Constitution: People involved in insurrections should not be President.
Roberts court:...hmm, no, I don't see it.
Constitution:....
Roberts court: but the president should have immunity for crimes
I like that Hamilton, who before the current era would’ve been considered problems the most notable advocate of a powerful Executive branch, was like “oh, the president should for sure be subject to criminal prosecution”
Constitution: Even impeached officials are subject to criminal indictment, trial, judgment, and punishment.
Roberts court: But, I mean, not the president, right?
Constitution: That's not what I said.
Roberts: But surely, it's what you meant.
Constitution: No. And don't call me Shirley.
The reading that the Constitution only intends to make them subject to prosecution after being convicted in the Senate might make sense, and if the Court had ruled that way instead of... *gestures at horrible ruling*, they might have a shred of credibility left.
They were used to violence. Our ruling class is not. It's been 80 years since a real shooting war that included wealthy people.
It's pathetic watching people be intimidated by Steve Bannon and Donald Trump. Ike would mop the floor with those guys.
And the Heritage Foundation clown? 😂
The US supreme court is such a mixed bag.
On the one hand I liked that they are anti-governmental censorship, especially if it fits the conservative agenda.
But the decision about boomstocks and this presidential immuniry thing?
Its already concerning that convicted people could run for office.
I don't think the Constitution was blank. It says Presidents can be held accountable. Roberts doesn't have legislative power, and this was a gross usurpation of ordinary process.
I think they were testing the waters with the disqualification case. They just wrote out part of an Amendment, and everyone accepted it. So why not just write out other parts of the Constitution?
They also wrote that nothing done by the president can be used as evidence for any other criminal case. It’s a clear case of inventing law out of whole cloth and they don’t even try to justify it legally or historically.
Or more succinct:
Constitution: People involved in insurrections should not be Presidents
Roberts: The constitution says people involved in insurrections should be President for life.
With the eight amendment now dead the others will not survive long. That was part of the bill of rights they eliminated. Those ten amendments were placed there to protect the poor from the rich.
It does, but how much scrutiny do you think this court will give to whatever reason is given to them?
Every other court will throw it out, then get overturned by six cultists in black robes.
Constitution: but the impeachment clause specifically says impeachment doesn't mean the president can't also be prosecuted criminally, so clearly--
Roberts court: We love Daddy Trump
so, they gave the President immunity - do they realize their precious yam tits is NOT currently the President? That the current President now also has this immunity? I think Biden should go after them, using this gift he has been given...
It's probably fair to say that in a democracy it's up to the people to choose a President who isn't a total asshat who would abuse the office, and arguably we were pretty good at that for most of our history. But sometimes the Demos is a bunch of morons.
