this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2024
1273 points (99.2% liked)

News

23014 readers
9 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A leading House Democrat is preparing a constitutional amendment in response to the Supreme Court’s landmark immunity ruling, seeking to reverse the decision “and ensure that no president is above the law.”

Rep. Joseph Morelle of New York, the top Democrat on the House Administration Committee, sent a letter to colleagues informing them of his intent to file the resolution, which would kickstart what’s traditionally a cumbersome amendment process.

“This amendment will do what SCOTUS failed to do — prioritize our democracy,” Morelle said in a statement to AP.

It’s the most significant legislative response yet to the decision this week from the court’s conservative majority, which stunned Washington and drew a sharp dissent from the court’s liberal justices warning of the perils to democracy, particularly as Trump seeks a return to the White House. Still, the effort stands almost no chance of succeeding in this Congress.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 240 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Ballsy move. I support this

[–] [email protected] 91 points 4 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (10 children)
[–] [email protected] 76 points 4 months ago (1 children)

At least it'll put the GOPers on record rejecting it.

[–] [email protected] 86 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Why would they care? They're proud of it. Their voters are proud of it.

[–] [email protected] 49 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

I think the Democrats need to do a much larger PSA about what exactly this means. I'm not sure 100% of Trumps cult, or many moderates, would be cool with knowing that Biden right now could have his DOJ lock up basically anyone in the US, with no reason needed, and then pardon them (his DOJ). This would all be actions that cannot be questioned, or used against the President as he has full immunity to:

  1. pardon anyone for anything
  2. command his DOJ

Those are the 2 examples that the Supreme Court majority gave as examples in their "ruling", and they gave both a completely made up unconstitutional condition of immunity that cannot be used against the President, or questioned/debated in any way. These 2 items are a gift to Trump in their hope that he takes the white house and will allow him to round up everyone he wants and put them in death camps if he wanted. He orders his DOJ to do it, pardons them all, and it's all above the law with no possible oversight available. But I think if more people on the right knew that Biden has this power right now, BUT!, if some on the left get their way and they replace Biden on the ballot, and they win, that person would now wield this absolute power.

Edit - Extra words =(

[–] [email protected] 16 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The most effective way to get the word out would be a demonstration on Biden's part. He could show how dangerous the power is and get rid of the traitorous fascists who created it at the same time.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 35 points 4 months ago (5 children)

What we need is for a Democratic president to do something bananas and claim immunity. I bet at least the less crazy Republicans would suddenly see how that could be a problem. Maybe if Joe set one of the conservative justices on fire as an official act.

But seriously, they have no problem with hypocrisy so that probably still wouldn't help.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 4 months ago

I think the Republicans would just use that as an excuse to do something even crazier at their first opportunity

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 4 months ago (1 children)

An amendment requires a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

It's worth a try but don't pin all your hopes on it.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 4 months ago (4 children)

And that's only half the battle - then 3/4 of the state legislatures must pass it as well

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 152 points 4 months ago (17 children)

IMO the only valid move for Biden right now asap, is to use his new immunity powers to invalidate his immunity powers, as a display of self checkmate.

Declare the full supreme court under threat of death has to go back and redo the decision, and all of them must vote to reverse it and remove the presidential immunity, or be hung.

This of course means "if you dont remove my ability to kill you, you will die".

Its the ultimate display of being handed ultimate power, and rejecting it through the power itself.

I cant think of any other move that makes sense really. It would be a headache in court but thats what the supreme justices get for making such a stupid ass decision.

[–] [email protected] 67 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

As far as I understand the decision (IANAL!), the definition of what constitutes an "Official Act" is left intentionally undefined, so in effect you can only claim this ultimate power if the courts like you in order to declare what you're doing official.

This means, if I understand it correctly, king powers for Trump and nothing for Biden. They'd just rule everything Biden is doing as not an official act.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The ruling happens after the act. Who knows what justices we’ll have by then.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I, for one, welcome our new unelected overlords.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 34 points 4 months ago (10 children)

*hanged.

"Hung" is a... different thing, which the male justices might see as a positive.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 4 months ago (9 children)

We are dealing with psychopaths who are itching to murder people and they vow to NOT recognize a free and fair election. VOTE people.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 4 months ago (6 children)

You realize immunity doesn't mean declare what you want, and you get it?

Also It's not illegal for Biden to say he is invalidating his immunity powers, it's just meaningless. Now if he punched Stormy Daniel's until she agreed to give syphilis to the court, that might be illegal acts that fall under his official duties.

Also, you need the courts behind whatever illegal thing you are going to do.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 4 months ago (3 children)
  1. Declare new rules
  2. Use any method, legal or otherwise, to enforce said rules
  3. Claim immunity

Congratulations. You've successfully used immunity to declare whatever you want.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
[–] [email protected] 99 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Finally someone with the fucking stones to call this fascistic slow crawl out for what it is, we can still stop this. If I'm a single issue voter who's only concern is not wanting to "live" under the yolk of a tyrannical monarch (me, but not single issue), then this has my attention. The clock is ticking, I hate it too.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Ooh, I haven't seen this turn of phrase in a while. I think you may want "yoke" over "yolk" here though.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 98 points 4 months ago (3 children)

The Constitution already guarantees this. SCOTUS is (as it is wont to do) brazenly defying it.

They should spend the rest of their natural lives in small concrete cells for the way they’ve deliberately and maliciously violated & stolen the rights of all Americans.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 4 months ago (1 children)

6 of them anyway. The other 3 seem to be good so far.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 78 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (21 children)

The patriotic thing to do for Biden is to go on a crime spree using his newly found immunity. All crimes must be part of core acts or official acts. See how long that takes

[–] [email protected] 39 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Seriously, he needs to "no not like that" this shit so far that the Republicans have no choice but to reign in their bullshit.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 4 months ago (1 children)

How are they expected to prosecute the "Biden Crime Family" if they can't prosecute the Kingpin?

[–] [email protected] 15 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I think this is unironically how they need to spin it. Convince the Republican base that this ruling is actually better for Biden than it is for Trump by repeating their own false narratives back to them - that the Biden Crime Family will get away with everything. Albeit, the things he could actually get away with are limited to what the court determines is an official act, and given the current makeup of the SCOTUS it's unlikely that they would side with him even if there were precedent, but he would be still almost untouchable under this new ruling no matter how you spin it.

Have a case against Joe Biden? Sorry, all of that evidence is now inadmissible in a court of law because it happened while he was president. Too bad, Republicans! Maybe if you were to... I dunno, pass a constitutional amendment that revoked that privilege. But oooooh nooooo, that would be horrible! Please, anything but that! All our nefarious plots would be undone and Biden would go to prison!

load more comments (20 replies)
[–] [email protected] 61 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Do this in tandem with Biden taking full advantage of the current immunity to utterly destroy the Trump campaign since it is a threat to democracy. We'll get that amendment passed in no time.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 4 months ago

And throw the corrupt justices in jail.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 58 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I agree with this political stunt to point out the Trump Courts illegitimacy.

The words of the constitution currently have no value to the Trump Court. They just invented Total Criminal Immunity for official acts, and anything said to a government employee isn't admissible in court. In a country founded on the idea no one is above the law.

This court is worse than the Dredd Scott court, they'll just rule up is down and any amendment meant to undermine their decision actually affirms it.

For those arguing that Biden couldn't do the funniest thing ever, I disagree. It truely doesn't matter if they rule it an unofficial act. The purpose of this ruling is to get Trump out of his 34 felonies he's already been convicted of because they used a lot of testimony from administration employees. So as long as that part of the ruling stands, Biden can still get away with anything. How do you convict with no witnesses.

[–] [email protected] 57 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

The constitution even says the president isn't immune and the federalist papers spells it out EXTREMELY clearly for any "originalist" to read.

Honestly the courts should call out SCOTUS on lying and making an invalid ruling that the constitution does not give them the authority to make, then just acting like it didn't happen.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 47 points 4 months ago (3 children)

ADDING an Amendment to a Document that the Supreme Court is IGNORING is the PERFECT way to Fix this!

[–] [email protected] 19 points 4 months ago

The SCOTUS will rule the president still has immunity, again...they don't care what the Constitution actually says.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 46 points 4 months ago (6 children)

A constitutional amendment implies that the constitution doesn't already cover this when, in its plain language, it definitely does. This provides an implicit concession that the court was right.

Don't give them that. Pack the court and issue the opposite decision at the earliest opportunity.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 35 points 4 months ago (4 children)

This will never happen. You can't get enough states to agree let alone Congress. Getting an amendment passed is near impossible in this climate. The mere fact that a Democrat proposed it mean FOX will demonize it as a threat to america

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 33 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Use amendment 14 section 3 to remove most of the Republicans from office.

Get rid of the idea of judicial review.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 31 points 4 months ago (3 children)

House Democrat... Great, so it's dead on arrival then.

Republicans control the House and they will never allow a vote on this.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Unless maybe biden threatens to use his immunity

[–] [email protected] 31 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Maybe my pig will shit out a gold nugget.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 4 months ago (2 children)

It puts a magnifying glass on the people obstructing the fight against blatant corruption. Which is a good start, and really the only thing that can be done with a simple majority.

Biden could also just start assassinating the nay sayers until the point gets through, too.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 4 months ago

Yay! I will have a garbage plate in Joe Morelle's honor the next time I am in Rochester.

(Although I do admit, I was probably gonna order the plate regardless)

[–] [email protected] 17 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

Good luck getting ~~-2/3-~~ 3/4 of the states to ratify it.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 4 months ago (1 children)

3/4 for amendments, actually.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago

Nothing pisses off congress more than having to do something and vote on legislation. Supreme Court made an enemy.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 months ago

This is the way.

load more comments
view more: next ›