1y ago

Legal experts: "Shameful" Supreme Court put US one vote away from "the end of democracy"

www.salon.com

"Unlikely Trump will ever be tried for the crimes he committed," says ex-Judge J. Michael Luttig

It’s not a hard question, or at least it hasn’t been before: Does the United States have a king – one empowered to do as they please without even the pretext of being governed by a law higher than their own word – or does it have a president? Since Donald Trump began claiming he enjoys absolute immunity from prosecution for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, two courts have issued rulings striking down this purported right, recognizing that one can have a democracy or a dictatorship, but not both.

“We cannot accept former President Trump’s claim that a President has unbounded authority to commit crimes that would neutralize the most fundamental check on executive power – the recognition and implementation of election results,” states the unanimous opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, issued this past February, upholding a lower court’s take on the question. “Nor can we sanction his apparent contention that the Executive has carte blanche to violate the rights of individual citizens to vote and have their votes cast.”

You can’t well keep a republic if it’s effectively legal to overthrow it. But at oral arguments last week, conservative justices on the Supreme Court – which took up the case rather than cosign the February ruling – appeared desperate to make the simple appear complex. Justice Samuel Alito, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, argued that accountability was what would actually lead to lawlessness.

139 comments

Illegitimate court, almost half were appointed by the accused and should not even be hearing this case. We are teetering on a dictatorship and this court is pulling the steering wheel even more that direction. I, for one, do not recognize any ruling from these corrupt judges.
- Three were appointed, which is 1/3rd of the nine justices. However, to me the most relevant figure is that five of the nine were appointed by GOP presidents that got into office losing the popular vote (Roberts & Alito by GWB, and Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and ACB by Trump).
  These justices, the majority of the court, do not and have never represented the US either by vote or ideology (even secondarily via the presidential/nominating vote), yet they are lifetime-appointed positions with unparalleled power over our lives and the continued existence of American democracy. They can choose to allow Trump to crown himself king, but they are already an effective monarchy.
  Roberts has been concerned about the Court's legitimacy the last decade. He should be - it isn't legitimate.
  
  Roberts doesn't give a flying fuck about his Court's legitimacy. He cares about the appearance of his Court's legitimacy.
  
  The Supreme Court is illegitimate because of what you said. By association, the presidency is also illegitimate. And since the Senate is undemocratic and Congress should have a couple thousand folks in it rather than 435, both of those are illegitimate.
  Thankfully, they still have the monopoly of violence.
- It’s an absolute clown show not based on law but on bribes, influence, and political alignment.
  
  Tale as old as time.
SCOTUS should not have taken the case. Full stop.
- Take it, laugh at the arguments and vote 9-0, maybe. Just get it settled.
I knew this SCOTUS was a joke, but this is unbelievable even for them. I cannot fathom that I've lived to see the day that a former president's lawyer argues that the sitting president ought to be able to perform political assassination and any number of justices, let alone a near, majority say "well that makes sense to me lol".
- This is just the natural development of unchecked conservatism, a plague long overdue for a cure.
  
  Reforms don't prevent end stage capitalism, they only delay it. It looks as though there isn't enough willpower for another delay.
  Early 20th century labor movements should not have negotiated with the 1% financial terrorists. It's as though we made peace with Russia, only a small respite in the class war while the 1% grew stronger then ever before.
- If they rule in favour I guess Biden can save your democracy with an undemocratic act. SCOTUS should agree then, right?
  
  He could, but he wouldn't. We'd just sigh and cross our fingers and hope decorum will prevail (spoiler alert)
republicans would be happy with the appearance of democracy - just like russia. Theres multiple names on the box, but you know the votes aren’t counted. trump would conveniently win every time. Strangely just like putin does.
- It's not a new observation that the GOP and Russia are on the same page about a lot of things; what isn't settled is what will be done about it
  
  So the reason they want to hold the illusion of democracy is because we know what to do with kings. And their families.
Me, a layman: GEE I WONDER IF SWEARING TO UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION MEANS HE SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DESTROY IT.
In all caps.
- Preserve, protect, defend. Didn't say anything about upholding or abiding by so everything's fine, what's the big deal? 😵‍💫
If the Court decides that the President has unbound authority then why shouldn't Joe Biden shoot Donald Trump with a gun? It's not illegal when the President does it!
- Biden could also argue that trump was a threat to America and its democracy.
  
  He wouldn't be wrong.
- Or maybe Biden could just have Seal Team 6 take out several Supreme Court Justices?
  
  Came here to say this. I wonder how Trollito would answer that very direct question?
- Stop saying this. They'd forget about him in 6 months
  
  What signaling, and who is “they,” and what is “this?”
- At that point Biden should sent every Republican to Gitmo. Appoint new SCOTUS judges that go and make that previous ruling null. Then he can't be charged because it wasn't a crime when he did it. Maybe that'll humble Republicans...hah yeah probably not.
- The main issue isn't necessarily the ethics of this.
  It's that the Republicans and the Democrats have different bases.
  Biden doing this would likely alienate moderate democrats, with many in the house/senate voting to support any impeachment inquiry. The same is not true for any Republican today.
  Their base has literally been "At least it's not a democrat."
  
  Idk the use of authoritarian power to suppress your enemies seems to get republicans off.
  I imagine it would be like when a local sports team is suddenly good and they pretend they were fans all along. They're in this for the spectacle, they just want to bray as loud as the people trying to talk.
  
  Biden's base is "at least he's not Trump" so I'm not sure.
I like how media always uses soft, snuggly words like "shameful" instead of real words like "fucking corrupt to the core and illegally installed".
- Yeah how are they not making a bigger point of the fact that the guy who cried about the stolen 2020 election and got pelt killed trying to stop the certification… is now on trial for illegally influencing the 2016 election and WINNING the presidency.
You gotta love the brazen, balls-to-the-wall craziness of the "accountability leads to lawlessness" argument. Especially coming from the supposed religious party, it's a stunning assertion, devoid of morality or even a sense of direction. It's just another version of the stupid fucking "too big to fail" argument.
The argument is this: Yes, the people in charge have committed crimes, but they're the top of the food chain now. If we take them out, there will be a power vacuum - the very chaos we are supposed to prevent! (no it's fucking not, retards, THAT's just the free market in action, you know, the thing you always masturbate about, you're supposed to be protecting these enterprises from falling into criminal behaviour, incentivising correct behaviour, and generally FIXING SYSTEMS not making them worse)
Idiots. What use preserving a corrupt system? It's just an admission that they're paying you. "Why would I change it now that I'm in a position to benefit from it?" Here's why: accepting money to hurt your own people is TREASON. Put that shit in your pipe and smoke it.
- I agree with everything but don't use the R word
Cowabunga it is then. I believe this is that part about the tree of liberty needing the blood of patriots or something.
If Biden has absolute immunity after a ruling to that effect, he would be within that authority to have the justices that voted for that rounded up and shot, then appoint a Supreme Court that will reverse it.
- I would love to see it.
  He won't, though. Repubs have counted on Dems to abide by the spirit of the rules even while they obstruct and dismantle everything with zero regard for a functioning democracy. The Dems would all be desperately reaching across the aisle for a compromise up until they are executed in the afternoon on January 20th.
  
  True, but could you imagine if he went completely off the rails after a ruling like that? Sets up a guillotine in front of Congress and starts marching Republicans out one after one.
  I'd watch the fuck out of that on Pay-per-view.
- pls pls pls
- That would hurt his fundraising though.
Well that was a horrifying read first thing in the morning.
- Reminds me of when that loser was president. Every morning there was some new horrifying thing to read about.
  
  Now some want to see that shit show return.
  Seriously, they should have argued that by the defense's own argument, Biden could jail, torture, and/or kill SCOTUS judges, political rivals such as tRump, and effectively commit any crime, so long as he was president when it happened and watch how fast these fascists turn tail.
  I don't understand this country and really wish the boomers would find another hobby besides redoing all the shit the generation before them tried to stop and making everyone's life worse to do it.
- Just your average day in the conservative/fascist multiverse.
  Why is this default lol
This illegitimate "supreme" court needs to be dismantled and rebuilt with normal justices. There is no place in a modern culture for conservatism or any other hate-based, oppressive ideology.
Conservatives should not be permitted to participate in government at any level. They seek only to control others and destroy progress. We should be speaking openly about the deadly dangers of conservatism and should exclude such toxic lifestyles from polite society.
- Court expansion is the only straightforward way. Put the corrupt ones in minority.
  
  Nope, shame them.
  Legit Biden needs to challenge it directly and have Trump's daughter and her husband arrested and jailed on charges he must fully admit are false and politically motivated. Say the Saudi money was to pay for classified information or something, they would either have to rethink their choice or the precedent is set with a Democrat in office which would allow literal and complete political control of the government.
  
  This is truly the only possible way. But, damn it would be nice to not have conservative pieces of shit anywhere near a position of authority over the normal people.
- normal justices
  I'll believe one when I see one. The profession is simply drowning in Federal Society freaks and Ivy League snobs.
  Conservatives should not be permitted to participate in government at any level.
  They've got a plurality, at least in the economic strata that control all the material wealth. I don't know how they stop participating in government while still retaining control of all this property.
  
  . I don't know how they stop participating in government while still retaining control of all this property.
  Excellent point. Historically, an infestation of unchecked conservatism has never been cured peacefully.
- ACAB; All Conservatives Are Bad
- You do realize democrats are conservatives right?
  
  Elaborate, please? How are Democrats Republicans, and if they aren't, what is the difference? I genuinely don't understand.
  
  You can't tell me that anything like a Conservative Democrat exists, much less that they control the leadership positions within the party. I won't believe it.
  
  I sure do.
  Neoliberals are conservatives. They have just a bit more tact than Republican conservatives, but they are still conservatives by every developed international standard. The Dems have a couple progressive members, but the majority are neoliberals, unfortunately.
  We don't have a progressive party. We have a conservative party and a more conservative party.
With a more representative electoral system like Ranked Choice, more people would have been driven to the polls. More people voting equals more democratic votes.
How we vote is controlled at the state level, so why haven't blue states passed electoral reform? Don't the democrats want more votes? Why would the democratic party say no to these extra votes?
Is keeping 3rd parties from joining the table worth sacrificing the nation to the Republican's nightmare?
- Electoral reform won't make blue states more blue. More people turning out doesn't matter if they're already voting for you, so you gain nothing. It would result in minor parties getting elected more often, which would weaken the power of the DNC. Obviously, the DNC doesn't want that.
  
  You are correct, the objective of ranked choice voting is not to empower the two existing parties. It is to create a system that it amenable to having more than two parties so of course the powers that be who benefit from that system don't want that - which is why it needs to be pressed because the two major block parties increasingly obstructionist and diverging will eventually cause a civil war. Smaller parties allow for more nuanced takes requiring cross party concensus and break up the stratification. If the game of democracy ends the Dems will end up with their heads on a plate so whatever kickbacks they receive from the status quo won't be worth jack.
  
  The hypothesis behind ranked choice is that enough people would vote for a third sane option that we don't have only choices between red and blue shitheads.
  If you have a lot of people ranking like: Blue -> Red -> Con Man
  And "moderates" ranking like: Red -> Con Man -> Blue
  Presumably the number of people who prefer basic red over a con man would mean the con man cannot take office. Not even if a large group of Trumpanzees vote: Con Man -> Red -> Blue
  Then, given that possibility, the assumption is that we would have viable third party candidates. If people could take third party candidates seriously, they are more likely to be incentivized to vote when they hate the favored top two.
  IDK about the presidency because of EC bullshit, but I am pretty certain it would work like that for state and local elections.
  
  It would result in minor parties getting elected more often, which would weaken the power of the DNC.
  We already functionally have that fight in the primaries (both in the DNC and RNC brackets). And we do have a rump base of Tea Party Republicans who routinely sabotage the Republican majority in the House. We have an even smaller rump base of progressives in the Dem party who mostly just exist to get censured by the Ethics Committee for being too antiwar or pro-Palestinian.
- Republicans and Democrats are working for the same corporate bosses. Third parties might actually want to represent the people.
- With a more representative electoral system like Ranked Choice, more people would have been driven to the polls.
  Ranked Choice only matters when you've got a third position that successfully triangulates between the other two positions.
  But when Democrats already do all the triangulation and Republicans simply push conspiracy theory to the farthest rightward fringe, and Republicans still win by large margins in big states, there's no material benefit to ranked choice voting.
  Is keeping 3rd parties from joining the table worth sacrificing the nation to the Republican’s nightmare?
  Any 3rd party simply becomes the whipping boy of the other two parties. Ranked choice won't change that. Republicans will still despise Libertarians and Democrats will still despise Greens.
  And a private corporate news media that profits off fear and resentment won't make these peripheral parties more appealing.
  
  So give it to us anyway and we’ll see if your predictions are true. Can’t hurt to find out.
  
  You have zero conception of how ranked choice voting works.
  
  Ranked Choice only matters when you’ve got a third position that successfully triangulates between the other two positions.
  Hold it!
  
  Uhh...
  What on earth are you talking about?
  
  But when Democrats already do all the triangulation
  They don't. And politics isn't so easily boiled down to a single axis - Democrats are focused on social issues that are easy to repeal. This will save the lives of minority groups right now, but allow billions to die from climate change.
- Literally yes. It is Pepsi and Coke. They act like they're not friends but they'd rather be the only soda on the block and make it harder for others.
  On top of that Dems feel they should always be a shoe in for victory compared to these dunderheads.
You guys don't get it yet? They all talk, they coordinated not to pass it then decided who can vote what to piss off the least amount of their constituents. That's it, it's all politics.
- The fact that your supreme court is even willing to deal with the question of whether a president should have absolute immunity pretty much says it all.
  
  True, but not hearing it would piss off the retarded half of the country. So they hear it, everyone panders to whoever they need, and here we are. This country is completely broken, both sides are garbage, it's all a show so they can get away with whatever they want and feed us just enough to keep us from rising up in any productive way. We are just the herd, we don't matter, we are a byproduct and we cultivate their money and lifestyle. They just can't tell us that openly. Even "voting", they will keep gerrymandering to keep it close. The dems will allow them to because dispite being widely more popular in the popular vote, they need the Villan of the Republicans to keep pushing things to the right to keep their game going. If they fought it, then someone would come along further to the left and the jig is up. Look what they did to Bernie, the only genuine candidate in my lifetime.
  I don't think very many people realize just how broken we are, and it is beyond any diplomatic way of fixing. We either ride the ship while it sinks or take the helm at this point. Capitalism+Citizens United+legal lobbiests/bribes+Insider trading allowed by congess members= you're gonna have a bad time. And the only people that can change it is congress themselves, so they as a whole need to decide to cost themselves millions and millions of dollars. Never gonna happen peacefully. Nothing surprises me with the Supreme Court. Or any other politician. They are actually human garbage scum of the earth willing to lie, cheat, and steal. Willing to back a country that is blowing up children and hospitals so they can make some money from arms dealers. Fuck them all. They are a stain on the history of humanity.
  /rant
  
  This is why they feel they've already won. They can say shit it court like the president has the authority to kill political opponents. It's a hail mary for them, but it doesn't matter at this point. The highest court in the US is now listening and thinking about that question.
Has anyone asked Trump that he believes if Biden want to execute him and his allies RIGHT NOW, it would be totally ok and Biden should get full immunity as well?
- Exactly. If they vote in any way that gives Trump the power he asks for, Biden could do all sorts of shit. Including arresting members of the supreme court.
- They always carefully qualify it as long as it's for official actions.
  That way, they can say anything Trump (or whatever future republican president) does is justified official business but they can't share details because it's classified, but if a dem does it, it's not official business and not justified.
  They're just setting up the gaslighting. Their playbook is so fucking obvious.
  
  Moderates everywhere: "Come on, you have to give them the benefit of the doubt. That's conspiracy talk."
If we ever get to the point where he gets placed above the law as our president, there's only one thing to do. I'll say no more.
- Hear hear
  
  Canada and Mexico are not at all far away. Easy to move to better accommodations.
- Soap box
  Ballot box <—We Are Here
  Ammo box <— But getting mighty close to Here
Just saying, if 45's acts are deemed political activity protected from prescription, 46 is still in office and is handed carte blanche to engage in all manner of unseemly counterfuckery. At the extreme, I believe Seal Team Six was mentioned, but I'm sure Biden could find lots of fun and creative ways to abuse unfettered executive power.
- The lawyers literally said that if the assassination is done for personal gain, but "as an official act", then it should fall under immunity.
The simplest solution is to remove a couple of conservative justices. Anybody could do it.
- Apparently the president could!
Pretty obvious that they have no shame. Just like trump.
stack the court. If the court is going to undermine any sort of accountability for criminals then the best thing to do is stack the court
- You will never see that because liberal democrats like Joe Biden hold civility and precedent with more primacy than halting a fascist uprising. This is why leftists claim that liberals always fall in line with fascism.
Let's just clearly state the obvious here:
The majority of Americans would like the President to be King and Emperor on a 4 year term.
They cannot wrap their heads around a government more complicated than 'one guy who makes the rules'.
- Only the conservatives think that. They seem hell-bent on inciting a new civil war.
  Fuck these "people". They demand chaos and death. Hopefully this time the normal people will finish the job.
- Majority? no. Like 30% of americans, yes.

139 comments