This is the part that really caught me off guard in the opinion. Folks rightly focus on, well, the top-line. But this is just a complete misunderstanding of executive privilege or where it comes from, and is patently, grossly invented for one man and for one case
Everybody makes jokes about ordering drone strikes on Mar-a-Lago, etc. which is obviously insane.
But Biden should be using the ruling to "fire a shot across the bow" on some policy matters, if only to highlight the extent of SCOTUS' partisan corruption.
Right. The reason everyone (except, for some reason, the SCOTUS majority) understands Biden can't ST6/drone strike his opponent is because everyone understands it's (a) not authorized (b) not official (c) violates the basic social contract in multiple directions, so would be a gross abuse of office.
Which makes the decision all the less defensible. The hypothetical was raised at SCOTUS OA, at OA at DDC, and in the dissent, and at every stage Trump's counsel and, eventually, the majority just didn't address it, even though it has a very straightforward answer
I haven't--maybe I won't--put in writing all the gaming I've been doing assuming Biden drops out of the race but not the presidency and then resigns after Harris certifies her own election on January 6 to be pardoned.
