• grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    You really need to read Sotomayor’s dissent in Trump v. United States.

    He may need Congress’ “consent” for some things but he can Seal Team Six any Congressperson who doesn’t “consent,” so effectively he can do whatever he wants.

    • bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      You really need to read Sotomayor’s dissent in Trump v. United States.

      I have.

      He may need Congress’ “consent” for some things but he can Seal Team Six any Congressperson who doesn’t “consent,” so effectively he can do whatever he wants.

      1. He wouldn’t. 2. If he did he’d be prosecuted. 3. This was never meant to allow Biden any power, R is the in group, D is the out group. 4. Republican ideology doesn’t treat in and out groups the same, the rules are different.

      So please stop.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago
        1. If he did he’d be prosecuted.

        By who, a SCOTUS well within Seal Team Sixing distance?

        You claim you read that dissent, but you clearly do not fully understand it.

        • bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          By who, a SCOTUS well within Seal Team Sixing distance?

          No, the DoJ and the FBI, you know, the entities that prosecute people.

          Immunity doesn’t make something legal, it simply puts the person beyond the reach of the law. You’re talking about a commander-in-chief using the military against citizens on US soil. All members of the military are trained to reject unlawful orders.

          So first you’re assuming seal team six accepts and carries out an unlawful order. Then the entire DoJ ignores it, or is murdered, until they accept it. Then any legislators or justices that attempt to rein in such power are also assassinated. That’s what is required for your idea to make sense.

          Guess what, SCOTUS is irrelevant to the calculation. Assuming you have all those things above, it doesn’t matter if SCOTUS conveys immunity or not. That president is beyond the bounds of the law anyway, with or without immunity.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            No, the DoJ and the FBI, you know, the entities that prosecute people.

            You mean the entities that Biden, as head of the executive branch, could control as he sees fit (under the “unitary executive” theory underpinning the conservative SCOTUS judges reasoning)?

            You’re really, really relying on this notion that the noble bureaucrats won’t comply, and also won’t get replaced with lackeys who would. With Biden as president, you’re likely right – but the power is there for the next person to hold that office to take. Unless Biden does something drastic to force SCOTUS to overturn themselves, anyway.

            • bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              You’re really, really relying on this notion that the noble bureaucrats won’t comply, and also won’t get replaced with lackeys who would.

              No, I’m being realistic. It’s a system of checks and balances, but it only works when you have a sufficient number of good faith actors. When you have a sufficient number of bad faith actors, or those willing to go completely over-the-top in their corruption, the system doesn’t work. Immunity, at the end of the day, is a moot point against that level of bad faith malfeasance, a point you choose to seemingly ignore.

              • grue@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                WTF? I’m not ignoring it; the entire point of my comments has been pointing it out. SCOTUS enshrined that bad faith malfeasance, and Biden using it against itself is now the only way to stop it.

                • bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  WTF? I’m not ignoring it; the entire point of my comments has been pointing it out.

                  You’re ignoring that Biden won’t do it, Dems wouldn’t allow him to do it, and the bad faith actors in place aren’t Democrats. So no one, at any level, is going to allow Joe Biden to take any of those steps.

    • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      You’re completely missing the fact that the final arbiter of what consists of an “official act” is SCOTUS. They can unilaterally decide (and will) that Biden’s actions are not official acts and therefore not immune. They won’t apply the same standard to conservatives, I promise you that.

      • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        The SCOTUS is the final arbiter.

        The SCOTUS that got smeared across the wall by seal team six and are being replaced by people who will say “Well, that was legal at the time so no harm, no foul. Now let’s get rid of that fucking insane decision and fix this country, shall we?”

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        You’re completely missing the fact that the final arbiter of what consists of an “official act” is SCOTUS.

        You’re completely missing the fact that if Biden were to actually use the powers SCOTUS granted him to their fullest effect, the three liberal justices would be the only ones left alive.

        • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          No I’m not missing that at all, it’s insane and not remotely helpful. It’s pretty goddamn naive to think that assassinating 2/3 of SCOTUS somehow puts us in a better position to fix the country but you do you.