Good luck USA
And the Supreme Court will kiss the feet of the people dragging them away.
Why else would they give him explicit advance immunity for assassinating his political rivals?
this post was submitted on 29 Apr 2025
170 points (100.0% liked)
politics
23594 readers
3280 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
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
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Why else would they give him explicit advance immunity for assassinating his political rivals?
Like every other dumb fuck conservative, they just wanted those pesky 3 libs to get murdered. They will never figure out that they're up next until it happens. It's endemic to the conservative worldview.
Unlikely. They don't want their power usurped.
I appreciate you cosplaying as a coauthor of the Federalist Papers, but I think the "institutional jealousy" theory of the balance of power has been comprehensively shredded by the behavior of Congress since about November 2000.
That's not an actual argument though and if anyone is playing expert it's you so maybe cut back that derision by like 50%.
I was trying to shout out that your username is Madison, it came out a lot bitchier than I wanted it to, sorry.
But I do think it's a valid argument. The assumption from the Federalist Papers that the different branches would not cede power to one another because of their desire to hold it themselves has proven to be untrue. Factional loyalty to GWB, then to Trump, has driven Congress to ever-greater depths of obesiance.
There's no argument, imo, that SCOTUS is not at least as loyal to an external faction (ironically, to people calling themselves Federalists) as Congress, and actually even more corrupted by money.
Therefore, I think a morals/behavioral based argument that SCOTUS will want to preserve their power in the face of a tyrant from their faction isn't convincing.
I gotcha, I probably could have handled it a bit better myself and yes it is a James Madison reference.
I think we have actual evidence that they do not intend to cede their power by not bright lining presidential immunity or being less vague. They may be horrific people but they are in fact quite the schemer and finagler. Chances are if the admin pushes it they'll just deputize willing participants which leaves us with either a civil war or rule of law.
I’ll believe it when I see it
Certainly a better attitude then why bother.
Just a different kind of vacation perk package. I hope Thomas is arrested first!
I mean, supreme court justices shouldn't be exempt from the law, but that doesn't mean much coming from this administration.
Baghdad Barb.
Oh, WE are already fucked. Good luck to the rest of the world!