Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
We’re reaching the point where we can only rely on the honorable Sam Colt.
Supreme Court has been playing calvinball since citizens united
She cited Roberts’ language in a past ruling granting ex-presidents broad immunity as an "ominous sign."
Jesus fucking christ, it's not an "ominous sign," it's literally the keys to the kingdom. All this "taking cases to SCOTUS" is just the easiest way to get what he wants, with the least fuss. That "ominous sign" already says he can do whatever he wants with impunity, and we're gonna find out just how far it goes.
Betcha he'll get a solid "gratuity" for it, too.
I believe standard fees will apply, an RV and a trip to Tijuana.
Nah, Trump never pays anyone
This is a plot twist I should have seen coming.
One of those meaningless medals Trump gets wet handing out.
So the last three or four times he just did it for funsies?
Watching the next federal election will be interesting, to say the least.
What next election?
This guy is the literal definition of a corporate stooge.
Absolutely zero integrity
The same Vance that let epstien go?
Not sure I'm getting this right: is this John Roberts trying to backpedal on a vaguely related issue after he scotus-voted for the president's immunity? A belated stirring of conscience?
No. The exact opposite, actually.
John Roberts is basically signaling he's willing to vote in favor of the unitary executive theory, essentially finishing off what their previous ruling that gave Trump all-but-total immunity by saying that he also has the right to do what he wants and the other two branches have no authority to stop him.
At that point, Trump is a dictator. The judicial branch would be relegated to an advisory branch with no enforcement mechanism (and therefore, no force of law). Due to the previous ruling, Congress's ability to give oversight to Trump (even if they wanted to, which they don't), is already neutered since he can't even be legally investigated. Further, Congress passing bills at all would be largely irrelevant. Even if Congress overrides the President's veto, he'd still be able to effectively kill it anyway simply by refusing to execute it.
All those firings Trump and Musk have been doing? Perfectly legal. Impounding money that Congress has already earmarked? Perfectly legal. And Congress wouldn't be able to do a damn thing about it. Any bills they pass would simply be glorified suggestions and requests that Trump can either choose to fulfill or just choose to ignore. You can pass all the "Saving Widows and Orphans Act" bills you'd like, but they won't matter if Trump just refuses to release the money to fund them, which he would be able to do.