869

“May have just legalized murder by one individual”: Experts alarmed at “stunning” SCOTUS ruling (www.salon.com)

submitted 5 days ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

209 comments fedilink hide all child comments

(page 2) 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] zbyte64@awful.systems 6 points 5 days ago

What a can of worms. If Texas can ignore SCOTUS then with this ruling what's to stop the president from ordering his staff to do the same?

[-] sxan@midwest.social 8 points 5 days ago

I'm honestly not sure why he doesn't just have all of SCOTUS murdered, and if anyone in Congress moves against him, have then eliminated as well. Do Trump in, whole he's at it. Full on blood bath.

Tell me why not?

[-] Mog_fanatic@lemmy.world 6 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Couldn't they just vote that it wasn't an "official" presidential action and try him for murder? With this new ruling and the absurdly vague definitions of what is or isn't official it seems like absolutely anything is legal but only if the SCOTUS say it is. So right now it certainly seems like if you wear red you could do anything you want and if you wear blue you are screwed six ways to Sunday. I may be misunderstanding this whole thing tho.

[-] Zoboomafoo@slrpnk.net 3 points 4 days ago

Who's "they" and how do they feel about an air-mailed Slap Chop?

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments

this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2024

869 points (99.0% liked)

politics

18080 readers

2573 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News