On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that American presidents have “absolute immunity” from prosecution for any “official acts” they take while in office. For President Joe Biden, this should be great news. Suddenly a host of previously unthinkable options have opened up to him: He could dispatch Seal Team 6 to Mar-A-Lago with orders to neutralize the “primary threat to freedom and democracy” in the United States. He could issue an edict that all digital or physical evidence of his debate performance last week be destroyed. Or he could just use this chilling partisan decision, the latest 6-3 ruling in a term that was characterized by a staggering number of them, as an opportunity to finally embrace the movement to reform the Supreme Court.

But Biden is not planning to do any of that. Shortly after the Supreme Court delivered its decision in Trump v. The United States, the Biden campaign held a press call with surrogates, including Harry Dunn, a Capitol police officer who was on duty the day Trump supporters stormed the building on Jan. 6; Reps. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) and Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas); and deputy campaign manager Quentin Fulks.

Their message was simple: It’s terrifying to contemplate what Donald Trump might do with these powers if he’s reelected.

“We have to do everything in our power to stop him,” Fulks said.

Everything, that is, except take material action to rein in the increasingly lawless and openly right-wing Supreme Court.

  • Steal Wool@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Fuck the Biden campaign, that should be their whole platform now. But instead they use it to threaten us.

    Edit: still, im voting for him…

    • kiljoy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      That edit is the whole problem democrats don’t have any consequences for being shitty. If this election is so important than fucking do something popular Jesus Christ.

      • Fades@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Edit: still, im voting for him…

        That edit is the whole problem democrats don’t have any consequences for being shitty.

        yeah! Let’s just not vote at all and hand trump and the federalist society the election!

        If this election is so important than fucking do something popular Jesus Christ.

        Biden has done a FUCK TON of stuff for the average american, especially in the face of the do-nothing MAGA congress. You’re mad because Biden isn’t immediately whipping his dick out to fuck over the supreme court with the insane amount of power they just handed him? Grow the fuck up, jesus christ. The LAST thing we need are knee-jerk emotional reactions instead of calculated tactics.

        • derek@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          I don’t immediately disagree with this. Reactionary decisions breed instability and progress requires a foundation. Though with the Nation’s already flawed fundaments being actively bulldozed I am compelled to ask: what calculated tactics may we reasonably trust are in play?

          Biden has played politics well enough. I’ll grant that. Especially while navigating the obscenely successful obstructionist Republican strategies which strangle the Legislature. The fact he’s accomplished anything of note in this climate could reasonably be spun as impressive.

          Is the bar for America’s “left-wing” set so low, and the expectation they’ll cow to corporate interest so common (and rightly so), that this spin, these accomplishments, are honestly lauded as the laurels on which the Biden administration may ride to a second term? Forgiving student debt. Ensuring fairer access to home loans. Expanding healthcare coverage for veterans. All good things! No doubt. Is it fair to expect the American people to think this is enough? While higher education, homes, and healthcare become increasingly inaccessible?

          Addressing symptoms in this way placates the agitated while maintaining the status quo and setting precedent to, ostensibly, address root cause at a later time. It assumes that the wheel of progress turns slowly. That progress will win out if it is patient and persistent and noble.

          The past twelve years have proven this is not so.

          The religious right-wing has worked diligently over the last ~70 years to create the current theocratic zeitgeist on which the MAGA parasite is parading to victory. It is not a sudden and surprising uncoordinated incidental movement preying on the Bible belt’s misguided moral anxieties. Haphazardly funneling the reactionary rhetoric of today into a Four Years Hate to seize power and further the ideology of Paul Weyrich. No. It is a dedicated effort. A calculated tactic. Others are replicating it and fascism is on the rise world 'round.

          Successful opposition to the oligarchy-backed, well organized, long-planned, and now popular out and proud American fascist hate campaign will not be found in treating symptoms or placating concerned citizens or maintaining the status quo. What, then, is the Progressive answer? What tactic is the Biden Administration, or the Democratic Party, or anyone anywhere deploying that we should “grow the fuck up” and wait to see the impact of? Why should I, or any concerned citizen, trust that this is so?

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    234
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Biden once again bringing a deck of cards to a gunfight because responding effectively and proportionally in a situation that desperatetly calls for it wOuLd bE DiVisiVE.

    THIS position is a justification for calling for him to step down from the candidacy, because refusing to even consider reforming - let alone packing (or, dare I say, the newly-revealed presidentially-legal-if-“official” extralegal and violent unpacking) the Supreme Court is very obviously going to lead to the long term failure of not only the Democratic Party, but democracy in this country in general.

    • Blackbeard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      I wish I could disagree with you but I just can’t anymore. I fear that we will look back on this as the breaking point.

    • Coach@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      109
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      This. Right. Here.

      It’s fine if Biden doesn’t want to play by the new rules – admirable in fact – but we have to understand that this is the game we’re playing now. Either learn to play the game or take your ball and go home.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        36
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s fine if Biden doesn’t want to play by the new rules – admirable in fact

        It’s admirable, but not fine! Biden must play by the new rules; the Supreme Court gave him no choice.

        “Taking the high road” doesn’t just make him lose, it also dooms all the rest of us! It is unethical for him to be that selfish.

    • Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      27
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Biden isn’t a fascist and neither are the people he appointed. Even if he gave an illegal order, it wouldn’t be followed because his administration isn’t stocked with incompetent lackies chosen for their loyalty alone.

      • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        24
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Gaza protests: US officials who have quit over Biden’s support of Israel

        Stacy Gilbert, who served in the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration, left in late May. She said she resigned over an administration report to Congress that she said falsely stated Israel was not blocking humanitarian aid to Gaza.

        Alexander Smith, a contractor for USAID, quit in late May, alleging censorship after the U.S. foreign aid agency canceled publication of his presentation on maternal and child mortality among Palestinians. The agency said it had not gone through proper review and approval.

        Looks like everyone that doesn’t get in line with Blue MAGA is getting the boot to me.

        • Beetschnapps@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          18
          ·
          5 months ago

          So you’ve found examples of folks moving on… while ignoring who they are…. Call things “blue maga” but that’s your label. You are “blue maga”… you make this shit up.

          • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            21
            arrow-down
            18
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Folks being censored by the Biden administration and the entire administration falling in line to intentionally lie, censor and support Genocide you mean?

            People here are really jumping to ignore the Genocide part.

            • Beetschnapps@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              19
              ·
              5 months ago

              I’m so censored! So genocide! So what do you mean? Supporting genocide is just a by-product of language? Genocide is what we do? Do you understand the word or are you just desperate to repeat it? The Biden administration has FORCED me so much… so who can say?

                • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  8
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  I didn’t even realize I was commenting on your thread until I got to the genocide shit. Yeah Biden sucks. Yes Israel is perpetrating genocide.

                  Trump would have Palestinians pushed into the sea by tanks with Zionists jumping off and popping settlements like a real time strategy game. Then everyone would sing hallelujah what a savior as extremist Christians and extremist Jews join hands and wait to receive their Lord and Savior at their new multi-million dollar beachfront mcmansions right over the literal bodies of every Palestinian child in existence.

                  Stop Trump! Vote!

  • prime_number_314159@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    “Official Acts” are the acts within the powers granted by the constitution, and acts of Congress. Biden (and any future presidents) can’t just punch someone, say “I officially punch you!” and get off the hook.

    This is similar to the immunity every judge and prosecutor in the country gets. Basically, inb4 the only result of this ruling is a few charges against Trump are dropped.

    • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      The official vs unofficial part will be determined by the courts. I assume most cases involving the President will go to the Supreme Court. Do you see the issue here?

      • Akuden@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        You assumed wrong, as the supreme court said the trails court will determine what is and isn’t an official act. What’s the problem?

        First responders get immunity while they are doing their duty. Judges do too. What exactly is the problem? Breaking the law CANNOT be an official act.

        • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Breaking the law has been an official act for fucking ever. Did Washington break the law when he became the first president of the United States? Obama droned a US citizen. Andrew Jackson said fuck you to the supreme Court and enforced the trail of tears on the sad remnants of the native population that didn’t die to illness, battle, or reprisal attacks.

          The problem, one of many, is the courts. These fucking judges get appointed en masse. Fucking scumbags. And if you have enough money, clout, or both you get to appeal to the Trump supreme court. I wonder if they would rule differently on an act depending on which party had the presidency.

        • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Why exactly do you think the Supreme Court made a whole ruling about former-presidents being immune to prosecution for official acts if you think breaking the law makes something not an official act? There would never be a case when the president would need this protection because they were either making an official act or making an illegal act, never both.

          And just to be clear, you’re wrong and all the justices on both sides are explicitly talking about doing illegal things while also doing official things.

          • Akuden@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Because they are protecting our republic. A president shouldn’t fear being prosecuted by someone for their official acts when they are out of office, such as a political rival.

            And no, something illegal cannot be official.

            • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              If something illegal cannot be official then this protection never applies. Someone would prosecute him for an illegal act, he’d invoke the defense of doing an official act, and then the judge would say “but the conduct you’re being prosecuted for is illegal, so if you did it, it couldn’t have been an official act and immunity does not apply”.

              And again, none of the justices on either side of the ruling are making this absurd and nonsensical claim.

              • Akuden@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                5 months ago

                None of the judges on either side are making this absurd claim because it’s in the constitution article 2 section 3 and has been settled for 200 years. The president has to follow the law.

    • FlaminGoku@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      He can officially defend the country and constitution by ordering the arrest of all of the seditious representatives, and remove the recent supreme courts justices for lying under oath.

  • chakan2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Here’s the difference…when Trump gets in office, 3 of the Supreme Court justices are going to fall out the window.

    Biden doesn’t think it’s a big deal.

  • p5yk0t1km1r4ge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Joe isn’t going to DO SHIT and we are FUCKED and the alarm bells NEED TO BE RINGING ALL OVER THIS COUNTRY

      • chaogomu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        If Trump wins, Biden and his wife will both likely be killed at Trump’s orders. Trump is already calling for Military Tribunals for his political enemies. Show trials where he can have them all sentenced to death.

        Biden’s name is on Trumps list, right up near the top.

      • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        Exactly, which is why he should say “Fuck it!” abuse his power to the n-th degree to save American democracy and then face the consequences.

        If I’m Biden I’d have a bill introduce to reform SCOTUS, Presidential powers, campaign finance, election administration, and more and say, “I expect this on my desk in a weeks time. I fear for the safety of our nation and our elected leaders if these issues go unaddressed.”

        Then if a week goes by and no bill is ready to sign, two Representatives and two Senators (two Rs and two Ds) go missing. Another week? Another four go missing. This can easily repeat for 12 weeks before a majority of the Senate goes missing. Then, perhaps, some family members of the remaining legislators go missing. 🤷

        Unprecedented times require unprecedented acts.

        • Podunk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          5 months ago

          In what way does that not lead to immediate civil war and half the country seeing that the lies they were told on fox news were true? That doesnt fix anything long term, or short, but it does guarantee no democrat would be elected for the next 100 years. If biden did that, i would no longer support him either.

          Seriously, what world do you live in where violence does not beget more violence? Im not saying that something radical doesnt need to be done, but is sure as fuck isnt that.

          • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            5 months ago

            Fox News has actually been selling the lie that this decision doesn’t change anything and impeachment will curtail any abuse of power. The frog will be slowly boiled to death at this rate. We can try to turn down the temperature or we can start pouring lava in the pot to make the frog go, “Oh, fuck that noise!”

                • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  I’m not sure if you’re agreeing with me or not. I’m not even really sure what I’m agreeing with.

                  I said that because the impeachments were fully along party lines. If a major party won’t hold its own members accountable, then the whole charade falls apart.

                  That was the only option, and I’m sure Pelosi et al knew the outcome long before they started it, but it still had to be done. Unfortunately it was far, far too late.

                  Edit oh I understand now. I totally misinterpreted what you were saying and I don’t know how. Yes. Well…I wouldn’t say fox just reporteds lies and propaganda. Their “news” is, however, is consistently incomplete and heavily opinionated.

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            for one, fuck republicans if they’re going to do that. You think they care if they start the war or not? They don’t give a shit, they’ll do it if they want to, otherwise they won’t fucking do shit.

            secondly, how the fuck does this start the next civil war, trump did vastly more in his time in office, and even outside of office, the supreme court has done more than he has in his entire term. I see no relevance to the republicans here, most of these decisions are just fucking stupid. One of them is unconstitutional (the most recent one)

            • Podunk@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              The post above me was literally advocating a policy of systematic execution of political opponents until the rest of congress capitulate to demands, and you dumb fucks cant understand that would have severe repercussions for the unity of the american population? How does that not dissolve the union or cause literal anarchy in the streets? Those fuckers stormed the capitol for way less. They would absolutely murder their neighbors because lindsay graham was sent to the gilloutine. If you want to out crazy a crazy person, you will absolutely lose. These fuckers have practice. Dont advocate burning the rest of our fragile system down. Help keep it standing. This isnt a wall we want to fall.

  • UsernameHere@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    5 months ago

    I don’t understand how he can make changes to the Supreme Court using this new Supreme Court ruling. My understanding is that change requires Congress and the recent ruling just means he can’t be held accountable for crimes committed as official acts.

    What crimes are being suggested to change the Supreme Court?

    • Supervivens@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      Kill the judges using his own immunity granted by them. Elect new ones that will take away this immunity. They are very obviously a threat to democracy and they themselves have said that whether something is an official order cannot be questioned.

      • Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        He doesn’t need to kill them. Take all their personal property using eminent domain, sell all their office space in D.C. and close the court buildings where they operate. Leave them running SCOTUS out of a store front in a strip mall in the most crime ridden part of D.C. He could even use extraordinary rendition (Thanks Dubya) to nab their families and hold them in black sites in foreign countries. There are any number of non-lethal official acts that he can use to make their lives a living hell until they consent to make the changes we need to keep this country safe from fascism. When your enemy hands you a gun, use it.

      • Infynis@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Can you cite that last part? I didn’t read the whole brief, and that wasn’t in the summaries I saw

          • Akuden@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            No, the president has immunity during official duties much like a first responder. If they break the law that isn’t an official duty.

            • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Any power outlined in the constitution is absolutely official, which arguably covers murder via the military. But if you murder the people who would say something isn’t official, an entire world of options opens up. The survivors will either agree with you or want to not die.

              Which is notably why it’s so dangerous under Trump. Trump can get the broad immunity without murdering most of the court (and rightfully setting off alarm bells/triggering rebellion) first.

                • Billiam@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  But that’s not all. They also ruled that you can’t use official acts in the process of determining what wasn’t an official act. If Biden ordered the military to assassinate Trump, the fact that the President is Constitutionally the head of the military and that the military must obey orders from the President couldn’t be used as evidence that he gave an illegal order.

                  This situation is fucked up.

                • grue@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  But who’s going to do the impeaching when everyone who would oppose it can simply also be killed?

                • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  You can be impeached for basically anything. But you still need 67 votes in the senate to be removed. And senators can also be murdered. Being able to have immunity for murder as long as you murder anyone who would deny it is a self-empowering ability.

                • henfredemars@infosec.pub
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Can you even consider the killing in the impeachment trial? He has absolute immunity from criminal acts.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      Biden has been fighting Congress since he took office on this…

      When we had the numbers, he said he’d “look into it” and then we didn’t hear back till after the midterms when we no longer had the numbers to do it.

      The reason it wasn’t done when we could, is Joe Biden.

      https://abcnews.go.com/US/biden-support-expanding-supreme-court-white-house/story?id=85703773

      After he was elected, Biden appointed a 36-member bipartisan commission to study potential changes to the Supreme Court – including the addition of more seats, as well as term limits and a code of ethics for justices.

      The commission unanimously adopted a report late last year, in which they warned that excessive change to the institution could cause democracy to regress in the future.

      The panel found “considerable” support for 18-year term limits for justices, but the issue of expanding the court beyond nine seats was met with “profound disagreement.”

      Because the bipartisan commission claimed fixing it would do more harm then letting the current corrupt court do shit like repeal Roe v Wade and all the other shit Biden now says was so terrible.

      But if elected again, he still won’t fix.

      That’s a big reason Biden has a 37% approval rating, he opposed actually fixing things. And just wants to maintain the status quo.

      It’s not a valid long term strategy.

      Moderates just want to complain, they don’t want to actually fix shit. We’ve been ignoring it since Obama’s pick was stolen, ignoring it more won’t magically solve it.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          He could throw them in prison extrajudicially for actions against the US government including treason for their support of 1/6… Hell, he can ship em to Gitmo even tho theyre US citizens.

          Although I’ve seen far less civilized but more permanent suggestions.

          It’s not even a crime, or false accusation.

          And as an official act, no one can go after Biden for it.

          If Biden believes trump is the threat he says he is, then he needs to do that. But ideally he would have expanded the SC back in 2021 when we had the numbers.

          Like, we’re backed into this corner because Biden decided to walk into it…

          • UsernameHere@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            My understanding is many supporters of Biden don’t want a coup or fascism.

            If Biden engages in those acts wouldn’t that result in less votes and support? And also increase the chances republicans get away with a coup/facism?

            Also, my understanding is a supermajority is required in Congress to change the Supreme Court. Which we did not have in 2021. Am I wrong?

            • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              If Biden engages in those acts wouldn’t that result in less votes and support? And also increase the chances republicans get away with a coup/facism?

              Republicans are gonna republican. But we’re literally fight fascism so…

              https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

              Also, my understanding is a supermajority is required in Congress to change the Supreme Court. Which we did not have in 2021. Am I wrong?

              Can be done with a simple majority, which we had till 2022. If Dems really fought and tossed out the filibuster, but they didn’t.

              Instead Biden created a bipartisan committee to investigate if the corrupt Republican SC should be allowed to stand as is. He gave them 6 months, and after 2 years (as soon as Dems.lost the House) they decided we should just let it go.

              At every step, Biden and party leadership refuse to fight.

              We can’t afford that. If trump is as dangerous as they say (he is) then we need to actually fight.

              Even if we lose, it motivates voters for the next election.

              But he could still, this very day, arrest them for treason and jail them indefinitely and no one can stop him due to the SC’s recent ruling.

              • UsernameHere@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                From what I’ve read, impeaching a Supreme Court justice requires the same impeachment process as the president so 2/3rds. Not a simple majority.

                But even if it could be done with a simple majority, your statement depends on the vote of Manchin and Sinema.

                • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  He could throw them in prison extrajudicially for actions against the US government including treason for their support of 1/6… Hell, he can ship em to Gitmo even tho theyre US citizens.

                  I didn’t say anything about impeachment…

                  From 2020-2022 we could have added justices with a simple majority after throwing out the filibuster.

                  We didn’t.

                  We are running out of actions because we are running out of time. I wish Biden wouldn’t have wasted those two years with a bipartisan commission to find out if everything was fine…

                  But he did.

                  Due to the recent SC ruling, Biden faces no punishment for actions committed in office. So he can jail Clarence and everyone else who’s corrupt in jail and thus remove the conservative majority. Hell, legally he can have them executed for treason without trial, but I think Gitmo and no communication is more than enough.

                  There’s lots of people in GITMO who have done far less

                  If trump is the threat Biden says (he is) then we need to do whatever we can to prevent trump.

                  Do you disagree that trump is an existential threat to American democracy and we may never recover if he becomes president.

      • qprimed@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        The reason it wasn’t done when we could, is Joe Biden.

        if I recall correctly, the words were… “nothing will fundamentally change”. a man of his word.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      I don’t understand how he can make changes to the Supreme Court using this new Supreme Court ruling. My understanding is that change requires Congress

      1. Just do it.

      2. Have anyone who tries to stop you (including Congresspeople who would vote against it) killed.

      3. Call it an “official act.”

      That’s legal now.

      • Akuden@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Nope. That is not within the duties of the president. Declaring something official doesn’t make it official.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          You say that as if it wouldn’t be a moot point once SCOTUS has five or six vacancies on it all at once, along with who knows how many in the Senate.

          That’s how power actually works, you know. Don’t believe me? Watch Saddam Hussein’s 1979 purge to see how it goes down.

          That’s the kind of power that exists here in the US now, thanks to the fascist Supreme Court. If Biden doesn’t use it against itself in order to destroy it, the next Republican President will use it to consolidate his own rule much the same way Saddam did.

            • grue@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              What a useless non-response.

              You can be in denial all you want, but the factual reality is that, since this SCOTUS ruling, the US is an autocracy now. Practically speaking, the only way for it to stop being such in the short term is for the autocrat (i.e., Biden) to forcibly change it back.

              • Akuden@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                5 months ago

                That’s because your fantastical scenario is exactly that, fantasy. You do not understand whatsoever the implications of the ruling because you cannot grasp the duty of the president, checks and balances, and the rule of law. Did they stop teaching civics in school?7

                • grue@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Well golly gee, mister, if I’m so ignorant can you please explain to me how I’m wrong? Be specific, now!

                  If not, then by all means, please continue with your point-free ad-hominem attacks. It’s entertaining! 🍿

      • UsernameHere@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        What about the voters that are voting Biden because they don’t want a coup or assassinations? Biden would lose all those votes. Then how does he win the election?

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago
          1. Biden replaces the treasonous court by any means necessary.
          2. The Democratic Party “strongly condemns” his “rogue” actions and chooses another candidate.
          3. Anti-coup and anti-assassination voters vote for that candidate ('cause who’re they gonna pick otherwise, Trump? LOL).

          Obviously it’s ethically horrific, but (from utilitarian and game theory perspectives) it’s the least-bad option I can think of right now.

    • calabast@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yeah, that’s a good point, I’ve seen a lot of suggestions that seem to go beyond the scope of this terrible terrible ruling. I guess he could order the military to prevent congress and the SC from meeting or doing anything. Then he could just issue executive orders, or declare war on a faction of politicians trying to stage a coup maybe?

      • UsernameHere@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        That’s what it sounded like to me also but I didn’t want to jump to conclusions.

        Are these people suggesting that Biden assassinate politicians and stage a coup arguing in good faith? Seems like something that would be suggested by an enemy nation.

        • WraithGear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Basically, the Supreme Court decides what is an official act, so any actions Biden would use this new power for to correct this would be ruled over by the hostile Supreme Court. So the hostile Supreme Court would have to be removed, then the replacement could remove the right for the president to do all this. The first action would have to be to attack the Supreme Court. How bleak. Dammed if you do and SUPER dammed if you don’t

        • calabast@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          I mean, if Trump wins the election, it might literally be our last election. They have a plan to dismantle our government. So no, unfortunately, I think they’re arguing in good faith, trying to use this tool the GOP has set up against them to save the country.

  • ZK686@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    38
    ·
    5 months ago

    Because it’s a stupid idea. Some Democrats and Liberals want to completely change our political system, judicial system, and Constitution, because thy’re not getting their way? It’s fucking stupid. Trump was in office and was able to appoint who he wanted…it’s pure luck that things worked out in his favor during his Presidency… t’s a cycle that will continue when he’s long gone and some hardcore liberal President does the same… we don’t change everything because one side is upset. STFU Democrats.

      • ZK686@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        5 months ago

        Ah yes, spoken like a true liberal. I’m a fucking moron for having a different opinion.

        • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          5 months ago

          No, you’re a moron for having a moronic opinion.

          Trump had as many appointments because McConnells Senate held up hearing Garlands nomination (not to mention a record number of lower court appointments). And then rushed in Gorsuch. And then when RBG died even closer to an election, they showed their hypocrisy with Barrett.

          And the entire point of Project 2025 is to replace a metric shitton of non-political merit-based federal jobs with political appointments so he can staff them full of cronies and circumvent checks and balances that way. Congress won’t outlaw hormonal birth control? No worries, FDA can do that. Unitary Executive Theory.

          They do what they want, when they want, until somebody stops them. And now, legally, nobody can stop them. Not without using the monkeys paw that this court just handed Biden.

      • ZK686@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        5 months ago

        I love how I can be called every single name in the book on Lemmy and Reddit for having a different opinion, but for some reason, when I retaliate, I’m banned, threatened, or warned… funny how ultra Liberal these sites have become…

        • reddwarf@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          “I love how I can be called every single name in the book on Lemmy and Reddit for having a different opinion”
          Yes, everybody else is crazy and wrong, not you. Absolutely do not question your stance if everybody opposes you, just double down on crying about it and call it not fair.

          “funny how ultra Liberal these sites have become…”
          I call BS on this one, you always found these sites unsavory and liberal, you just made an account on those sites to ‘push back’ on these liberals. You are probably on some form of mission, either coordinated or personal, I don’t know, but you sure do sound like a troll.

          Now don’t take this as ‘mean librul hurst my feelies’, these are just my opinion after assessing you to be an a-hole.

    • keyez@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Except it wasn’t pure luck things worked out for Trumps term regarding the SC appointees. Obama was able to pick one or two which was blocked and vetoed and filibustered by the cons for years until their guy was there.

  • muse@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    5 months ago

    Jesus Christ just hand us over to Russia already then

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      51
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      5 months ago

      Moderates keep telling us nothing matters besides stopping trump, but they keep refusing to take action to actually stop him…

      Either they’re lying about how big of a threat trump is (they’re not) or theyre intentionally not doing everything they can to stop him.

      There’s no logical consistency.

      That shit flies no problem with Republican voters, but historically Dem voters don’t like it.

      • Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        In the Venn diagram of “how fucked am I, personally, if Trump wins?”, they’re not the first, second, or even fifth group that gets murdered in a ditch by Christo-fascist militias. So upsetting the status quo is only seen as risking/actually hurting themselves today, over a possibly in the future. Any talk of “divisiveness” is milquetoast dereliction, the MAGA fringe are not honest negotiators.

        They’re not actual allies, they’re fair weather friends. For all the rhetoric of “resist” that was thrown about in early 2016, I saw a lot of pink pussy hats and very little black-block. Politics is still a game to them, the stakes aren’t real. Yet.

      • zbyte64@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        They believe their constitution is magical and if you follow it like you do the Bible, then God will reward you with the presidency. Problem is, fundamentalists have interpreted the book to play by a different set of rules.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          SC is literally telling Biden he has all this power…

          And Biden’s response is seriously:

          I don’t think I do, so I’m going to ignore this.

          Like, imagine playing a game of soccer and the ref says you can pick the ball up.

          Other team starts playing rugby, and you refuse to let your team pick up the ball.

          Now imagine it’s not just a game, and literally millions of lives depend on you not losing…

          That’s what Biden is doing.

          • BReel@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            5 months ago

            Except that we know for a fact the refs are incredibly biased against specifically one team.

            I wish he would use it, but I understand the hesitance to do so. Why would they do this BEFORE Trump is back in and even give Biden the option to use it? Why risk giving Biden a 4 year larger window to use it if he does win? Feels like a trap to me.

            • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              17
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              Mate…

              If you think republicans are waiting for Dems to abuse it before they do…

              I don’t know how much you’ve been paying attention.

              If your point was “why wouldn’t they wait for Biden to be out office”, it seems like they’re confident Biden won’t do anything.

              And considering how Biden immediately and publicly said he wouldn’t, kind of looks like that was a good assumption

              • BReel@lemmy.one
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                I’m not saying they were wrong, but effectively making the first king of the USA doesn’t seem like something one should risk the outcome of, no matter how strong your assumption is.

                • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  You’re surprised far right extremists have poor risk assessment skills?

                  That’s honestly one of the things that contribute the most to how precarious the current situation is.

                  A smart person with no fear of failure is a very bad thing, and as terrible as most of the SC justices are, they’re not stupid, and the people who put them there definitely aren’t.

                  They’re just not afraid of consequences.

            • enkers@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              5 months ago

              Except that we know for a fact the refs are incredibly biased against specifically one team.

              The ref’s just gave either team the power to choose new refs that are biased against the other team.

              • BReel@lemmy.one
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                I know that’s what all our Lemmy lawyers are saying. But I’m pretty confident SCOTUS would find a way for rules to apply to Biden that weirdly wouldn’t apply to Trump.

                Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to see him try. I’m just saying if I was in his spot, I wouldn’t immediately jump in assuming everything will just be “that easy”.

                You should at least sleep on it once or twice before you do something as drastic as everyone wants.

                • enkers@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  I’m not sure you’re understanding what I’m laying down. If all previously extra-judicial actions are now potentially on the table, that opens new avenues for changing the members of SCOTUS.

  • mojo_raisin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Let’s be clear about what this is,

    this is the executive branch refusing to put checks on a clearly corrupt and dysfunctional judicial branch. The stability of our 3 branch system depends on the branches being willing and able to check each other. If one branch yields to another, the system fails.

    • mightyfoolish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      5 months ago

      I agree. This is within the president’s role to fix.

      Biden, you are head of the executive branch. Your job is to ensure the law is followed. Do your job and start making them do theirs. It doesn’t have to be bloody but applying some pressure would be a great start.

    • abracaDavid@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      I mean, having an unelected group with lifetime appointments with ultimate power was kind of destined to fuck us at some point.

  • BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    5 months ago

    The reality is the democrats can’t reform the supreme court, because they don’t control the House of Representatives, and barely control the Senate.

    To enact reform of that type they would need solid majorities in both chambers and control of the presidency. That remains very unlikely. Even simple ideas like expanding the court rather than meaningful reform is impossible as no nominees would get through congress.

    It makes sense the democrats make their campaign focused on Donald Trump. And as bad as the supreme court is at the moment, the democrats have bigger issues to deal with - a lacklustre campaign with a poor candidate. It’ll be hard enough trying to convince people Biden is a good choice as a candidate, let alone move into complex areas like judicial reform.

    • fluxion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      And yet somehow even with a Democratic House/Senate you know Trump will get plenty of mileage out of using this ruling to become emperor.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      The reality is the democrats can’t reform the supreme court, because they don’t control the House of Representatives, and barely control the Senate.

      The Supreme Court literally just said Biden can do whatever the fuck he wants as long as it’s an “official” act, including having the conservative Justices assassinated and replaced by people he picks himself, confirmed by the Senate or not.

    • oyo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      He could and should “stack” the court right now. Supreme Court nominees only need advice and consent of the Senate, not the House.

    • demizerone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      5 months ago

      Just like the debate, so many missed opportunities to fucking end Trump. He his not of the right mind, America is in danger.

      • jas0n@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yeah. All he had to do was ask him who won the last election and watch him melt down. That was it. Instead he told us how he “defeated Medicare.” We’re screwed.

      • immutable@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        Remember when they served him a softball on abortion and somehow he managed to change the subject to an immigrant killing a white woman. Fucking insane

  • Sam_Bass@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    The campaign is made up of closeted repuglicans. Explains a lot of their bullshit this season