On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that American presidents have “absolute immunity” from prosecution for any “official acts” they take while in office. For President Joe Biden, this should be great news. Suddenly a host of previously unthinkable options have opened up to him: He could dispatch Seal Team 6 to Mar-A-Lago with orders to neutralize the “primary threat to freedom and democracy” in the United States. He could issue an edict that all digital or physical evidence of his debate performance last week be destroyed. Or he could just use this chilling partisan decision, the latest 6-3 ruling in a term that was characterized by a staggering number of them, as an opportunity to finally embrace the movement to reform the Supreme Court.
But Biden is not planning to do any of that. Shortly after the Supreme Court delivered its decision in Trump v. The United States, the Biden campaign held a press call with surrogates, including Harry Dunn, a Capitol police officer who was on duty the day Trump supporters stormed the building on Jan. 6; Reps. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) and Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas); and deputy campaign manager Quentin Fulks.
Their message was simple: It’s terrifying to contemplate what Donald Trump might do with these powers if he’s reelected.
“We have to do everything in our power to stop him,” Fulks said.
Everything, that is, except take material action to rein in the increasingly lawless and openly right-wing Supreme Court.
Biden once again bringing a deck of cards to a gunfight because responding effectively and proportionally in a situation that desperatetly calls for it wOuLd bE DiVisiVE.
THIS position is a justification for calling for him to step down from the candidacy, because refusing to even consider reforming - let alone packing (or, dare I say, the newly-revealed presidentially-legal-if-“official” extralegal and violent unpacking) the Supreme Court is very obviously going to lead to the long term failure of not only the Democratic Party, but democracy in this country in general.
This. Right. Here.
It’s fine if Biden doesn’t want to play by the new rules – admirable in fact – but we have to understand that this is the game we’re playing now. Either learn to play the game or take your ball and go home.
It’s fine if Biden doesn’t want to play by the new rules – admirable in fact
It’s admirable, but not fine! Biden must play by the new rules; the Supreme Court gave him no choice.
“Taking the high road” doesn’t just make him lose, it also dooms all the rest of us! It is unethical for him to be that selfish.
Agreed. Hence the “but” and the rest of my comment.
.
2D deck of cards vs anarchy checkers, and America loses.
Biden isn’t a fascist and neither are the people he appointed. Even if he gave an illegal order, it wouldn’t be followed because his administration isn’t stocked with incompetent lackies chosen for their loyalty alone.
Gaza protests: US officials who have quit over Biden’s support of Israel
Stacy Gilbert, who served in the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration, left in late May. She said she resigned over an administration report to Congress that she said falsely stated Israel was not blocking humanitarian aid to Gaza.
Alexander Smith, a contractor for USAID, quit in late May, alleging censorship after the U.S. foreign aid agency canceled publication of his presentation on maternal and child mortality among Palestinians. The agency said it had not gone through proper review and approval.
Looks like everyone that doesn’t get in line with Blue MAGA is getting the boot to me.
So you’ve found examples of folks moving on… while ignoring who they are…. Call things “blue maga” but that’s your label. You are “blue maga”… you make this shit up.
Folks being censored by the Biden administration and the entire administration falling in line to intentionally lie, censor and support Genocide you mean?
People here are really jumping to ignore the Genocide part.
I’m so censored! So genocide! So what do you mean? Supporting genocide is just a by-product of language? Genocide is what we do? Do you understand the word or are you just desperate to repeat it? The Biden administration has FORCED me so much… so who can say?
Stop apologizing for Genocide
You don’t get to claim Biden is on a moral high ground for not doing something while he has literally done that thing to support Genocide.
I didn’t even realize I was commenting on your thread until I got to the genocide shit. Yeah Biden sucks. Yes Israel is perpetrating genocide.
Trump would have Palestinians pushed into the sea by tanks with Zionists jumping off and popping settlements like a real time strategy game. Then everyone would sing hallelujah what a savior as extremist Christians and extremist Jews join hands and wait to receive their Lord and Savior at their new multi-million dollar beachfront mcmansions right over the literal bodies of every Palestinian child in existence.
Stop Trump! Vote!
It’s astonishing that a man of his age is still flexible enough to stick his head up his own ass. He still thinks he can work with conservatives, doesn’t he?
Dems have to be in on it, that’s the only thing that makes sense. It isn’t Dem vs. Rep, it’s rich vs. poor :(
When it comes to politics there is one golden rule that explains everything:
Never attribute to stupidity what can be attributed to malice.
I hate when people use the original version of that rule because it’s never a good lense. The original should be ‘Never attribute to stupidity what can be attributed to profit’, or do people really think the world is run by idiots who just accidentally managed to profit off of every single time things got worse.
They always say the same. “Oops we did massive war crimes in Korea and Afghanistan and Iraq and oopsie we’re doing a Genocide in Gaza! It was all with the best of intentions we’re just so clumsy haha!”
I want the power Obama had. The power to overthrow an entire nation based on nothing but economic fears and leave in it’s place an open air slave state, then have people who claim to not like war think your biggest scandal is the color of your damn suit. Just doing an oopsie in Libya, whoopsie daisy.
What were the war crimes in Korea? I would have thought Vietnam would be an easier example. Though admittedly I don’t know much about the Korean war.
The Korean war is weirdly never really mentioned. It was a lot like Vietnam but more at the beginning of the cold war. We did an amazing amount of war crimes. Napalm was really hot back then (badum ts)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_North_Korea
Air forces of the United Nations Command carried out an extensive bombing campaign against North Korea from 1950 to 1953 during the Korean War. It was the first major bombing campaign for the United States Air Force (USAF) since its inception in 1947 from the United States Army Air Forces. During the campaign, conventional weapons such as explosives, incendiary bombs, and napalm destroyed nearly all of the country’s cities and towns, including an estimated 85% of its buildings.[1]
A total of 635,000 tons of bombs, including 32,557 tons of napalm, were dropped on Korea.[2] By comparison, the U.S. dropped 1.6 million tons in the European theater and 500,000 tons in the Pacific theater during all of World War II (including 160,000 on Japan). North Korea ranks alongside Cambodia (500,000 tons), Laos (2 million tons), and South Vietnam (4 million tons) as among the most heavily-bombed countries in history.[3]
We just see Kim Jong Un waving with his ballistic missiles and thinking he’s a funny crazy man that hates America for no reason. That’s the magic of telling one side of history.
Conservatives, I understand. They’re sick, and toxic, but they fight for what they believe in. Which is why we have to defeat them, and why we have to fight back so hard.
But Liberals, man, I just don’t get it. Like zero goddamn fight in them. No political will. Not in my lifetime anyway. “Hey we’re kinda less shitty than fascists, vote Democrat.”
And I have to, but like, only to keep from sliding into the abyss in my own lifetime. So inspiring. Time to start over.
Because libs self-limit. And that’s because they believe themselves to be “good” people. “Good people don’t do that.” Thinking that you’re good while your foe is evil or ungood is a type of hubris.
You are confusing liberals and centrist democrats. Biden and his other centrists are not putting up a fight at all. While liberals like AOC, Sanders and porter have been fighting since day 1. I’m a liberal and every traitor connected to this coup should be hung.
You are confusing liberals and centrist democrats.
No, he’s not. Liberalism is a center-right ideology. Liberals and centrist Democrats are the same people.
You’re the one using the term incorrectly as some kind of synonym for leftists.
You can usually tell how old someone is by whether or not they think, “liberal,” and, “progressive,” are synonyms.
Progressive can mean liberal, I mean look at ole Bull Moose Teddy Roosevelt. He was both progressive and liberal. Generally social Democrat does not though.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Classical_radicalism
Counterpoint- you can tell how terminally online someone is by thinking liberal doesn’t mean progressive in the US.
I disagree with the labeling but it’s one of the silly infighting things people on the left have to understand. Fifteen years ago I was proud to call myself a liberal. Now I know the “real” definition and I don’t call myself that. But my positions haven’t changed much. I’m really hearing what anarchists have to say these days but I call myself a socialist, the same as I did back then.
News flash, words are used differently in different countries. You can try to fight semantic battles on archaic or international definitions of “liberal”, but that’s a pointless waste of time and not what it means to most Americans. It’s well past the point that an incorrect usage has become an alternate definition.
Bernie called Biden his friend, lol.
They worked together in Congress forever. I work with people who suck all the time and I call them buddy.
When Bernie was campaigning against Biden he defended Biden’s candidacy multiple times over his own. That’s a huge problem. And people who support billionaires are not our friends. But Bernie is such a people pleaser.
Bernie wants the right policies and outcomes, but he’s not a fighter and has no backbone.
I want Bernie to wrap his sallow yet expansive hand skin entirely around my throbbing member as I cum to a photo of Michelle Obama’s ankles.
Forgot what we were talking about. Oh yeah, fuck you Bernie is a hard nose fighter. It’s amazing he gets around and yells at people at his age. When he was younger than me he got arrested marching for civil rights. He is embraced by thought leaders in the black community and idolized by Christians even though he’s a Jew against Israel. Fuck you man Bernie is 87 years old and I’m here for it
Because they actually believe in democracy and believe that it’s the people that should prove they disagree by not electing Republicans but again and again the people prove in high enough numbers that they would rather vote against their best interests.
deleted by creator
It is a fundamental misunderstanding and mistake to believe that people don’t vote the way you want them too is because they are less intelligent than you.
We’re here, and we’re waiting for the rest of the populace to figure it out. Because we can’t start a revolution on our own. But you need to realize that people will die for this cause, maybe even you. Are you really ready to fight?
I’ve said it before and I’ll link to that here: https://lemmy.world/comment/6020397
Ok. Post was deleted but my comment was there. Screenshot for the win.
Joe isn’t going to DO SHIT and we are FUCKED and the alarm bells NEED TO BE RINGING ALL OVER THIS COUNTRY
Ehh he won’t be here to see most of it. Why does he care.
Exactly, which is why he should say “Fuck it!” abuse his power to the n-th degree to save American democracy and then face the consequences.
If I’m Biden I’d have a bill introduce to reform SCOTUS, Presidential powers, campaign finance, election administration, and more and say, “I expect this on my desk in a weeks time. I fear for the safety of our nation and our elected leaders if these issues go unaddressed.”
Then if a week goes by and no bill is ready to sign, two Representatives and two Senators (two Rs and two Ds) go missing. Another week? Another four go missing. This can easily repeat for 12 weeks before a majority of the Senate goes missing. Then, perhaps, some family members of the remaining legislators go missing. 🤷
Unprecedented times require unprecedented acts.
In what way does that not lead to immediate civil war and half the country seeing that the lies they were told on fox news were true? That doesnt fix anything long term, or short, but it does guarantee no democrat would be elected for the next 100 years. If biden did that, i would no longer support him either.
Seriously, what world do you live in where violence does not beget more violence? Im not saying that something radical doesnt need to be done, but is sure as fuck isnt that.
Fox News has actually been selling the lie that this decision doesn’t change anything and impeachment will curtail any abuse of power. The frog will be slowly boiled to death at this rate. We can try to turn down the temperature or we can start pouring lava in the pot to make the frog go, “Oh, fuck that noise!”
Yes, because impeachment worked so well the last two times.
I think that was the point: Fox News is, as usual, pushing lies and propaganda.
I’m not sure if you’re agreeing with me or not. I’m not even really sure what I’m agreeing with.
I said that because the impeachments were fully along party lines. If a major party won’t hold its own members accountable, then the whole charade falls apart.
That was the only option, and I’m sure Pelosi et al knew the outcome long before they started it, but it still had to be done. Unfortunately it was far, far too late.
Edit oh I understand now. I totally misinterpreted what you were saying and I don’t know how. Yes. Well…I wouldn’t say fox just reporteds lies and propaganda. Their “news” is, however, is consistently incomplete and heavily opinionated.
for one, fuck republicans if they’re going to do that. You think they care if they start the war or not? They don’t give a shit, they’ll do it if they want to, otherwise they won’t fucking do shit.
secondly, how the fuck does this start the next civil war, trump did vastly more in his time in office, and even outside of office, the supreme court has done more than he has in his entire term. I see no relevance to the republicans here, most of these decisions are just fucking stupid. One of them is unconstitutional (the most recent one)
The post above me was literally advocating a policy of systematic execution of political opponents until the rest of congress capitulate to demands, and you dumb fucks cant understand that would have severe repercussions for the unity of the american population? How does that not dissolve the union or cause literal anarchy in the streets? Those fuckers stormed the capitol for way less. They would absolutely murder their neighbors because lindsay graham was sent to the gilloutine. If you want to out crazy a crazy person, you will absolutely lose. These fuckers have practice. Dont advocate burning the rest of our fragile system down. Help keep it standing. This isnt a wall we want to fall.
If Trump wins, Biden and his wife will both likely be killed at Trump’s orders. Trump is already calling for Military Tribunals for his political enemies. Show trials where he can have them all sentenced to death.
Biden’s name is on Trumps list, right up near the top.
WTF is wrong with Biden passing on so many easy gimme issues? JFC.
Just like the debate, so many missed opportunities to fucking end Trump. He his not of the right mind, America is in danger.
Yeah. All he had to do was ask him who won the last election and watch him melt down. That was it. Instead he told us how he “defeated Medicare.” We’re screwed.
Remember when they served him a softball on abortion and somehow he managed to change the subject to an immigrant killing a white woman. Fucking insane
Wouldn’t the correct move be to immediately prove why such a ruling is asinine? Use official powers to reform the court, new court removes dangerous ruling asap, guard rail repaired.
Because the president doesn’t have official powers to reform the court
Just have one officially killed.
Then signal to the rest that you’d like them to review this latest decision while you’re deciding on your nominee to fill the vacancy.
And literally hours after McConnell says it’s too close to an election to have a confirmation, have him killed too.
Then ask his replacement (Cornyn? Graham? Hawley?) to pretty please hold a confirmation vote before your special ops team has a chance to get a few hours of sleep and a hot meal and they’re ready to roll again.
I don’t know exactly what the limits of his powers are, but at the most extreme couldn’t he blockade the homes of the conservative justices, preventing them from fulfilling their duties? If any official act is immune, why not go all the way? I guess it could get him impeached, which probably wouldn’t be great for November, but it feels like something has got to give at this point, these rulings have been beyond the pale.
The understanding of what is and isn’t an official act is severely lacking. An official act is within the duties of the president. The president can’t break the law and claim it was an official duty, lol.
Something about “defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic”. They would be arguing about the detailed interpretation longer than Biden will be around.
That’s extremely doubtful, as Trump was never convicted for something that would label him as an enemy of the United States.
Didn’t he get 34 counts of election fraud? Election fraud seems threatening to the USA.
Falsifying business records is not election fraud is the eyes of the law.
idk man “upholding democracy and fair representation” seems awfully familiar to what would be considered an “official action” to me, but what do i fucking know.
According to the supreme court they can, as long as breaking the law was an official act.
deleted by creator
No, again, you’ve misunderstood. Breaking the law is not within the duties of the president.
ok so question then, if the immunity act makes the president criminally immune, how does it not constitute breaking the law as a duty of the president? What the fuck is that supposed to mean otherwise?
The best example is first responders. They have immunity doing their duty. They cannot hesitate to perform their duty - such as giving life saving services - if they fear they are unsuccessful and are sued / thrown in prison. If they break the law though on duty it was never their duty to break the law and are therefore not immune. Take CPR. They might perform CPR and injure the person they are working over, or they might not save them. The family of that person cannot sue them, nor can a court convict them if they accidentally make things worse.
Same thing with the president. The president can’t break the law and say, “whoops, just doing my official duty”. It doesn’t work like that.
Here’s an actual lawyer doing analysis of the dissent from an actual justice. Maybe you should watch it and learn what the decision actually says about official acts
I read the decision. The dissent is so ludicrous no one takes it seriously. I’ve seen several discussions of lawyers breaking the decision down. The only part of the dissent that makes sense is Amy Conny Barrett’s examples.
take material action to rein in the increasingly lawless and openly right-wing Supreme Court
Nooooooo! Then the right-wing media would paint them as partisan! Instead of what they’re doing now, which is … painting them as partisan.
Jesus Christ just hand us over to Russia already then
Moderates keep telling us nothing matters besides stopping trump, but they keep refusing to take action to actually stop him…
Either they’re lying about how big of a threat trump is (they’re not) or theyre intentionally not doing everything they can to stop him.
There’s no logical consistency.
That shit flies no problem with Republican voters, but historically Dem voters don’t like it.
They believe their constitution is magical and if you follow it like you do the Bible, then God will reward you with the presidency. Problem is, fundamentalists have interpreted the book to play by a different set of rules.
SC is literally telling Biden he has all this power…
And Biden’s response is seriously:
I don’t think I do, so I’m going to ignore this.
Like, imagine playing a game of soccer and the ref says you can pick the ball up.
Other team starts playing rugby, and you refuse to let your team pick up the ball.
Now imagine it’s not just a game, and literally millions of lives depend on you not losing…
That’s what Biden is doing.
Except that we know for a fact the refs are incredibly biased against specifically one team.
I wish he would use it, but I understand the hesitance to do so. Why would they do this BEFORE Trump is back in and even give Biden the option to use it? Why risk giving Biden a 4 year larger window to use it if he does win? Feels like a trap to me.
Mate…
If you think republicans are waiting for Dems to abuse it before they do…
I don’t know how much you’ve been paying attention.
If your point was “why wouldn’t they wait for Biden to be out office”, it seems like they’re confident Biden won’t do anything.
And considering how Biden immediately and publicly said he wouldn’t, kind of looks like that was a good assumption
I’m not saying they were wrong, but effectively making the first king of the USA doesn’t seem like something one should risk the outcome of, no matter how strong your assumption is.
You’re surprised far right extremists have poor risk assessment skills?
That’s honestly one of the things that contribute the most to how precarious the current situation is.
A smart person with no fear of failure is a very bad thing, and as terrible as most of the SC justices are, they’re not stupid, and the people who put them there definitely aren’t.
They’re just not afraid of consequences.
Except that we know for a fact the refs are incredibly biased against specifically one team.
The ref’s just gave either team the power to choose new refs that are biased against the other team.
I know that’s what all our Lemmy lawyers are saying. But I’m pretty confident SCOTUS would find a way for rules to apply to Biden that weirdly wouldn’t apply to Trump.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to see him try. I’m just saying if I was in his spot, I wouldn’t immediately jump in assuming everything will just be “that easy”.
You should at least sleep on it once or twice before you do something as drastic as everyone wants.
I’m not sure you’re understanding what I’m laying down. If all previously extra-judicial actions are now potentially on the table, that opens new avenues for changing the members of SCOTUS.
In the Venn diagram of “how fucked am I, personally, if Trump wins?”, they’re not the first, second, or even fifth group that gets murdered in a ditch by Christo-fascist militias. So upsetting the status quo is only seen as risking/actually hurting themselves today, over a possibly in the future. Any talk of “divisiveness” is milquetoast dereliction, the MAGA fringe are not honest negotiators.
They’re not actual allies, they’re fair weather friends. For all the rhetoric of “resist” that was thrown about in early 2016, I saw a lot of pink pussy hats and very little black-block. Politics is still a game to them, the stakes aren’t real. Yet.
Biden offered to golf with traitor trump…
deleted by creator
The last line “we have to do everything in our power to stop him” makes me think this was actually a campaign decision. Vote for me or the trump death squads are coming!
We won’t do anything in our power right now to make sure that he can’t make death squads, that’s on you the voter, and if you don’t re-elect Joe then you’ll have only yourself to blame. Same reason they’ll probably never codify roe v Wade, it takes away one of their main selling points.
Same reason they’ll probably never codify roe v Wade, it takes away one of their main selling points.
they’ll have to do it next cycle if they’re going to do it on this administration at all. It would be wildly irresponsible to ignore it for the prospect that the 2028 election cycle will be democratic again. Especially if trump is still running.
Reforming the Supreme Court was basically Pete’s thing during the primaries. He was talking about it years before Roe, Chevron, and absolute immunity. He suggested adding 6 more judges, 5 of which would be rotating appointments by the other 10. It’s a shame Biden won’t do anything about this - especially when there are other leaders in the party who would.
Didn’t appreciate where his overall platform ended up, but his court plan was awesome. It’s very much at the point where it needs serious reform beyond just judicial ethics and balancing the numbers.
Loss of advantage will certainly feel like a sting to conservatives, but it’s a plan that has some fundamental appeal to fairness. Of course since then the court has gone 6-3, so instituting a 5-5 split would require actually getting rid of a sitting justice.
lol like buttigieg would do ANY of that, do you remember how hard and fast he flipflopped on universal healthcare?
I agree that we have no idea if he’d actually go through with reforming the court if given the opportunity - I’m just pointing out that Democrats have openly called for reforming the court, on the presidential debate stage, as recently as 2019. It shouldn’t be viewed as a non-starter - especially when these ideas were coming from the so-called moderate wing of the party.
On the M4A topic, it’s crazy to me how its supporters have managed to ally themselves with the private healthcare lobby in opposing a competitive public option. If Medicare is more efficient than profit-driven insurance, as we all suspect, then forcing private insurance to compete with it puts us on a direct path to a single-payer system. Pete is a democratic capitalist - it shouldn’t be a surprise that his version of M4A uses the system in place to get us there. If Bernie amended his bill to include a 15-year transition plan I doubt anyone would accuse him of flip-flopping.
On the M4A topic, it’s crazy to me how its supporters have managed to ally themselves with the private healthcare lobby in opposing a competitive public option. If Medicare is more efficient than profit-driven insurance, as we all suspect, then forcing private insurance to compete with it puts us on a direct path to a single-payer system. Pete is a democratic capitalist - it shouldn’t be a surprise that his version of M4A uses the system in place to get us there. If Bernie amended his bill to include a 15-year transition plan I doubt anyone would accuse him of flip-flopping.
The difference between Bernie and Pete is Bernie has proven he won’t flip flop like Obama, Bernie has proven he acts according to a genuinely socialist vision. Pete is just another milquetoast status quo manager who knows what coat of paint looks fresh and cool this season and adopts his policy stances to match that. Bernie is literally the polar opposite of that.
To be fair I think it’s too early in Pete’s political career for me to say that he stands by what he says or for you to say that he doesn’t. I don’t think anyone can hold a candle to Bernie on ideological consistency - he would rather lose than compromise. We all admire him for that, but it makes him a better activist than politician. I say this as someone who donated to his campaign and voted for him twice.
I agree that Pete is the polar opposite, but I don’t know if it’s a bad thing. Early on he said that he wanted the primaries to be a debate of ideas, and that - if nominated - he would champion the platform of the party. That could be the MO of a grifter, or it could be someone who’s serious about restoring democracy. I don’t blame anyone for being skeptical, but if we’re dismissing him because we have concerns about his healthcare plan, I’d say we’re still living in 2016.
It’s like climate change action. Too little, too late. Or really not much at all. Thanks, you fucking primary DNC voters.
Too little, too late
The SC literally just granted this power. What was he supposed to do, force them not to release the ruling? He could not have packed the court in any way to cancel out this 6-3 majority in time
Thanks, you fucking primary DNC voters.
how would that change the ruling?? It is not a simple thing at all to reform the highest court, especially amidst these last few insane years. Biden or another D, it is not something that can just be done. You’re acting like Biden had the chance to just sit down in a chair but chose not to.
You should be thanking the unelected supreme court fascists.
Let’s be clear about what this is,
this is the executive branch refusing to put checks on a clearly corrupt and dysfunctional judicial branch. The stability of our 3 branch system depends on the branches being willing and able to check each other. If one branch yields to another, the system fails.
I agree. This is within the president’s role to fix.
Biden, you are head of the executive branch. Your job is to ensure the law is followed. Do your job and start making them do theirs. It doesn’t have to be bloody but applying some pressure would be a great start.
I mean, having an unelected group with lifetime appointments with ultimate power was kind of destined to fuck us at some point.
If you dont try to fight fascism with every tool avaliable and legal to you, then you’re a fascist. There’s no if and or buts about it. Biden could take steps to counter fascism but instead he make committments to explicitly not fight it using the new SCOTUS ruling and even not to change the courts.
Even if he wins, in 4 years were going to be right back to fascism because he is explicitly refusing to fix this. Hes unfit to fight fascism which means hes unfit to be president in the modern US.
deleted by creator
Here’s the difference…when Trump gets in office, 3 of the Supreme Court justices are going to fall out the window.
Biden doesn’t think it’s a big deal.
