b-boy bouiebaisse: roberts’ reasoning is fundamentally (lower-case “r”) anti-republican. i know we dunk on the framers here but roberts has issued a rebuke of the revolutionary assumption that concentrated, unaccountable power is a fundamental threat to liberty.

roberts’ reasoning is fundamentally (lower-case “r”) anti-republican. i know we dunk on the framers here but roberts has issued a rebuke of the revolutionary assumption that concentrated, unaccountable power is a fundamental threat to liberty.

It's just hilariously disingenuous. Imagine looking at, say, ALL OF HUMAN HISTORY and concluding that the biggest threat to liberty isn't abuse of power, but powerful people refraining from sufficiently wielding their authority out of fear that they might one day be held accountable.

roberts essentially ignores the purpose of separation of powers, which was not to create entirely separate spheres of action but to prevent the emergence of unchecked authority. instead, he says, separation of powers *demands* unchecked authority.

Unless it’s regulation, then the executive branch’s power is the judiciary’s.

Tell that to Seal Team 6.

Textbook propaganda in Coley's definition: rhetoric that invokes an ideal in the service of undermining that ideal. "Separation of powers!" but demolishes checks and balances "Religious liberty!" but privileges one religion's illiberalism "Originalism!" but completely misses the framers' intent

Ministers Of Propaganda w/Scott M. Coleysoundcloud.com Scott M. Coley is a lecturer in philosophy at Mount St. Mary’s University in Emmitsburg, Maryland. His research interests include philosophy of religion, moral epistemology, and political philosophy.

he certainly believes that applies to his supreme court

Remember how the media spent years trying to claim he was a moderate, when he was very clearly just a guy who A) boiled the frog slowly, and B) trying to build a strong and sturdy foundation for the generational project

While talking about liberty! It's literally an opinion that says we need a dictator to be free

In Roberts' defense: if Congress is immune from any repurcussions for their actions because of the speech and debate clause; and the Court is immune from any repurcussions because they say so; it's only fair to also make the President immune from any repurcussions.

Well, Congress is not so immune. The Menendez criminal prosecution demonstrates that.

www.politico.com/news/2024/05....

Judge rules Menendez's prosecutors can't show 'critical' evidencewww.politico.com It puts a hole in prosecutors' central claim against Menendez

This was anticipated. It does affect some, no denying that, but it doesn't protect what doesn't happen in congress. The evidence here related to favors done as a rep. They are getting the story in indirectly. NJ guy here, following the trial.

been thinking this naively and so glad to (finally) hear someone knowledgeable on the matter say so! me, pretty much thinking back to HS civics, wondering how it can be that Roberts decouples "separation of powers" from "checks and balances"

as long as his team is in the lead

It's not separation of powers in Robert's interpretation, it's non-overlapping magisteria.

operating, famously, within a system of unchecks and imbalances

It would be funny to see how fast they carved out exceptions for Biden's actions in the rare event that Biden wanted to do an action.

They know that won’t be a problem. The perfect man for the moment is President.

I'm not surprised Sotomayor's suitably blistering rebuttal uses The Federalist often... Have the "originalists" never friggin' read the documents that ACTUALLY SPELL OUT THE FRAMERS' INTENT?!?!?! This is pretty much exactly what they were trying to avoid, FFS.

The focus on “What Trump will do…” distracts from this all being the exact goal of the Unitary Executive. Which is just rebranded Monarchy.

Sadly, this has been a part of the Republican project for decades. Dick Cheney saw what happened in the Nixon era and decided that it should never happen again...

If it makes you feel any better he doesn’t mean a word of it and he would instantly rule the other way if Biden used even a speck of official power for inequitable partisan advantage

Oh, you know what? That's the point. Not merely to ignore the purpose but to bury it. Fetishizing the separation of powers as a random thing that just exists. With a religious significance of some kind, but not one that must be dragged into reality. The Virgin BIrth of US jurisprudence

Not to mention the disregard of The Constitution by those certain members of the SCOTUS. They have violated their oath to uphold it. Corrupt.

I mean, he also ignored that prosecution is the executive branch. Acting on the executive branch in this case. There is no separation of powers argument.

He ignores the balance of power principle the most.

even the most half-assed taught-by-the-gym-teacher-because-we-can't-afford-a-history-teacher grade-school social studies class calls it "checks and balances"

Really well put and insightful point, Jamelle. I’m learning a lot from you.

I hope the founders come and pace around his room every night, haranguing him endlessly about his betrayal of the foundational principles of the Constitution and the general shredding thereof. I hope they haunt him until the end of his life.

It’s really amazing that the institutionalist conservative is committed to instituting a monarchical, imperial presidency. Even if it’s a purely partisan move there were other ways to accomplish that narrow goal. They seem to truly just be philosophical authoritarians.

Well, they don’t believe in separation of church and state either.

But hasn't he just put that power in the hands of the judiciary now? Since they decide what's immune and what not. How is that separating the executive from the other branches?

Seems to me that following that argument presidents can just appoint whomever they want now to court, Senate confirmation is not necessary. Can't have congress interfering with executive like that. They are mere "advisory." Wonder what would happen if Biden sent 6 new justices their way?

Roberts objects? He's removed from bench by Secret Service. Who you going to call Roberts? Admittedly Trump would simply counter strike the same way. But keep this up for a few administrations and you get rid of lifetime appointments.

If Trump gets into power then the presidency will be a lifetime appointment until Don Jr is ready to blow his way in.

Preach. And great job at the Georgetown Law panel today!

Hot take: unchecked authority is unambiguously bad. Do these people not know how to read history?

He protects the power. Not the checks.

Politicians can have a little fief, as a treat.

Well, in that case Biden ought to do something that tests that, like, say, imprison Trump right now using the new powers that the SCOTUS have greenlighted.

I keep coming back to the fact that these people make such a big deal about calling themselves originalists and the framers could not possibly have been more clear on this specific issue I know the hypocrisy is the point, but still

I assume it's like most things where "originalists" were at one point a niche philosophy of legal scholar who tried to adhere as close as possible to the intention of the original texts by the founding fathers, and then a bunch of libertarians got poured into it and cooked guys like Gorsuch.

yes. their raison d’etre was literally in the opening sentences of declaration of independence, dogs

One of the few completely correct, uncorrupted ideals of the American revolution is "Kings are anathema to human liberty."

I would joke that they've declared the Declaration of Independence unconstitutional, but it doesn't feel like a joke. These were all "official acts" as well.

“He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.” And God bless him for he was about his Official business.

Oh God that is such a great point.

This is a good point, but I'm pretty sure declaring independence from the US was already unconstitutional.

John Roberts and his other kings and one queen have ended America's democracy today.

have been imagining john adams' bones spinning themselves into a ball of flame hot enough to power the eastern seaboard for a month

It’s wild that he said a president violating federal law is a hypothetical. What does he think the safe he’s ruling on is about?!

Post