this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2024
137 points (96.6% liked)

politics

19104 readers
3704 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Most notably, the high court will weigh if and when a former president can claim criminal immunity for acts committed while in office as Trump, who is currently on trial for allegedly concealing hush money payments to an adult film actress, fights three additional indictments over his attempts to overturn the 2020 election and his hoarding of classified documents.”

Trump’s appeal is set to come before the justices on Thursday.

top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Norgur@fedia.io 64 points 7 months ago (2 children)

From the outside, the US increasingly looks like an autocracy lead by those "judges" in the supreme court that apparently can not be touched in any way and somehow get to decide just about everything.

[–] darvocet@infosec.pub 63 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

This is also how it looks and feels from the inside. Biden better step up and use his “absolute presidential immunity” to save America if it comes to that.

[–] Bob_Robertson_IX@lemmy.world 18 points 7 months ago (2 children)

The thing is, the Supreme Court has no means of enforcing it's judgements. If enough of the people believe the Court is no longer legitimate then their judgements will cease to hold weight. If we ever reach that point then the country as we know it will likely be unable to recover.

[–] makatwork@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I currently believe the court is illegitimate. I wonder how many others already hold the same belief.

I also thnk the court can be saved, but something would need to be done about the blatanct corruption, such as the removal of certain judges

[–] Norgur@fedia.io 2 points 6 months ago

Yep, if that happens, the judiciary breaks down. If I do not need to respect the judgement of the supreme Court, why do I need.to respect the judgement of any court?

If this takes root among law enforcement (this seems to have already started big time) and among the general public, public order becomes impossible to maintain.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 29 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That's what happens when you delay judgment on a frivolous pleading from Trump.

They pile up at the deadline.

Maybe you should have denied cert, guys.

[–] Mirshe@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The worst part is that they ALLOW Trump to keep moving the goalposts. First it was "the President is completely immune from prosecution", then it was "anyone who's been President is immune from prosecution for anything they do while in office", now it's "well they're not completely immune, they just have to be impeached and convicted first".

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

And it's not just crimes committed while in office, but all crimes ever committed if you're ever president

[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If it passes, Obama should just walk right up to Trump and smack him like a bitch.

[–] Kyrgizion@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

While yelling "I pardon myself!" after every slap.

[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 17 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I would love for the AG to file an amicus brief on behalf of Biden saying “we eagerly look forward to the ruling so that we can act in accordance “

[–] bradv@lemmy.ca 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I don't want Biden breaking the law either.

[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If they rule a president isn’t culpable then they basically have determined the law doesn’t apply to the president. So he’s not breaking any laws s at that point.

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The President becomes a (temporary?) King.

[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 5 points 6 months ago

That’s exactly what Trump has been arguing for (dictator, but same difference). The outcome of this case will determine that.

[–] NeptuneOrbit@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

It's a bluff/logical argument.

If your spouse declared "I can sleep with whoever I want to!" you might download tinder and say "Oh really? How does it feel?"

[–] Ultragigagigantic@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Cutting off our own head to save face.

[–] RazorsLedge@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

To spiderface*