish the terrorist party and their supporters would definately make me sweat. Other solutions would be much easier.

    BigMacHole ,

    Biden: The Supreme Court ruled I can do ANYTHING I WANT!

    Also Biden: So I will do NOTHING! Please Vote kthxbai!

    ExFed ,

    Yes, because he actually cares about what the Constitution stands for, not just some adversarial power game. Claim the paradox of tolerance all you want, but fighting fire with fire here is just participating in the same race to the bottom that’s destroying our democracy here in the USA.

    Land_Strider ,

    Preemptive strikes exist. Law does not need to apply after the fact if the law is allowed preventive measures.

    And arguing about if one should take such a preventive strike, yes they should since the perp has already declared threatening intentions to cause immediate harm.

    flicker ,

    The people arguing against using this new power because using it now makes you just as bad as “them,” are the dog-sitting-in-a-room-on-fire meme.

    "Using the fire ax is just as evil as destroying the house yourself! Get fucked. We caught the Republicans smoking. Make them smoke the whole pack.

    aniki ,

    Only you plebs argue about the constitution while the people in charge treat it like a napkin.

    Tja ,

    Alternative take: letting Republicans do whatever they want and not fighting back or taking actions to prevent it, is what is destroying your democracy.

    ExFed ,

    Unless you’re willing to claim we’re in a civil war, then I’m not willing to call Republicans “the enemy” … That’s that the real enemies of America want of us: to divide and conquer from within.

    Sanctus ,
    @Sanctus@lemmy.world avatar

    The Republicans are literal claiming this is war and treating it as such.

    mlg ,
    @mlg@lemmy.world avatar

    FDR trying to pack the crap out of scotus with liberal judges so all his social reforms would actually go through instead of being struckdown.

    CaptainSpaceman ,

    Modern dems cant fathom having gumption. All they have is furrowed brows while the repubs destroy dismantle and overthrow.

    Dem brow furrowing will intensify until GOP is the one true ruler.

    GoodEye8 ,

    If he has practicality no limits what’s preventing him from getting the decision undone and making it so that the president could never have such power?

    If he has all the power in the world he should also have power to undo that power.

    Natanael ,

    He doesn’t have legislative power, that’s the difference. He controls the executive branch, so he can direct law enforcement and regulator agencies and more however he wants. But he can’t single-handedly restrict his own power in a way the next president can’t undo

    GoodEye8 ,

    So tell SCOTUS either they reverse it and add that they’ll never do it again or they get “executive ordered”. If they refuse you “executive order” them, after all that’s what they thought wouldn’t be illegal. Continue until you get a SCOTUS who won’t refuse. If the SCOTUS wants to throw their lives away for their own stupidity, let them.

    _number8_ ,

    https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/e48cc39c-a2c1-4a39-b803-1e80aaea167e.png

    Natanael ,

    Biden has moved worker rights and more forwards, what’s your point?

    ShepherdPie ,

    Like when he broke up the rail union strike shortly before that horrible train crash in Ohio that unleashed toxic black clouds over the town?

    Natanael ,

    You mean when the rail union got what they asked for, because all while Trump supported companies against unions,

    michiganadvance.com/…/uaw-president-says-trump-vi…

    The rail union thanked the Biden administration for helping getting their demands through,

    www.ibew.org/media-center/…/230620_IBEWandPaid

    "We’re thankful that the Biden administration played the long game on sick days and stuck with us for months after Congress imposed our updated national agreement,” Russo said. “Without making a big show of it, Joe Biden and members of his administration in the Transportation and Labor departments have been working continuously to get guaranteed paid sick days for all railroad workers.

    “We know that many of our members weren’t happy with our original agreement,” Russo said, “but through it all, we had faith that our friends in the White House and Congress would keep up the pressure on our railroad employers to get us the sick day benefits we deserve. Until we negotiated these new individual agreements with these carriers, an IBEW member who called out sick was not compensated.”

    You’re forgetting that the goal of unions isn’t to strike, it’s to protect their member’s rights, and they got their rights. Strikes is one means of applying pressure, Biden applied pressure by other means

    ShepherdPie ,

    because he actually cares about what the Constitution stands for

    I think you’re just projecting your own beliefs onto him. I seriously doubt any politician at this level gives two shits about anything but themselves and their power.

    ExFed ,

    I think you’re just projecting your own beliefs onto him.

    That’s fair; my statement was pretty strong. But I think we can agree that by comparison Biden cares more about it than his opponent, a known insurrectionist.

    lone_faerie ,

    The constitution has been ripped to shreds, spit on, and set on fire. Any moral high ground is meaningless at this point.

    FlaminGoku ,

    If he clearly cared, he would get rid of the fucking traitors that are in office, right now.

    mrfriki , (edited )

    This is how dictatorships start. You know it, right?

    Audacious ,

    Right, murica is no longer a democracy in practice if this stands.

    azimir ,

    Sorta. It’s a democracy with the voting and all that at this time. Since the person holding presidency is now above the law, then as long as the current president decides that we get to continue to have a republic, then we’re a republic. The moment a US president decides that it needs to be an official act to end voting, or just stall on voting indefinitely, then we stop being a republic. Basically, we’re living on borrowed time until the “by the people” part of the US nation is taken away by whomever we voted in as president last.

    President Biden has the idea that he should respect the Constitution. He’s unlikely to decide to end the republic. If he gets reelected (and the conservatives don’t just kick off a civil war trying to end the election like they failed to do back in 2020), then we buy at least a few more years. Then… we go into a cycle where if benevolent dictators keep getting elected we stay afloat. The moment a populist gets elected president who also doesn’t personally decide to not take over as dictator, the republic ends.

    Varyk , (edited )

    Time to legally immediately replace every Justice except for Sotomayor and Jackson.

    snooggums ,
    @snooggums@midwest.social avatar

    Why not Kagan and Jackson?

    Varyk , (edited )

    Jackson added, for sure.

    Kagan no way.

    Kagan has sided with conservatives way too many times with the “look, their conclusion is poorly reasoned and unconstitutional, but you can technically get to the conclusion constitutionally from a liberal perspective if…” and then she sides with the conservatives.

    Poking around in legal details can be fun, but she can be a professor while we get someone taking action on the court instead of siding with employer-imposed religious mandates over employee bodily autonomy (hobby lobby), supporting the “Muslim ban”(trump via Hawaii), and crippling contract law so that class action lawsuits can’t be brought against corporations over faulty or illegal contracts. (American Express versus Italian colors).

    Kagan is not helping people, get someone on there who wants to help people.

    anon6789 ,
    @anon6789@lemmy.world avatar

    I never thought I’d say this, but can we channel a little Andrew Jackson energy in regard to the courts?

    funkless_eck ,

    Another issue is in 2128 AD or whatever when we’ve totally forgotten Biden and Trump except in niche history lessons, and Throckmorton Cacadoodoo, the newest demagogue takes the presidency, like I know it’s “slippery slope” but man it feels like this downward incline is becoming more lubricated.

    snooggums ,
    @snooggums@midwest.social avatar

    I like you optimism that it wiuld take that long instead of the more likely scenario of the next Republican president.

    The GOP has been working up to this point for four decades, they aren’t going to wait now that they have the powers set up. They also don’t need to fear the Dems abusing the power because the Dems proved they can’t even get rid of the filibuster the GOP undermined to stack the courts.

    It will be the next Republican president, not just the angry orange.

    neidu2 ,

    So, Biden can order seal team 6 to permanently fix the Supreme Court by removing 6 and leaving 3 alive. Gotcha.

    After all, those 6 argued that he has the right to do so.

    FattestMattest ,

    I declare an official act of presidency!

    neidu2 ,

    Insert Michael Scott drawing a gun.

    xenomor ,

    Just tell Joe that there are six Palestinian children on the court and he’ll get right on it.

    Cadeillac ,
    @Cadeillac@lemmy.world avatar

    How original

    Bye ,

    Only if he claims it’s an official act though! Don’t forget that part! Write “official act as president” on everything!

    ChicoSuave ,

    If he issues it as an executive order, it works.

    NotMyOldRedditName ,

    It doesn’t have to be an executive order, he’s in charge of the military. Any command he gives them is an official act, and can’t be questioned now.

    And then he can pardon them as they don’t have the same immunity as he now has. Pardons are also official acts.

    Natanael ,

    Only for federal crimes, but that covers most things involving the military anyway

    NotMyOldRedditName ,

    Ah, good point.

    NotMyOldRedditName ,

    Also, I’m not sure being pardoned has an impact on if they can be discharged for following an order that a tribunal disagrees with. They might not end up in jail, but it could be the end of their military career

    brygphilomena ,

    In red ink at a 45° angle. He’s basically a sovcit now.

    bluGill ,

    It is up to congress to stop that not the courts. He should be impeached if he tries that.

    neidu2 ,

    He should. But he should still do it, and ST6 moves faster than congress.

    TrickDacy ,

    Uh what… How do you figure?

    Natanael ,

    Congress can expand the court to put the corrupt asses in minority and them the ruling can be reversed

    raynethackery ,

    With a Senate split down the middle? Never going to happen.

    TunaCowboy ,

    Democrats will continue to give sternly worded remarks all the way up to their appointment with the gallows, so brave!

    JDPoZ , (edited )
    @JDPoZ@lemmy.world avatar

    Democrats will continue to give sternly worded remarks all the way up to their appointment with the gallows, so brave!

    When They Go Low, We Go Die

    Chapter 3

    Marjorie smiled with great satisfaction as she looked at the crowd and began to check the rifle in her arms to make sure there was a round in the chamber.

    2 men with giant beer guts - who each wore different flavors of Punisher-style skull masks and were covered head to toe in pointlessly elaborate tactical surplus gear as if they were cosplaying their favorite Call of Duty characters - began dragging another elderly man up to the makeshift platform.

    The white-haired old man was dressed in a finely tailored dark blue suit with a little American flag lapel pin next to his tie. It looked so similar to the one that so many others in his cohort had adorned for probably the last 20 or so years, but he had been blindfolded by the men before being brought before the stage so he couldn’t see how many others still wore it or who had switched to the golden lion that… “the others…” now wore exclusively.

    The octogenarian ghost of a man feebly began to speak (not shout) loudly in protest as if trying to reason with whomever might be in charge, but the 2 pig-like men grinned and said nothing. They began tying his hands behind him against a wooden pole covered with small holes, indentations and spatters of red. As the grinning pigs both stepped away from the geriatric man secured to the pole, the mob just below him roared with wild bloodlust over his inaudible words drowning them out over and over again with : “USA! USA! USA! USA!”

    Marjorie laughed and took one hand away from the rifle to quiet the crowd so they could hear the old man’s words :

    “Point of order, Mr. Chairman! Point of order! I’m reclaiming my time! I’d like the gentle-lady to put down the firearm she just picked up, Mr. Ch-”

    …he was cut off with a loud and sudden BANG as he slumped into a dark puddle of red slowly expanding across the stage floor.

    The crowd roared and resumed its repeated chant…

    …and another blindfolded well-dressed elderly figure was walked up to the pole.

    the_post_of_tom_joad ,

    I really felt like i was there

    A_Very_Big_Fan ,

    Democrats will continue to give sternly worded remarks all the way up to their appointment with the gallows, so brave!

    When They Go Low, We Go Die

    Chapter 3

    Marjorie smiled with great satisfaction as she looked at the crowd and began to check the rifle in her arms to make sure there was a round in the chamber.

    2 men with giant beer guts - who each wore different flavors of Punisher-style skull masks and were covered head to toe in pointlessly elaborate tactical surplus gear as if they were cosplaying their favorite Call of Duty characters - began dragging another elderly man up to the makeshift platform.

    The white-haired old man was dressed in a finely tailored dark blue suit with a little American flag lapel pin next to his tie. It looked so similar to the one that so many others in his cohort had adorned for probably the last 20 or so years, but he had been blindfolded by the men before being brought before the stage so he couldn’t see how many others still wore it or who had switched to the golden lion that… “the others…” now wore exclusively.

    The octogenarian ghost of a man feebly began to speak (not shout) loudly in protest as if trying to reason with whomever might be in charge, but the 2 pig-like men grinned and said nothing. They began tying his hands behind him against a wooden pole covered with small holes, indentations and spatters of red. As the grinning pigs both stepped away from the geriatric man secured to the pole, the mob just below him roared with wild bloodlust over his inaudible words drowning them out over and over again with : “USA! USA! USA! USA!”

    Marjorie laughed and took one hand away from the rifle to quiet the crowd so they could hear the old man’s words :

    “Point of order, Mr. Chairman! Point of order! I’m reclaiming my time! I’d like the gentle-lady to put down the firearm she just picked up, Mr. Ch-”

    …he was cut off with a loud and sudden BANG as he slumped into a dark puddle of red slowly expanding across the stage floor.

    The crowd roared and resumed its repeated chant…

    …and another blindfolded well-dressed elderly figure was walked up to the pole.

    Quoting the entire comment you’re replying to is kinda redundant

    sigmaklimgrindset ,

    Ugh, it’s literally Julius Caesar vs Cato all over again.

    Biden is Cato obviously.

    Fredselfish ,
    @Fredselfish@lemmy.world avatar

    Biden fucking dumbass going blast no kings well I can promise you if Trump wins exactly how he will act. He will take Full of advantage of this ruling.

    Best thing Biden can do but he want is take advantage of it to in helping out the American people.

    Freefall ,

    Any seal team actually, also various other military personnel.

    Draegur ,

    Wow it’s a shame he’s a fucking pussy who won’t author an ‘official act’ to oust the supreme court.

    bolexforsoup ,

    You don’t need to resort to misogyny/sexist insults to make a point.

    CraigeryTheKid ,

    Now I need to look up the origin of that word. I thought it came up separately from the body part reference.

    bolexforsoup ,

    “Pussy” is pretty narrowly used in place of “vagina” and is used almost exclusively as an insult to call someone weak or cowardly (outside of a sexual context).

    Theprogressivist ,
    @Theprogressivist@lemmy.world avatar

    And what’s the problem? If it were sexist they would be using “stop being a woman” compared to “stop being a pussy”. One is sexist the other is just an insult. Grow some skin. This is the internet, after all.

    bolexforsoup ,

    is just an insult

    You are so close. What makes being a pussy a bad thing? Why is that an insult? Unpack that for a second. Use your critical thinking skills.

    CaptainSpaceman ,

    Because pussies tend to be soft and delicate and theyre saying he should be hard and strong instead of soft and delicate.

    bolexforsoup ,

    It is baffling to me that what you just wrote didn’t sort this out for you.

    CaptainSpaceman ,

    Have you ever touched a hard, rigid, strong pussy?

    bolexforsoup ,

    We both know you aren’t so narrow minded as to actually believe the argument you’re making. You’ve ditched common sense/basic social literacy in an effort to win an Internet argument. If you’re not going to actually have a real discussion then we can move on.

    Lightor ,

    Lol this was never a real discussion, it was someone clutching their pearls and normal people laughing at them.

    bolexforsoup ,

    I’m not sure why you’re wasting your time with a pearl-clutcher then. Surely you don’t need my validation to keep acting like an asshole, so why are you still here? It’s not like my approval means anything. Just block me and be done with it 🤷‍♂️ So congrats! You’ve won the war for moral high ground and your right to call someone a pussy. Truly valiantly fought, you are the winner. I’m sure it feels amazing.

    [cue some dross about how this is just funny/entertaining to you without any consideration for how sad that is]

    I’m just gonna save us a lot of time and move on. Feel free to have the last word, I’m sure it’s very important to you.

    CaptainSpaceman ,

    You’ve said a lot in this thread without actually saying anything. Impressive!

    Lightor ,

    Lol and what makes having a low temperature desirable, because those people are cool. You really are digging for something to be offended by.

    bolexforsoup ,

    Do I really need to point out that this is a false equivalency?

    Lightor ,

    You could, but you’d be wrong. You take a word with a literal meaning and use it as slang, giving it another making. Do I really need to point out how slang works?

    Lightor ,

    You sound like a real dick

    bolexforsoup ,

    As opposed to a fake one?

    Lightor ,

    Ey, you’re catching on

    bolexforsoup ,

    Jfc how bored do you need to be to have like four different conversations going with me. Feel free to have the last word, I’m sure it’s very important to you. I’m done

    Lightor ,

    Lol, look at how many convos you have, how bored must you be? Somehow I’m worse because I’m talking with one person, not 10? But ya, silly me engaging in conversation on a forum.

    Lol, this “have the last word” line is basically a meme at this point. I’ve called out your issues and hypocrisy in other to threads you don’t respond to, but you respond to this with a weak attempt to save face. You had a bad take, got called out, and now you’re running away, tail between your legs.

    You’ve been done, when half a dozen people wrecked your bad stance, at least you recognize it now.

    Soulg ,

    It did. It’s an abbreviation of the word pusillanimous.

    However, almost everybody thinks it’s referring to vagina, so it doesn’t really matter anymore. Even most people who use it think that.

    bolexforsoup ,

    What matters is 99.99% of people understand “pussy” as “vagina” so yeah that’s kind of the issue here.

    Soulg ,

    You’ll notice that I said that in my post.

    bolexforsoup ,

    I didn’t disagree

    kitnaht ,

    deleted_by_moderator

    •
    Bassman27 ,

    Calls you out on the word pussy but doesn’t call you out on the word cunt lmao

    kitnaht , (edited )

    That would be xenophobic, because the word is used everywhere in the UK constantly. (/s of course)

    Edit: The removed comment above was mine, and I told Bolex that using the word pussy isn’t misogynistic, just like calling someone a dick isn’t misandrist… World News mods didn’t like that though because people were agreeing with me…and we can’t have anyone calling out the victim-olympics, wouldn’t want that!

    Seabyte ,

    How dare you? Haven’t you seen the World News logo? This is a criticism-free zone.

    Theprogressivist ,
    @Theprogressivist@lemmy.world avatar

    Geez, how fragile.

    bolexforsoup ,

    You’re trying too hard

    Burghler ,

    And you got ratio’d kiddo

    bolexforsoup ,

    Imagine thinking fake Internet points matter, let alone decide who is right and wrong. I thought those of us who left Reddit learned that lesson. I guess it takes a little longer for some of us 🤷‍♂️

    Tell you what, let’s go through your comment history and find all the times you were on the wrong side and make sure you adjust your views accordingly. Fair’s fair right?

    Burghler ,

    You do you pal. I replied because you keep doubling down. I don’t care much to fit some homogeneous mindset so I’m fine being wrong. The fake internet point blackhole you got going does got you riled up evident by this engagement

    bolexforsoup ,

    Bro YOU brought up the vote count! You are the one who acted like it matters. I literally don’t even know what the scores are - it doesn’t show downvotes on my end, so no I really do not care what the vote counts are but you can go ahead and feel superior about… I don’t know, owning somebody because you think you should be able to call people a pussy without having to consider what the word means? Congratulations, you won! Must feel great. You really brought home a W for free speech on that one. Truly this is what you should be fighting for.

    I am happy to double down on telling people that they should maybe consider the language they use. If you find that offensive and feel the need to go to war over it I don’t know what to tell you. If I’m a sick puppy you’re at the vet with me too lol

    Burghler ,

    I’m not that invested in this to read all that sorry. I’m sure it all means well, or not. Idk. But best of luck m8

    bolexforsoup , (edited )

    How on earth is that text intimidating to you lmfao

    Whatever dude don’t care

    Lightor ,

    They’re not the one crying about a bad word online lol

    cabron_offsets ,

    Christ, can you fuck off?

    bolexforsoup ,

    The block feature is readily available to you. Enjoy!

    Draegur ,

    Good point.

    Blocked.

    bolexforsoup ,

    Bye!

    FlaminGoku ,

    These are the fucking hand wringing “liberals” that I can’t stand.

    Feelings over Freedom!

    I don’t know where I fall because whereas I believe in equity for all and protecting the children and planet and all that shit, I also strongly lean towards swift and immediate retribution and don’t care whose feelings get hurt.

    bolexforsoup ,

    Lmfao I’m taking your freedom? How dramatic.

    SoupBrick ,

    I am fairly certain “pussy” is slang for pusillanimous. Can it be used misogynisticly, yes. Was that the intent here, I don’t think so based off the context.

    www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pusillanimous

    bolexforsoup ,

    All of us learned it as a way to call someone a “vagina” to highlight they are weak or cowardly. You can’t possibly tell me that wasn’t how you learned it.

    SoupBrick ,

    So based off of that comment alone and the context surrounding it, do you truly believe their intent was to be misogynistic or were they using slang to emphisize their frustration while calling Biden a coward?

    bolexforsoup , (edited )

    Intention is irrelevant. Otherwise I could just call people slurs and argue the slur’s meaning is irrelevant. The insult is clearly associating having/being a vagina with cowardice and weakness.

    SoupBrick ,

    Yeah, I guess I can see your point. I was under the impression that a lot more people were aware of the root of that word. I grew up reading a lot of books, so I guess that factored into my view. Thanks for the perspective, I am all for phasing out legitimately problematic language.

    bolexforsoup ,

    I’m not 100% what your upbringing was, but at least for us in America generally you learned that word sometime in middle school as something to call other boys as an insult. You’re definitely well read because frankly I’ve never even heard that word until this thread lol

    lone_faerie ,

    And the f slur means “a bundle of sticks”. That doesn’t make it not a slur.

    bolexforsoup ,

    I’m glad to see someone else here talking sense

    Pandantic ,
    @Pandantic@midwest.social avatar

    From the link:

    And despite what you may have heard, pusillanimous does not serve as the basis for pussyfoot, pussycat, or a certain related vulgarism.

    Mango ,

    Imagine thinking that being offended is going to stop someone from using speech for the specific purpose of offending.

    FlaminGoku ,

    Shut up wuss.

    bolexforsoup ,

    Damn I got got! What a big strong man you are! You sure showed me!

    Let me give you a little tip I gave someone else: the block button is easily within your grasp, if maybe a bit advanced for you. But i’m sure that with hard work and determination even you could figure out how to use it.

    Bye!

    Mango ,

    I came into this post and your comment was pre-upvoted for me somehow. I didn’t upvote you, but I’m gonna keep it.

    FlaminGoku ,

    Right? Order the DOJ to lock up all of the justices (so it’s bi-partisan!).

    NatakuNox ,
    @NatakuNox@lemmy.world avatar

    Then fucking do something about it Joe! The DNC has been little more than passive observers to the raise of fascism.

    teodor_from_achewood ,

    “The DNC” doesn’t do what you think it does.

    givesomefucks ,

    It doesn’t do what it should.

    The point of the party is supposed to be long-term strategy and putting the platform over any one person.

    When people talk about what the DNC should be doing, it’s not some “gotchya” to point out that they’re not doing their job and leadership needs replaced.

    It’s just proving their point

    teodor_from_achewood ,

    So because the National Committee’s short and long term strategy is not what you’d be doing, you think they’re not doing anything.

    Do you do any local political organizing?

    givesomefucks ,

    you think they’re not doing anything.

    What’s their long term plan?

    As far as I can tell, it’s only prevent progressives from taking control of the party.

    teodor_from_achewood ,

    For now, they’re planning on getting out voters for the general election, and recruiting volunteers along the way.

    Most planning falls to state and local parties - which you can easily get involved in.

    Why haven’t you?

    givesomefucks ,

    For now,

    Bruh…

    Do you know what “long term planning” means?

    If you don’t think they have one, say it.

    Zorque ,

    So basically the only thing they care about is winning, not actually representing peoples values?

    Theyre more than just an election committee, thats what the DCCC is for.

    anlumo ,

    Of course they are in it for the money, what do you think?

    lone_faerie ,

    I think they should be working for the people. The government isn’t (supposed to be) a money making scheme.

    anlumo ,

    Yes, but that’s not how it works in practice. Running a government is a huge money-making machine, and so it attracts the worst kind of people.

    Nougat ,

    Since we're talking about a SCOTUS ruling, it would be on Congress to pass legislation.

    And to follow up on @teodor_from_achewood's comment, the Democratic National Committee is a private party organization that supports Democratic candidates in elections. They have nothing to do with passing legislation.

    grue ,

    It’s on Biden to personally demonstrate to SCOTUS just how dangerous the ruling was.

    Nougat ,

    By calling for drone strikes on SCOTUS, yes.

    ExFed ,

    I deeply disagree with this take. If we actually care about the Constitution and upholding what it stands for, then we have to work to undo the damage caused by this race to the bottom, not participate in it.

    grue ,

    Good luck with that. You can “disagree” all the way to the concentration camp.

    flicker ,

    You know what would be a fantastic way to spur forward legislation and law stopping the president from doing anything bonkers?

    Having the president do something bonkers that the evil assholes who are setting the field to make Trump a king, have no choice but to stop.

    Semi_Hemi_Demigod ,
    @Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world avatar

    I like this idea. Republicans are desperate to prosecute the “Biden crime family” but can’t go after him because of this ruling. So Biden just has to do a bunch of illegal but non-violent stuff - like openly soliciting bribes - and Republicans would be forced to pass a law.

    For that law to be valid, it can’t be targeted at one person - called “bill of attainder” - it would apply to all presidents going forward regardless of who’s elected.

    Hoist them by their own petard.

    Quill7513 ,

    Still. The DNC has systems in place to decide who to back in elections to pass legislation. Their messaging since 2015 has been embarrassing. They keep courting moderate conservatives that don’t exist and ignoring unrepresented potential voters who do. They talk about how they win elections when there’s good turn out without ever analyzing which candidates encourage high turnout. Americans want to feel represented in politics and we don’t. The Democrats need to do something that would weaken the democrat party but would weaken the Republican party more: they need to actively begin dismantling the two party system. We want election reform. We want the police to not be a hostile force against the general populace. We want the society we live in to benefit everyone and not just the kinds of people who can afford to finance an election campaign.

    The polling exists. We all know that neither party represents or enacts what the people want do. The Democrats refuse to look around and see what’s happening, preferring to rearrange the deck chairs as the ship sinks because that’s the only thing they know to do. And you know? I can’t really blame them. We the people have also been rearranging the deck chairs. We live in a country that only benefits the top but we all still show up to do our duties without looking at what’s going on in other countries where the people are standing up to their authoritarian oppressors.

    The worst part is the fascists know what they’re doing. They know to decay the structure by raising the temperature because we’ve become too complacent. We need to stand up to fascism in a way that we haven’t ever since McArthyism.

    teodor_from_achewood ,

    The DNC has systems in place to decide who to back in elections to pass legislation.

    No it does not.

    Quill7513 ,

    Then what the fuck is a primary and how do they decide to back in a primary and what the fuck is a super delegate?

    teodor_from_achewood ,

    Bernie lost because he didn’t get enough votes.

    Quill7513 ,

    Sure. And I voted for warren. My point isn’t “The DNC needs to get their heads out of their asses and make Bernie their nominee” my point is “The DNC needs to get their heads our of their asses and realize their current overall strategy is a losing one”

    NatakuNox ,
    @NatakuNox@lemmy.world avatar

    Ya but was there a thumb on the scale to push people one way?

    teodor_from_achewood ,

    No

    MutilationWave ,

    What would you call almost everyone dropping out and backing Biden right before super Tuesday but a thumb on the scale? Less severe but directly traceable to the DNC, what would you call giving debate questions in advance to one candidate but not the other but a thumb on the scale?

    This is just what I know of.

    teodor_from_achewood ,

    Conspiracy theory nonsense.

    UltraGiGaGigantic ,

    What primary?

    the_post_of_tom_joad ,

    Ugh. Stop. Talking. You Fucking. Knob.

    Jesus Christ, someone might believe you so talk less. Please.

    Please.

    EDIT: PLEASE

    teodor_from_achewood ,

    Nah.

    You all will whine and whine and whine but will never do the most basic political organizing.

    SwingingTheLamp ,

    No, Congress cannot pass legislation on this matter. The ruling says that the Constitution itself grants the President immunity, so it would take a Constitutional amendment to change it.

    Nougat ,

    No, Congress cannot pass legislation on this matter.

    Sure they can. They can pass legislation that says "The President of the United States of America does not have criminal immunity from official acts taken as President."

    Once that's done, a case would have to be identified and charged. The President would need to do something that would be considered a crime, and would be considered an official act, then be charged with that crime. Then it would follow its way through the legal process - district court, appeals court, en banc, eventually landing at the Supreme Court, who would decide whether that legislation was constitutional.

    There are plenty of unconstitutional laws still on the books, especially at the state level, "atheists cannot hold public office" is a great example. Of course, those laws are "unenforceable" under normal circumstances; these are not normal circumstances. We've seen how the fascists abuse the legal system. It would not surprise me one bit for them to latch on to one of those "still on the books" unconstitutional laws and attempt to enforce it, because throwing wrenches into the machinery is the point.

    Using the "atheists cannot hold public office" example, it would be elementary to cause harm to someone's campaign for elected office just by seeking to enforce an unconstitutional law. Drawing attention to the lack of religious belief in a candidate, forcing said candidate to defend themselves, getting the unwashed masses to go "Yeah! That's what the law says!" because they're too fucking stupid to understand that other court rulings have nullified that law.

    SwingingTheLamp ,

    Yes, technically they could, but any suit under that law would be vulnerable to getting thrown out on summary judgement. Would you agree that it’s more accurate to say that Congress can’t fix the system by reverting to the old law?

    Nougat ,

    Would you agree that it's more accurate to say that Congress can't fix the system by reverting to the old law?

    I'm not sure what you mean by this, can you explain?

    SwingingTheLamp ,

    They can’t take us back to the way things were on June 30th, 2024, to make this ruling like it didn’t happen. It doesn’t have the power. The best the that Congress can do is pass an unconstitutional law that may, at some future date, through a highly-fraught process in the courts, reverse it.

    Nougat ,

    That's the "right" way, yes. I believe constitutional amendments also begin in Congress.

    Natanael ,

    Constitutional amendment

    Natanael ,

    This is an interpretation of the constitution, so what congress needs to do it to amend the constitution to explicitly state the president is not immune, and good luck getting that through

    teodor_from_achewood ,

    They can amend it or they can pass law citing a different part of the constitution or other judicial precedent, then if it gets challenged the Supreme Court would have to rule on the constitutionality of it’s latest legal justification.

    Hopefully after we replace six justices.

    Clinicallydepressedpoochie ,

    They have nothing to do with passing legislation.

    Get the fuck out of here.

    crusa187 ,

    Some might call them enablers at this point.

    small44 ,

    So why Bush was never held accountable for his war crimes and biden won’t either.

    RedditWanderer ,

    Whatever point you are making that they are treated as kings, it doesn’t mean we should make it any easier for them lmao.

    small44 ,

    I’m not saying that trump shouldn’t be held accountable and go to jail. I just don’t want to hear that for biden

    givesomefucks ,

    We need someone that will use every tool at their disposal to stop trump.

    Biden has shown time and time again, that’s he’s just not willing to do that.

    Stopping trump is more important than Biden, if he won’t fight, and he won’t get out of the way, and the party won’t force him to…

    It’s time to ask why we still support the party. The voters are the irreplaceable part, not the party.

    ms_lane ,

    The problem with that, is now “every tool at their disposal to stop trump” is an object lesson in exactly what Biden is talking about.

    ‘Every tool’ means Every tool

    givesomefucks ,

    Biden could have expanded the courts 4 years ago, but he didnt.

    This could have never happened.

    Roe vs Wade could still be standing.

    So much shit could be better, but Biden didn’t want to fight.

    jazzup ,

    Biden could not have expanded the court. That requires an act of Congress. Even if the Democrats passed such an act in the House, it would have been dead in the Senate because they have never had the needed supermajority and none of the Republicans would have voted for it.

    retrospectology , (edited )
    @retrospectology@lemmy.world avatar

    “In my view, we need a strong Republican Party. We need a Republican Party that’s united.”

    -Joe Biden (~2011)

    The man is just incompetent and nostalgic for the “good old days” when Dems and Republicans would play grab ass together and hoodwink the public together to protect the status quo and grow the wealth divide. This whole fascism thing, though clearly signaled decades ago, has him scratching his head. He simply doesn’t get it and is too mentally calcified to keep up with the paradigm shift in politics.

    bolexforsoup ,

    You grabbed a completely out of context quote from 13-14 years ago as you complain that he is nostalgic (for what…?)

    Where do I begin?

    retrospectology ,
    @retrospectology@lemmy.world avatar

    It’s not out of context, it’s exactly what he said and meant. And he’s repeated that sentiment on multiple occassions.

    If you need a more recent example to ignore, in 2022 he attempted to make some kind of distinction between MAGA and non-MAGA republicans because he still is dumb enough to believe there’s some contingent within the GOP that’s not fully onboard with fascism. Even after the decades of lies and double-dealing, of Republicans pushing to capture the courts and voting consistently to strip Americans of their rights, it hasn’t sunk in. Not even after January 6, after the whole party united behind Trump.

    He actually thinks there needs to be a balance between “good” Republicans and Democrats, which is a deeply idiotic notion at this point and betrays the fact that he doesn’t actually want to achieve any of the progressive policy he cribbed off Sanders to win in 2020.

    Freefall ,

    Wasnt trump still a Democrat back then? It’s like people never change…wait …

    retrospectology ,
    @retrospectology@lemmy.world avatar

    Biden hasn’t changed though. He’s still the same old pro-austerity, pro-corporate, “respectably racist” Republican-at-heart conservative he’s always been. You just can’t see it because Trump is so much more extreme.

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