Your post has been removed because it violates the given rule.
a. For any content that is related to another subreddit, both the name of the subreddit and any usernames must be fully blocked out.
b. For any content from other social medias, all names and usernames, except those of public figures, must be fully blocked out.
c. Advocating, inciting, or participating in brigading is not allowed.
I hate how its being treated as a fact that Trump is the end of democracy while he's working well within the rules of democracy. Its one of the biggest conspiracy theories of our time, but nobody can actually explain how. Just buzzwords.
There’s a complete disconnect from reality on the left. Evidenced by how shocked they were by how idiotic Biden looked during the debate. He’s obviously barely been functioning for a very long time. KJP trying to play some of it off as “cheapfakes” before the debate was laughable.
They’re not really shocked. They’ve been refusing to cover it and now that it’s patently obvious they’re pretending to be shocked. Now they’re trying to save face.
I honestly like that people can show their derangement in public like this, I just wish all political sides could do it, so we can clearly see who makes the biggest fool out of himself and have a great laugh together
Is this over the SC decision? It doesn’t even impact what he’s already being charged for. People are so dramatic. It applies both ways but democrats especially, will have like 20 decisions swing their way, and the one that doesn’t makes them think the US is crumbling down. I get one fucking district court saying they might glance at a case to undo a mag ban or something and I’m doing backflips. Fighting for fucking scraps over here.
It's because they don't read the decision or the nuance. They just read what they think it says and the headlines they see. After the abortion ruling I remember all the "They banned abortion" and even today they say that the Supreme Court will overturn a national abortion law if Congress and the president implement it....when that exactly what the supreme Court said should happen. Also, constantly that its "fascism" when the court puts decision making in the hands of the legislature by overturning previous presidents the basically made law or as in today allowed the executive branch to basically make law.
The funniest claim in all that is the party that caused the most recent inflationary spiral pretending that somehow cutting government spending (the perennial platform of Republican candidates) would somehow result in hyper inflation.
I personally think it's them claiming the group of people who violently despised the proposed idea of 15-minute cities is also going to halt all travel. Somehow the Trump fans that claimed having a grocery store within 15 minutes of your apartment will lead to the government locking you in to that 15 minute square and hating it... are also the people who want to lock you in a 15 minute square? It's like they don't know the first fuckin' thing about the Repubbies and just make shit up to make them sound bad- wait a minute...
service guarantees citizenship?
https://preview.redd.it/tm8w2419wz9d1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=353c01cbf6d25b7bbc90b6f2af54ce4d24266ff8
HELL YEAH LETS GO, ITS HELLDIVING TIME BABY
I get that is dangerous to set a bar to vote, because the bar can be arbitrary and discriminative.
But it is definitively more dangerous to not have a bar higher than how many years have you been alive.
Universal suffrage is a joke.
The only people who should be able to vote in a system are those who have a stake in said system. If your sole contribution to that system is how much you are able to steal from the actual productive people in that, not only should you not be able to vote but you should be drug out into the streets and let justice take charge.
Bro is a time traveller.
https://preview.redd.it/5zicfqcttz9d1.jpeg?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d62459d45813bdcfc1cae4a9974edfa361f6470a
Also that pic of him looks like Trump and Biden merged
It’s so funny to me. The dnc has literally run on “vote for us or this will be the last election ever!!! Women and blacks and gays will lose their rights and you’ll all be deported!” And all that happens is we just get lower gas prices 💀
It might be the greatest tweet in history. He should have a campaign bit on it.
“Now there’s this thing called X. Beautiful platform one of the most beautiful platforms in the history of social media. Not as good as Truth Social, but what can you say? They’re trying their best; they have an African-American running it now.
I told the Eli, the African-American running it, don’t change it to X, but he didn’t listen. I like the guy, but he really needs to get his hair figured out and maybe get to the gym.
Here’s the crazy thing, everybody knows it. But I had the greatest tweet ever recorded. When I told Barney Frank that his nipples protruding were very disrespectful. But here’s the point: if we don’t get mean tweets back, we won’t have a country anymore.
That was the same playbook as 2016. “You can’t vote Trump, it will mean economic chaos and global instability!” Then we voted for Trump anyway and got a nice economy and stable geopolitics with no new wars 😆
Part of me thinks that the way we got geopolitical stability is because trump was such a wildcard for how he would respond that other countries were probably like lets not fuck around with him in the seat
[Madman theory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madman_theory) is cool, although it's unclear how good Trump was at this. Currently Putin also employs this tactic.
The playbook is the same with just a different name, I remember it was, “we will have a terrible economy, and he will start WW3!!!” Now it’s, “he will remove the election process and deport all minorities” it’s just whatever flashy buzzwords they can throw on an article
The better one is “we believe in democracy and we want everyone’s voice heard” then are up in arms about the Chevron Deference being withdrawn.
It is mental gymnastics that would win the gold in Paris.
France: Centre wing collapse, left and right wing (including alt lefts and alt rights) fights for congress majority, all due to sitting leader wants to play 5d chess
Reddit: What is that, never heard of
USA: Centre left and Centre right senile man fights for presidency, while congress is most likely to be a deadlock between chambers again, since Americans are aware of a balance of power
Reddit: OH MY GOD IT IS GERMANY IN 1932
Seriously lefties, if you want to see enabling act, Paris will pass it first.
You'd think I'd hate this ruling, but I'm old enough to know that when the other side gets in to power, any weapon you crafted will be pointed back at you.
And if you live long enough, they *will*, almost certainly, get in to power.
A good rule of thumb for legislating government powers is “do I want my political opponent to have this power?”
Unfortunately it seems like that’s not common anymore.
Democrats can't think of a time they won't be in power, even when turtle warns them that removing the 60 vote threshold for federal judge appointments might not be a good idea, they double down and do it anyways
Because Democrats keep thinking they will finally "secure" democracy and never lose another election again. First rule in life: never believe your own press.
They’re going to keep trying to import voters until they do since they’ve convinced their domestic base to not have kids anymore.
They definitely don’t see the irony of trying to spay and neuter their own actual base with the trans crap and convincing the rest that abortion is a sacrament. They’re weeding themselves out of existence.
Sotomayor excused President Obama killing an American Citizen, simply because it was done in an official act to stop terrorist actions. When the American Citizen was a child, and not an active known terrorist. Just related to them.
So in her oral argument she will excuse Obama, but when Trump does something she doesnt like, she wants to pull immunity. She is partisan and the worst justice.
When you get judges who dissent on something so clear-cut, you get cases like *Roe v. Wade*, and *U.S. v. Miller*.
Say whatever you want about abortion, *Roe* was objectively not correctly decided.
Even the left wing judges knew that Roe v Wade was a shaky case that could be easily overturned if looked at again. Ginsburg was saying for years the democrats need to actually pass laws that protect abortion and not just rely on a court ruling that could get struck down overnight.
They had decades to properly make abortion rights federal law, including their share of years with a blue congress. But if they actually did that, then they wouldn't have been able to keep dangling the threat of *losing* abortion rights over their voters' heads every election.
Is it that shocking? Tasers were declared common use in a 9-0 decision because there are 200k of them. Aren’t we still waiting on the actual final word for pistol braces even with at the very very least 3 million of them?
realistically if project 2025 does come into fruition, only maybe bits and pieces of it could
compromises are inherent to politics, the government oversteps by the amount project 2025 describes and everyone riots. im not going to sugarcoat it, it was written by ideologues and would be terrible in full but its simply not possible in the full extent
i dont even think he knows which party hes in honestly, ive heard the guy speak, hes no worse than biden
our options are: senile president (homelander wannabe) and senile president (apparently the guy drinks adrenaline or something)
https://preview.redd.it/hl9sj2bmk0ad1.jpeg?width=1920&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=523895bd826a92bb8945c9163e5f82ae0dc1023a
I might be silly for believing this, but I think my long term life plans will ultimately work out better in a far-right america. I just want to move out to the woods, hoard firearms and mind my business.
They were rightfully critical of the Trump’s Messiah-level status with some in the right. However, when the shoe on the other foot, they do the same thing they claimed they opposed.
There is a process for persecuting the President for official acts already. It’s called impeachment and you’d think these guys would know that term already
My concern is more the executive privilege implications of this ruling. No longer being able to subpoena presidential material relevant to a criminal case is not ideal, in my opinion.
The shear amount of cope is staggering. People are still arguing that a comatose Biden would be better than trump. Even a slight step off that line leads to oblivion by down votes. Its bizarre.
No shot he’d be a better president but a 7-2 Supreme Court majority is basically inevitable if Trump wins. That’s enough to not want Trump to win. The court would be set to the right for legitimately 50 years.
Sure, but only on certain issues. A 7-2 majority means every ruling for at minimum two generations is guaranteed to lean to the right. It won’t matter who’s the president at that point.
It’s still crazy that RBG spent her entire life as some feminist icon just to refuse to step down after being begged when Obama had control of the house and senate. Democrats cannot stop ruining shit for themselves.
Of course they thought that. They had the first PoC president, then it was gonna be the first woman president. Then it'd be the first PoC woman president. And they'd just keep parading firsts in front of people so everyone could feel so virtuous and progressive.
She was confident Hilary would win and wanted a woman President to appoint her successor. Cue [November 8, 2016.](https://youtu.be/gFeq6zEu26k?si=N0-NBKzzWhatzokW&t=14)
There’s 9 justices and he’s splitting the court into conservative or liberal leaning justices. So 7-2 means conservative justice majority, ergo their rulings would be conservative for like 50 years because those appointments are for life
This one isn't even an L, but everyone acting like it is.
SCOTUS just said you had to make a determination that it wasn't part of an official act, something that should be rather trivial to do in the context of Trumps current legal cases. It's very clear that giving a speech to support his election would not constitute an official act...so a few more delays while they appeal what the lower court is absolutely going to rule on and we'll be back on track.
I really don’t get how people (particularly conservatives) don’t understand American conservatives are conserving classical liberalism. Like… “liberal” isn’t a dirty word just because someone co-opts it
They’re not conservative then they’re liberals because otherwise a democrat in the 2000s would be conservative since they’re preserving pre woke progressivism
All the comments here saying stuff like "Well, I don't really support Trump, but I want him to win because of the meltdown on the left it would cause" just make me want to slam my head into a wall.
Like, I'm not even mad that people are supporting him if they actually feel like his policies would improve the US. But if your whole argument is "haha Trump win good funny because left mad", you are living proof why democracy is under more and more pressure in the West.
I understand the argument for the ruling that took place today. Lots of people are saying it largely changes nothing, I don’t necessarily disagree with that. I take issue with the phrasing of “official acts,” and it remaining undefined. Just feels like all of Trump’s communications with Pence and the DOJ are going to be ruled as official so that the case just has no evidence and can’t establish motive.
My bigger issue is with the bribery ruling, and I don’t know how anyone can be cool with that one. That one’s not really nuanced either, I think it’s a really bad decision.
Are you pro their recent rulings or just curious as to why I don’t like em?
Actually I'm very pro these rulings and I will attempt to explain why. I'm not doing this necessarily to change your mind, but at the very least I hope to reduce some of the panic surrounding them.
With this particular case today, you are correct, nothing really changes at all. What it exposes though is the ambiguity present in the existing laws surrounding the executive powers. To me, this is a good thing because we now have a push to start defining the limitations of the executive. More than likely Trump will not face consequences for this, not because of anything the SCOTUS did, but really because what evidence we have of wrongdoing is circumstantial at best.
With the bribery case, you have to look at it through the lens of jurisprudence. What their decision said, was that as the law is CURRENTLY written, no wrongdoing happened. Like most crimes, bribery is very specific in the sequence of events to qualify. Per the statute, bribery involves a specific act being done for the purposes of compensation promised. So basically, if you were a senator, I come up to you and say I want you to vote on x bill and in return I will give you a briefcase of money. What happened in this specific case is that the mayor was asked to pick a specific contractor but no compensation was ever agreed upon. It was only after he chose them that they "gifted" him things. Is that immoral? Absolutely, but, as the law recognizes it, it was not a case of bribery. That's what SCOTUS decided on.
Finally, I know Chevron is really contentious, but again personally, I hated the notion that the executive agencies had basically unlimited power with their "laws." Certain agencies never abused this power but a couple of very bad apples, (namely the ATF and DEA) abused the absolute shit out of it. This entire thing can be easily resolved by Congress which is what should have happened in the first place instead of Chevron.
>Just feels like all of Trump’s communications with Pence and the DOJ are going to be ruled as official so that the case just has no evidence and can’t establish motive.
I mean, yeah, sorry, but you can't just prosecute your political opponents in the hopes they won't get elected, especially when you have no evidence
Their chairs should all have eject buttons. As they vote, their districts vote on whether or not to eject them. If the vote hits 60%, then they get catapulted. A lot more people would be more involved.
It’s not both sides. Like it or not, the majority of republicans wanted Trump as the nominee, so he’s the nominee.
Unlike the democrats who run on machine politics, superdelegates, and outright ignore the will of voters (Bernie vs Hilary)
Guys I just read in a leftist sub that now the Democrats could abuse this decision in their favor and stay in power forever....
But they won't, because differently from republicans, the Democrats have morals, always take the high road and their voters would never accept it.
Facts?
https://preview.redd.it/jm5cf2knaz9d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b2cf054bff52692a3ed411f08be3ab8652eb89ad
The phrasing of “should have gone nuclear, but didn’t” is particularly ironic considering how many times the Democrats invoked one nuclear option or another with regards to permanently changing congressional procedure to force something through. Every time they did that it bit them in the ass the very next election term.
Look I hate the dude, but he’s the only one in that entire god forsaken city that actually understands how to play the game, you guys are screwed when he’s done done
Tbh that maneuver to keep Garland off the court is one of the few things I appreciate about him. I have major issues though with republicans who are seemingly terrified of playing to win.
Because it was an obvious function of the government that has always existed, and changing the executive office to where the attorney general is more important than the president, we would have an impressively disastrous shakeup in function of presidential power.
Because judges actually making rulings based on an originality interpretation as opposed to “expanding government power” interpretation is unbelievably based.
Government power has gotten ridiculous and the fact that the Supreme Court is actually making judgements based on actual law instead of however they feel like is nice. The Trump ruling has been precedent since Mississippi v Johnson 1876, I’m not sure why people are freaking out about this
Hitler wasn't even elected, the president of Germany was pressured into appointing him as chancellor after Hitler lost the election. Then because the Nazis had power and Hindenburg was weak, it caused hindenburg to give the chancellor total authority in an emergency and then he died. The notion that Trump is a dictator and we are voting him in is astonishing, especially since we already had a Trump presidency. The American people aren't that stupid, they act like we have amnesia.
I love that Trump will certainly destroy democracy, enslave women, plunge us into war, and sell us to Putin if he gets elected. Yet somehow he never got around to doing any of that the first time he was elected President.
Congress is too stupid, incompetent, and partisan to impeach presidents who do bad acts. So people are trying to reach for any other concept of holding the president accountable, for things that a reasonable congress would have impeached him for.
These avenues dont exist in the constitution and would need to be invented by congress to actually be legal.
So they ran to the courts to try and make a new avenue to hold a president accountable, and were told that the constitution doesnt have that in it. And that the tradition they want to start would be stupid.
They only loss with this ruling is that I can't call Dubya a war criminal anymore since everything during the Iraq War can be considered an *official act* during his presidency.
Your post has been removed because it violates the given rule. a. For any content that is related to another subreddit, both the name of the subreddit and any usernames must be fully blocked out. b. For any content from other social medias, all names and usernames, except those of public figures, must be fully blocked out. c. Advocating, inciting, or participating in brigading is not allowed.
Too small, can’t read.
Here’s the synopsis: Wah wah wah, end of democracy, wahhhhh, cats and dogs living together, wwwwaaahhhh, mass hysteria.
I hate how its being treated as a fact that Trump is the end of democracy while he's working well within the rules of democracy. Its one of the biggest conspiracy theories of our time, but nobody can actually explain how. Just buzzwords.
There’s a complete disconnect from reality on the left. Evidenced by how shocked they were by how idiotic Biden looked during the debate. He’s obviously barely been functioning for a very long time. KJP trying to play some of it off as “cheapfakes” before the debate was laughable.
Yeah the media is shocked at Bidens mental conidition after spending 4 years hiding Biden's mental condition
They’re not really shocked. They’ve been refusing to cover it and now that it’s patently obvious they’re pretending to be shocked. Now they’re trying to save face.
Thank you. The newest TDS variant seems virulent, hopefully it burns out quickly.
Mask up just in case. Safety first!
https://preview.redd.it/5htvsst043ad1.jpeg?width=191&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5c5596f4b791761865cf24538b20ba776483cfbc
[удалено]
“The president should murder his political opponent so we don’t become a fascist nation” they won’t see the irony
Very Hitler of them too. “We must eliminate the Jews before they cause us harm!”
You would think a newly public traded company would remove this stuff from their platform but nope...
I honestly like that people can show their derangement in public like this, I just wish all political sides could do it, so we can clearly see who makes the biggest fool out of himself and have a great laugh together
I mean, we literally have Talibans on Twitter...
Shit like that rises the stock price for em. Think of all the coverage, the new ~~bots~~ users, the engagement
Is this over the SC decision? It doesn’t even impact what he’s already being charged for. People are so dramatic. It applies both ways but democrats especially, will have like 20 decisions swing their way, and the one that doesn’t makes them think the US is crumbling down. I get one fucking district court saying they might glance at a case to undo a mag ban or something and I’m doing backflips. Fighting for fucking scraps over here.
It's because they don't read the decision or the nuance. They just read what they think it says and the headlines they see. After the abortion ruling I remember all the "They banned abortion" and even today they say that the Supreme Court will overturn a national abortion law if Congress and the president implement it....when that exactly what the supreme Court said should happen. Also, constantly that its "fascism" when the court puts decision making in the hands of the legislature by overturning previous presidents the basically made law or as in today allowed the executive branch to basically make law.
Reads like it was written by a DNC bot from India or pakistan
The bots live in the USA and do it for free
And they literally think they're making history by doing it as if they are important.
I can’t wait to watch my kids do their history report on the brave resistance led by Reddit user Trump_Sucks_Balls06
The funniest claim in all that is the party that caused the most recent inflationary spiral pretending that somehow cutting government spending (the perennial platform of Republican candidates) would somehow result in hyper inflation.
I personally think it's them claiming the group of people who violently despised the proposed idea of 15-minute cities is also going to halt all travel. Somehow the Trump fans that claimed having a grocery store within 15 minutes of your apartment will lead to the government locking you in to that 15 minute square and hating it... are also the people who want to lock you in a 15 minute square? It's like they don't know the first fuckin' thing about the Repubbies and just make shit up to make them sound bad- wait a minute...
I think they might just be saying stuff that they want to do and pretending that Republicans want to do it.
I mean, the Republicans don't exactly have a good track record on not printing money recently.
Lately the republicans have been all about cutting taxes without actually reducing the spending though
How people even reach this level of delusion is a mystery to me
Terminally online
Haha even they’re calling him sleepy joe now. This is great.
Lobbying in Iran is illegal, that’s why they have corruption instead Edit: This is also projection
The republicans aren’t the ones pushing eating bug protein. It’s the lefties precious WEF crowd.
Indiscernible from satire.
Lee Harvey was antifa type, but the difference between 1963 and 2024: Lee Harvey couldnt leak his co-conspirators on reddit
> exept Lobbying is illegal in iran [reminds me of something.](https://apnews.com/united-states-government-f4e4419aabab4d6594752bbf16bfc9f5)
So he's saying that the left, who wants to outlaw beef for the environment, are the ones who will let us eat steak?
"How many fucking L's have we taken this week" All of them, sir. You've taken all the L's.
iteray, I don't think there are any 's eft anymore
Damn hoarders. We'II have to start using "I" as a pIacehoIder. WonderfuII.
There's only one i in wonderful friendo
Iook, I'm an American. I'II speII things however I want. MURICA.
Based and wunderfuii piiied Edit: Sorry, piIIed\*
These guys are literal morons. It’s incredible.
This sub has, funnily enough, made me turn from universal suffrage is great, to service guarantees citizenship, would you like to know more
https://i.redd.it/m7q9mw5020ad1.gif
service guarantees citizenship? https://preview.redd.it/tm8w2419wz9d1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=353c01cbf6d25b7bbc90b6f2af54ce4d24266ff8 HELL YEAH LETS GO, ITS HELLDIVING TIME BABY
I get that is dangerous to set a bar to vote, because the bar can be arbitrary and discriminative. But it is definitively more dangerous to not have a bar higher than how many years have you been alive.
Universal suffrage is a joke. The only people who should be able to vote in a system are those who have a stake in said system. If your sole contribution to that system is how much you are able to steal from the actual productive people in that, not only should you not be able to vote but you should be drug out into the streets and let justice take charge.
Bro, your comment is way too based for your flair.
It's fucking amazing. Scotus bringing it to terminally online leftoids everywhere this week.
Good.
The right to a jury trial is a L according to the left 🤡
predictable ‘Germany in 1932’ comparison 😆
When the orange man wasn't literally Hitler in 2016 but he'll definitely be literally Hitler this time
“He was just WWI hitler then, this time is different”
Trump being gassed in WW1 and then coasting in hospitals until the end of the war confirmed
Look at a side by side picture of Trump and Patton. Just sayin’
Bro is a time traveller. https://preview.redd.it/5zicfqcttz9d1.jpeg?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d62459d45813bdcfc1cae4a9974edfa361f6470a Also that pic of him looks like Trump and Biden merged
that man wanted to take the commies all the way back to commiegrad.
He was sadly removed for being too based for this world
Fucking balance patches.
It’s so funny to me. The dnc has literally run on “vote for us or this will be the last election ever!!! Women and blacks and gays will lose their rights and you’ll all be deported!” And all that happens is we just get lower gas prices 💀
But the mean tweets!
God I miss them. > Barney Frank looked disgusting—nipples protruding—in his blue shirt before Congress. Very very disrespectful.
It might be the greatest tweet in history. He should have a campaign bit on it. “Now there’s this thing called X. Beautiful platform one of the most beautiful platforms in the history of social media. Not as good as Truth Social, but what can you say? They’re trying their best; they have an African-American running it now. I told the Eli, the African-American running it, don’t change it to X, but he didn’t listen. I like the guy, but he really needs to get his hair figured out and maybe get to the gym. Here’s the crazy thing, everybody knows it. But I had the greatest tweet ever recorded. When I told Barney Frank that his nipples protruding were very disrespectful. But here’s the point: if we don’t get mean tweets back, we won’t have a country anymore.
I could actually hear him saying this in my head. GET OUT OF MY HEAD.
He's so real for that
That was the same playbook as 2016. “You can’t vote Trump, it will mean economic chaos and global instability!” Then we voted for Trump anyway and got a nice economy and stable geopolitics with no new wars 😆
Part of me thinks that the way we got geopolitical stability is because trump was such a wildcard for how he would respond that other countries were probably like lets not fuck around with him in the seat
[Madman theory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madman_theory) is cool, although it's unclear how good Trump was at this. Currently Putin also employs this tactic.
You’re probably right, but then that’s just more reason to vote for him again.
The playbook is the same with just a different name, I remember it was, “we will have a terrible economy, and he will start WW3!!!” Now it’s, “he will remove the election process and deport all minorities” it’s just whatever flashy buzzwords they can throw on an article
The better one is “we believe in democracy and we want everyone’s voice heard” then are up in arms about the Chevron Deference being withdrawn. It is mental gymnastics that would win the gold in Paris.
France: Centre wing collapse, left and right wing (including alt lefts and alt rights) fights for congress majority, all due to sitting leader wants to play 5d chess Reddit: What is that, never heard of USA: Centre left and Centre right senile man fights for presidency, while congress is most likely to be a deadlock between chambers again, since Americans are aware of a balance of power Reddit: OH MY GOD IT IS GERMANY IN 1932 Seriously lefties, if you want to see enabling act, Paris will pass it first.
Just a bunch of privileged people who don't understand that the letter of the law is different than the utopia they built in their minds.
You'd think I'd hate this ruling, but I'm old enough to know that when the other side gets in to power, any weapon you crafted will be pointed back at you. And if you live long enough, they *will*, almost certainly, get in to power.
A good rule of thumb for legislating government powers is “do I want my political opponent to have this power?” Unfortunately it seems like that’s not common anymore.
Democrats can't think of a time they won't be in power, even when turtle warns them that removing the 60 vote threshold for federal judge appointments might not be a good idea, they double down and do it anyways
Yup. That decision by Schumer was an important pivot point that got us exactly this Supreme Court.
Because Democrats keep thinking they will finally "secure" democracy and never lose another election again. First rule in life: never believe your own press.
They’re going to keep trying to import voters until they do since they’ve convinced their domestic base to not have kids anymore. They definitely don’t see the irony of trying to spay and neuter their own actual base with the trans crap and convincing the rest that abortion is a sacrament. They’re weeding themselves out of existence.
Great statement and highly pertinent to the Chevron deference ruling as well.
*Refreshing tree of liberty intensifies*
“So this is what Germany felt like in 1932”…… 5 seconds later “from the River…..”
Reddit when the Supreme Court says what has been true for years (in regards to the presidential immunity case)
The people I know who are lawyers and studied constitutional law were surprised it wasn't 9-0
It should've been 9-0 but 3 activists on the court have clearly never read the Constitution and instead just operate on partisan bullshit.
Sotomayor excused President Obama killing an American Citizen, simply because it was done in an official act to stop terrorist actions. When the American Citizen was a child, and not an active known terrorist. Just related to them. So in her oral argument she will excuse Obama, but when Trump does something she doesnt like, she wants to pull immunity. She is partisan and the worst justice.
Hyper partisan judges are a-ok as long as they're "on the right side of history"
When you get judges who dissent on something so clear-cut, you get cases like *Roe v. Wade*, and *U.S. v. Miller*. Say whatever you want about abortion, *Roe* was objectively not correctly decided.
Even the left wing judges knew that Roe v Wade was a shaky case that could be easily overturned if looked at again. Ginsburg was saying for years the democrats need to actually pass laws that protect abortion and not just rely on a court ruling that could get struck down overnight.
They had decades to properly make abortion rights federal law, including their share of years with a blue congress. But if they actually did that, then they wouldn't have been able to keep dangling the threat of *losing* abortion rights over their voters' heads every election.
Democracy isn’t a good form of government, it’s just the least shit one we have right now.
That tells you something about the intellectual quality of the dissenting justices.
Were they really?
Yes. They haven't fully bought into banana Republic partisan politics at EVERY level yet. Remember Obama drone strikes hitting an American citizen?
Most people don't, because it wasn't covered, if it was a Republican, they probably would have impeached him for it
Also who built the cages for the migrant children?
I just wanna know if American steel was used? Im a homer for buying local even if it costs more
My Brother in Christ, so its not just me that thinks its crazy that the 3 dissented.
But that wouldn't give political hacks a chance to grandstand
Is it that shocking? Tasers were declared common use in a 9-0 decision because there are 200k of them. Aren’t we still waiting on the actual final word for pistol braces even with at the very very least 3 million of them?
Someone posted in the millennial subreddit- I shit you absolutely not- that Biden is the LAST hope for democracy lmao, the post was hysterical.
realistically if project 2025 does come into fruition, only maybe bits and pieces of it could compromises are inherent to politics, the government oversteps by the amount project 2025 describes and everyone riots. im not going to sugarcoat it, it was written by ideologues and would be terrible in full but its simply not possible in the full extent
I cannot find a single article about Trump endorsing project 2025
i dont even think he knows which party hes in honestly, ive heard the guy speak, hes no worse than biden our options are: senile president (homelander wannabe) and senile president (apparently the guy drinks adrenaline or something) https://preview.redd.it/hl9sj2bmk0ad1.jpeg?width=1920&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=523895bd826a92bb8945c9163e5f82ae0dc1023a
I might be silly for believing this, but I think my long term life plans will ultimately work out better in a far-right america. I just want to move out to the woods, hoard firearms and mind my business.
They were rightfully critical of the Trump’s Messiah-level status with some in the right. However, when the shoe on the other foot, they do the same thing they claimed they opposed.
There is a process for persecuting the President for official acts already. It’s called impeachment and you’d think these guys would know that term already
They do know, they've tried it twice but it didn't work either time, so they needed to find different ways of going after drumpf
My concern is more the executive privilege implications of this ruling. No longer being able to subpoena presidential material relevant to a criminal case is not ideal, in my opinion.
Mr President, a ~~second~~ sixth L has hit the DNC
Damn, I was really hoping someone would be able to go after Obama for murdering an American citizen.
Well, if a lower court decides it was an “unofficial act” then they could. Also they could still go after him for any sort of reason beyond that.
Given that it doesn’t appear to be part of his constitutional authority, even if it’s an “official act” he still only has “presumptive immunity”.
The shear amount of cope is staggering. People are still arguing that a comatose Biden would be better than trump. Even a slight step off that line leads to oblivion by down votes. Its bizarre.
No shot he’d be a better president but a 7-2 Supreme Court majority is basically inevitable if Trump wins. That’s enough to not want Trump to win. The court would be set to the right for legitimately 50 years.
Sure, I guess. But even the liberal justices have been voting more conservative lately.
Sure, but only on certain issues. A 7-2 majority means every ruling for at minimum two generations is guaranteed to lean to the right. It won’t matter who’s the president at that point. It’s still crazy that RBG spent her entire life as some feminist icon just to refuse to step down after being begged when Obama had control of the house and senate. Democrats cannot stop ruining shit for themselves.
I legitimately think the DNC thought that they would never lose another presidential election after Obama
Of course they thought that. They had the first PoC president, then it was gonna be the first woman president. Then it'd be the first PoC woman president. And they'd just keep parading firsts in front of people so everyone could feel so virtuous and progressive.
That's cool and all, but that doesn't make food affordable
I've heard Redditors call it "demographics is destiny" a lot at the time.
They at least got some merch outta RBG.
She was confident Hilary would win and wanted a woman President to appoint her successor. Cue [November 8, 2016.](https://youtu.be/gFeq6zEu26k?si=N0-NBKzzWhatzokW&t=14)
It's wild to me that when SCOTUS does it's job correctly, that it's viewed as right-leaning now. The Overton window has entered another dimension.
lefties really love their insular 3 person partisan hack judges.
Not a fan of a republican court, but so far they are mostly originalists, aren't they? And that's kinda based no matter which party they endorse.
I'm from Europe, what does 7-2 supreme court mean
There’s 9 justices and he’s splitting the court into conservative or liberal leaning justices. So 7-2 means conservative justice majority, ergo their rulings would be conservative for like 50 years because those appointments are for life
7 judges that lean conservative and 2 that lean progressive. (Although none of them are really conservative or progressive)
Good. the 3 dissenting fucking idiots are all partisan hacks. At least the others are willing to "cross the aisle".
A lot of fascist and anti-democratic talking points in those quotes for people claiming they're against fascism and like democracy.
If they read any books they wouldn't be leftists.
OP made this meme in an actual blender.
https://preview.redd.it/4k6rtocp5z9d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=93ef2641f1398ca86f493b6334878d288626797a
Riden & Dyin' w/ Biden
Funnily enough the whole "vote blue no matter who" thing is the reason they get shit ass candidates like this all the time.
This one isn't even an L, but everyone acting like it is. SCOTUS just said you had to make a determination that it wasn't part of an official act, something that should be rather trivial to do in the context of Trumps current legal cases. It's very clear that giving a speech to support his election would not constitute an official act...so a few more delays while they appeal what the lower court is absolutely going to rule on and we'll be back on track.
tfw you can't skirt laws to persecute political opponent who is impolite on social media: 😡😡😡😡
You’re also a liberal
Damn. Praying they find a cure for that. 🙏
It’s ironic for republicans to pretend they’re not also liberals it’s in their name Republican
I really don’t get how people (particularly conservatives) don’t understand American conservatives are conserving classical liberalism. Like… “liberal” isn’t a dirty word just because someone co-opts it
They’re not conservative then they’re liberals because otherwise a democrat in the 2000s would be conservative since they’re preserving pre woke progressivism
If those kids knew that Jackson sided with the majority in the January 6 case, they’d be very upset.
Am I supposed to be able to read that?
As someone whose been exhausted by the “end of democracy!” doomers since 2016, I’m certainly not happy with these past couple rulings.
The idea that something is good just because the other side hates it is going to be the death of this country
country is already dead and that was the what killed it, social media identity politics is pathetic
Pretty sure the debt is what killed it.
The idea that something is bad just because the other side likes it is equally as damaging
All the comments here saying stuff like "Well, I don't really support Trump, but I want him to win because of the meltdown on the left it would cause" just make me want to slam my head into a wall. Like, I'm not even mad that people are supporting him if they actually feel like his policies would improve the US. But if your whole argument is "haha Trump win good funny because left mad", you are living proof why democracy is under more and more pressure in the West.
If I believed Trump would end democracy I would vote for him lol.
Umm excuse me sweaty, you’ve just done a heckin Threat to Democracy™️ Don’t you know this is literally in the most critical election of our lives?
I thought the previous election was "the election of our lives."
Honest question and I'm being sincere here, what are you not happy about?
I understand the argument for the ruling that took place today. Lots of people are saying it largely changes nothing, I don’t necessarily disagree with that. I take issue with the phrasing of “official acts,” and it remaining undefined. Just feels like all of Trump’s communications with Pence and the DOJ are going to be ruled as official so that the case just has no evidence and can’t establish motive. My bigger issue is with the bribery ruling, and I don’t know how anyone can be cool with that one. That one’s not really nuanced either, I think it’s a really bad decision. Are you pro their recent rulings or just curious as to why I don’t like em?
Actually I'm very pro these rulings and I will attempt to explain why. I'm not doing this necessarily to change your mind, but at the very least I hope to reduce some of the panic surrounding them. With this particular case today, you are correct, nothing really changes at all. What it exposes though is the ambiguity present in the existing laws surrounding the executive powers. To me, this is a good thing because we now have a push to start defining the limitations of the executive. More than likely Trump will not face consequences for this, not because of anything the SCOTUS did, but really because what evidence we have of wrongdoing is circumstantial at best. With the bribery case, you have to look at it through the lens of jurisprudence. What their decision said, was that as the law is CURRENTLY written, no wrongdoing happened. Like most crimes, bribery is very specific in the sequence of events to qualify. Per the statute, bribery involves a specific act being done for the purposes of compensation promised. So basically, if you were a senator, I come up to you and say I want you to vote on x bill and in return I will give you a briefcase of money. What happened in this specific case is that the mayor was asked to pick a specific contractor but no compensation was ever agreed upon. It was only after he chose them that they "gifted" him things. Is that immoral? Absolutely, but, as the law recognizes it, it was not a case of bribery. That's what SCOTUS decided on. Finally, I know Chevron is really contentious, but again personally, I hated the notion that the executive agencies had basically unlimited power with their "laws." Certain agencies never abused this power but a couple of very bad apples, (namely the ATF and DEA) abused the absolute shit out of it. This entire thing can be easily resolved by Congress which is what should have happened in the first place instead of Chevron.
>Just feels like all of Trump’s communications with Pence and the DOJ are going to be ruled as official so that the case just has no evidence and can’t establish motive. I mean, yeah, sorry, but you can't just prosecute your political opponents in the hopes they won't get elected, especially when you have no evidence
[удалено]
Legitimate grounds for a "both sides" argument here. The old politicians of all sides aren't passing the torch, and we're all worse off because of it.
Politicians will never willingly retire. We desperately need term limits for ALL elected positions.
Their chairs should all have eject buttons. As they vote, their districts vote on whether or not to eject them. If the vote hits 60%, then they get catapulted. A lot more people would be more involved.
Shocked Mitch McConnell face
It’s not both sides. Like it or not, the majority of republicans wanted Trump as the nominee, so he’s the nominee. Unlike the democrats who run on machine politics, superdelegates, and outright ignore the will of voters (Bernie vs Hilary)
Guys I just read in a leftist sub that now the Democrats could abuse this decision in their favor and stay in power forever.... But they won't, because differently from republicans, the Democrats have morals, always take the high road and their voters would never accept it. Facts? https://preview.redd.it/jm5cf2knaz9d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b2cf054bff52692a3ed411f08be3ab8652eb89ad
The phrasing of “should have gone nuclear, but didn’t” is particularly ironic considering how many times the Democrats invoked one nuclear option or another with regards to permanently changing congressional procedure to force something through. Every time they did that it bit them in the ass the very next election term.
Could you make the text a little smaller please?
I don’t get why libright would like this decision
We all knew it was goong to happen at oral arguments. Solicitor general basically gave up
Really it was over when they blocked Obama from picking a Supreme Court judge
Than God for Cocaine Mitch
Look I hate the dude, but he’s the only one in that entire god forsaken city that actually understands how to play the game, you guys are screwed when he’s done done
Tbh that maneuver to keep Garland off the court is one of the few things I appreciate about him. I have major issues though with republicans who are seemingly terrified of playing to win.
Still would be 5-4
Because it was an obvious function of the government that has always existed, and changing the executive office to where the attorney general is more important than the president, we would have an impressively disastrous shakeup in function of presidential power.
This week has been a win for jury trials and for reducing the power of the administrative state. Both are Ws for libertarians.
Because judges actually making rulings based on an originality interpretation as opposed to “expanding government power” interpretation is unbelievably based. Government power has gotten ridiculous and the fact that the Supreme Court is actually making judgements based on actual law instead of however they feel like is nice. The Trump ruling has been precedent since Mississippi v Johnson 1876, I’m not sure why people are freaking out about this
Hitler wasn't even elected, the president of Germany was pressured into appointing him as chancellor after Hitler lost the election. Then because the Nazis had power and Hindenburg was weak, it caused hindenburg to give the chancellor total authority in an emergency and then he died. The notion that Trump is a dictator and we are voting him in is astonishing, especially since we already had a Trump presidency. The American people aren't that stupid, they act like we have amnesia.
I love that Trump will certainly destroy democracy, enslave women, plunge us into war, and sell us to Putin if he gets elected. Yet somehow he never got around to doing any of that the first time he was elected President.
🍿 🤣
You guys should look at SCOTUS subreddit they’re having a meltdown
Can someone explain the situation to me as dumbed down as humanly possible
Congress is too stupid, incompetent, and partisan to impeach presidents who do bad acts. So people are trying to reach for any other concept of holding the president accountable, for things that a reasonable congress would have impeached him for. These avenues dont exist in the constitution and would need to be invented by congress to actually be legal. So they ran to the courts to try and make a new avenue to hold a president accountable, and were told that the constitution doesnt have that in it. And that the tradition they want to start would be stupid.
> Liberals > Auth Left I didn't know that one could fail a political compass test
They only loss with this ruling is that I can't call Dubya a war criminal anymore since everything during the Iraq War can be considered an *official act* during his presidency.
Judging by your placements you have no idea what a liberal is.
I've gotten to the point where I'm not sure if I'm libleft anymore or if all the people around me got lost.
Grab your popcorn boys, this election cycle’s gone be an insane ride.
So Auth Left is liberal now?
Libright should be pissed off too. Also I just typed in “libright” and it got autocorrected to “lubricator” so that’s something.
Someone doesn’t know where liberals are on the Political Compass… and that someone is OP
If the tables were flipped and the Supreme Court did this for something Biden did, do you think conservatives would have been normal about it?