News
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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
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. 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.
view the rest of the comments
This is exactly why they didn’t want him to return, and charged him the minute he landed. This story will be testimony for the cruel and unusual punishment that the US has subjected 275+ migrants to with the deportations to CECOT. We just need them to get it in front of SCOTUS.
I also can’t imagine this will bode well for Bukele, given that El Salvador is a member of the ICC, and these actions are very clearly forbidden by the Rome Statute.
...you're joking, right? It's clear whose side they're on and it isn't the side of "I'm worried what history books will say about me." There's only three sane justices out of nine.
Who knows with the SC? They throw out a reasonable judgement every 3rd or 4th time. Sort of like insurance companies, gotta pay some claims to get good reviews.
Yeah I don't think it's a given they will support the president in everything. In fact, I foresee a future showdown with the Supreme Court that has potential to cause a constitutional crisis.
Court says one thing.. executive ignores and does another... what happens? The legitimacy of the government is hanging by a thread. The next couple years will decide the next 20
What evidence do you have for this? Honestly asking here.
I mean, the SCOTUS basically ruled the federal level electeds, appointeds, and hirees all have qualified immunity for "official acts", and "official acts" are anything Trump says. The SCOTUS also ruled the courts cannot stop the POTUS from doing anything, except in extremely narrow ways. The SCOTUS also ruled that every regulation is a government overreach. The SCOTUS also ruled money is speech. The SCOTUS also ruled that Trump can, at will, deploy the military on US soil to wage war against it's citizens.
That’s not entirely correct. “Official acts” are to be determined by the judge presiding over the case. Since no charges against the President have been filed or heard, “official acts” have yet to be legally defined.
So, official acts are going to be determined by judges appointed by Trump? How do you think that will work out?
BTW, charges were laid against Trump, and he was convicted. And then, served no jail time, and the sentence was commuted.
You’re talking about two different things. The charges that were heard, resulting in Trump’s conviction, were NYS charges. The federal charges have yet to be heard.
Trump cannot pardon state charges, so a state judge can determine an official act if there are new state charges.
So, in the event of state charges, as long as he runs for an office, he is immune from everything then, correct?
Nah. He was convicted of the state charges. That’s my point. He did not use immunity in that case. Therefore, “official acts” have yet to be defined by a judge.
He could be charged by the state as POTUS, and the state judge would determine of the acts that defined the criminal activity were “official acts.”
For a recent example, they said the president cannot deport people under the Alien Enemies Act and that the government needs to give people a reasonable timeline to get a lawyer and mount a legal defense.
The federal government lost that one (for now at least.. they sent the question of Alien Enemies Act back to lower courts.. but not habeus corpus)
What happens if in a couple of months, the federal government just sends some people to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act- directly ignoring the SC?
This would fit in with the administration's strategy. Do legally dubious things to cause chaos. Ie sending troops into LA totally unnecessarily. Why? Cause protests, legal doubts about whether or not federal government has a right to use military against domestic citizens.
Or the military parade.. or the tariffs.. defunding NOAA hoping for a destructive hurricane, etc. It's chaos for the sake of chaos. Same reason they deported the Venezuelans in the first place without habeas corpus.
It's a concerted and consistent effort to weaken the public institutions until they feel like enough is enough and deal the final blow. The moment where they finally roll the die and cross the Rubicon.
The SC is the only one that has the potential to stand up to the administration. I firmly believe there will be a showdown.
Note- The "official acts" thing has more nuance although that can of worms is not something I have time for. But when that ruling happened, I read the opinions the justices.
Not everything counts as an official act. For example Reagan's Iran Contra business would not have fallen under the definition.
You or I may not agree with the SC on every ruling. But the individuals on there, for the most part, are scholars of the constitution and hold a deep respect for it. It's why even people like Kavanaugh who was appointed by Trump will sometimes rule against his interests.
We may disagree on some interpretations but these people genuinely believe in the rule of law. This will inevitably clash with the administration.
And then said,"But we can't make him stop ignoring us"
Nothing at all.
I think it's more about building up the dictatorship, so nothing stands in his way.
This is a fucking laughable joke. You're kidding, right?
lol, ok. Which law? Bible law? Trump law?
Your response provides very little substance. If I were you I'd ask myself why am I spending my valuable time discussing things online if I'm not really engaging.
You really only hurt yourself in the long run with this type of attitude. I hope you're a teenager because then it's understandable. Either way unless you engage more than a "lol ok" I'll save my toilet time for something else.
The substance is "Judges aren't checking him, and have stated they cannot"
Nah, pushing 50, and have seen this dog and pony show get worse since the 80's, with people saying, "Don't worry! Our system will keep things in check!" as all of the checks are discarded.
Let me guess, just vote bloo no matter hoo, right?