Iain: It’s certainly fascinating watching them try to write a ruling that says “the last President should have absolute power to try to have his VP and half of Congress murdered in a coup, but the current one can’t just sack us all and get some competent constitutionalists in.”

i think the best way to understand the supreme court's conduct in trump v. united states is as an explicit effort to intervene in the 2024 election on behalf of the former president. it is a gross abuse of power on par with dred scott and deserves to be met with sanction from the elected branches.

My thoughts on the oral argument and what the Court is likely to do:

even if we avoid the worst consequences of this decision — which, as rick says, involve trump getting elected and then pardoning himself for his attempted coup (and likely trying again) — the court's actions should be seen as grounds for dramatic action to curb its power

It’s certainly fascinating watching them try to write a ruling that says “the last President should have absolute power to try to have his VP and half of Congress murdered in a coup, but the current one can’t just sack us all and get some competent constitutionalists in.”

Post