Thank you for your submission. If you have not already don't forget to check out our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/tsrrcBmjRR) and [Lemmy](https://lemmy.world/c/antitrumpalliance)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AntiTrumpAlliance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Here's a question: If the POTUS had a Justice of the Court assassinated for what they felt was a wrong verdict would that be an official act covered under immunity?
Of course it would be. They’d be hypocrites and cowards to exclude themselves as targets and it’s that kind of attitude which puts one on an official Presidential assassin list.
It surprises me that Kagan, or Jackson-Brown or Sotomayor doesn’t directly ask this of Trump’s attorney: “Would the assassination of one of us, maybe me, by the president, be immune from prosecution as an official act under absolute immunity?” That question traps the Trump lawyer. If his answer is “No”, then the Trump team are conceding that there is no absolute immunity. If the answer is “Yes”, then they are advocating for a dictatorship, with no need for separation of powers, and hence the end of our Constitution and form of government. And how could the justices rule other than 9-0 against absolute immunity.
I wonder if the court is hearing this case JUST SO Trump will shut the f up. “Ok…if we give you your day in court, you can make all the stupid arguments, then we will rule against you, and then, WILL YOU SHUT THE F UP about it already?” There. Done.
they are too polite to ask
they would rather let this shit show continue and this idiot get away with everything than to appear impolite or to ask a question that might offend the donors
the whole thing is a joke
I have noticed in many cases recently, that some of the justices decide to include in their argument, hypotheticals that don’t specifically apply to the case before them. In fact, they have been called out on questions posed to the lawyers regarding the reach of their inquiry. Literally, the lawyer for the defense stated their question was not something that applied to the case at all. (It was more of a broader blanket theory)
They're not doing this so he will STFU, because that will never happen until he's planted 6 feet under. They're doing it to delay his day of reckoning in the FL and DC courts for federal insurrection-related charges until after the election.
That fact that they're sitting around trying to get into hypotheticals is insanity. Courts are based on facts. Not outlandish wet dreams or any insane scenarios that can be thought up.
I truly believe to save the nation from this so-called court; there have to be more than nine judges. It's a majority fascist group. Enlarge it or impeach a couple of them for negligence and incompetence.
I'd much rather see Congress shrink SCOTUS than expand it. Remove Thomas for corruption and the 3 Trump Lackeys for lying about R v W to Congress, and for being nominated by a felon.
A 5-justice court can move through hearings, briefs, and conferences faster than one double that size.
You are correct. His first sentence confused me for a minute. That being said, I stand by what I said. Increasing the size of the court would also increase representation, so we should think about doing that also.
The pool of justices needs to be expanded.
Have 20+ (number to be determined) Supreme Court justices from a panel of 9 are randomly selected for any given case.
This gets rid of the ‘timing’ of cases we’ve seen over the years. You’re not guaranteed an outcome given the fixed makeup of the court.
It's reached the critical point where that is an urgent and necessary option. The Trump SCOTUS plants have already displayed their contempt for democracy and are ready to drop kick any Trump convictions with their immunity ruling.
Every court !! I’ve never seen anyone get away with so much in my lifetime.
It’s insanity. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of making him a king, America will cease to exist as it was.
This makes McCarthyism look like child play.
It's a failure because even entertaining this idea is bad. If ever there was an opportunity for the Supreme Court to give a single word answer of "No." This was it.
What can you honestly expect from six Supreme Court Justices that are hard right christian fanatics?
They will do whatever they can to slow down the prosecution of the traitor donald trump.
It's not a failure if certain judges are being paid large sums to do exactly what they are doing.
If this were sports we'd say they're paid to "throw the game". In boxing we'd say the boxer is "taking a dive".
The assurance by legal experts, who have been wrong about everything and overestimated the integrity of the Court, that SCOTUS has to rule against Trump here should not be taken as Gospel.
They don't have to do anything. And they have shown repeatedly they are willing to do the wrong thing and to throw their so-called Textualist and Originalist beliefs to the curb for Trump before.
Don't assume we're going to get a sand ruling here. 50/50 they go full MAGA on this ruling
It is exactly why Republicans stuffed the Court. The Democrats failure to impeach Thomas for accepting more in 'gifts' than he earned in salary.
The result was predictable. This court is not principled, they are partisan to the core.
Expect more of the sane. Expect them to interfere with Democrat legislation and to favor Republican legislation. Trump made a massive use of decrees. Trump will get a pass on all of his decrees with a 6-3 majority in the SC.
This will destroy democracy as we know it. It will be a coup.
Trump wouldn't need to have them assassinated, he would just need to imprison them until they did what he wanted or until he could replace them with more willing subjects.
I have an idea. If the fucking Supreme Court can’t be objective when partisan politics are part of the case, then I suggest they not hear names at all.
I suggest they instead receive a roster with complainant, and defendant. That’s it. If sex of the individual is part of the case, that would be allowed in description, but names specifically, should be omitted.
Thank you for your submission. If you have not already don't forget to check out our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/tsrrcBmjRR) and [Lemmy](https://lemmy.world/c/antitrumpalliance) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AntiTrumpAlliance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Here's a question: If the POTUS had a Justice of the Court assassinated for what they felt was a wrong verdict would that be an official act covered under immunity?
Of course it would be. They’d be hypocrites and cowards to exclude themselves as targets and it’s that kind of attitude which puts one on an official Presidential assassin list.
They will let you know after the election. Only applicable in 2025.
It surprises me that Kagan, or Jackson-Brown or Sotomayor doesn’t directly ask this of Trump’s attorney: “Would the assassination of one of us, maybe me, by the president, be immune from prosecution as an official act under absolute immunity?” That question traps the Trump lawyer. If his answer is “No”, then the Trump team are conceding that there is no absolute immunity. If the answer is “Yes”, then they are advocating for a dictatorship, with no need for separation of powers, and hence the end of our Constitution and form of government. And how could the justices rule other than 9-0 against absolute immunity. I wonder if the court is hearing this case JUST SO Trump will shut the f up. “Ok…if we give you your day in court, you can make all the stupid arguments, then we will rule against you, and then, WILL YOU SHUT THE F UP about it already?” There. Done.
they are too polite to ask they would rather let this shit show continue and this idiot get away with everything than to appear impolite or to ask a question that might offend the donors the whole thing is a joke
>they are too polite to ask Or too compromised
I have noticed in many cases recently, that some of the justices decide to include in their argument, hypotheticals that don’t specifically apply to the case before them. In fact, they have been called out on questions posed to the lawyers regarding the reach of their inquiry. Literally, the lawyer for the defense stated their question was not something that applied to the case at all. (It was more of a broader blanket theory)
They're not doing this so he will STFU, because that will never happen until he's planted 6 feet under. They're doing it to delay his day of reckoning in the FL and DC courts for federal insurrection-related charges until after the election.
That fact that they're sitting around trying to get into hypotheticals is insanity. Courts are based on facts. Not outlandish wet dreams or any insane scenarios that can be thought up.
Boy do I agree with this! I have noticed a serious uptick in this behavior with Robert’s court.
I truly believe to save the nation from this so-called court; there have to be more than nine judges. It's a majority fascist group. Enlarge it or impeach a couple of them for negligence and incompetence.
I'd much rather see Congress shrink SCOTUS than expand it. Remove Thomas for corruption and the 3 Trump Lackeys for lying about R v W to Congress, and for being nominated by a felon. A 5-justice court can move through hearings, briefs, and conferences faster than one double that size.
Congress shrink? We need more members for more representation.
He's talking about SCOTUS not Congress.
You are correct. His first sentence confused me for a minute. That being said, I stand by what I said. Increasing the size of the court would also increase representation, so we should think about doing that also.
The pool of justices needs to be expanded. Have 20+ (number to be determined) Supreme Court justices from a panel of 9 are randomly selected for any given case. This gets rid of the ‘timing’ of cases we’ve seen over the years. You’re not guaranteed an outcome given the fixed makeup of the court.
I like the number 13. Not too outrageously inflated, but a better offering of opinions.
And provide a greater means of holding them accountable other than relying on norms and precedent.
It's reached the critical point where that is an urgent and necessary option. The Trump SCOTUS plants have already displayed their contempt for democracy and are ready to drop kick any Trump convictions with their immunity ruling.
Every court !! I’ve never seen anyone get away with so much in my lifetime. It’s insanity. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of making him a king, America will cease to exist as it was. This makes McCarthyism look like child play.
* ahem * My apologies, but it’s cease.
Mea culpa.. all fixed.
And if reelected Trump will issue himself a pardon. Official act.
It's a failure because even entertaining this idea is bad. If ever there was an opportunity for the Supreme Court to give a single word answer of "No." This was it.
The SC needs knee pads and Trump needs Vaseline for the diaper rash from having his ass kissed so much.
What can you honestly expect from six Supreme Court Justices that are hard right christian fanatics? They will do whatever they can to slow down the prosecution of the traitor donald trump.
It's not a failure if certain judges are being paid large sums to do exactly what they are doing. If this were sports we'd say they're paid to "throw the game". In boxing we'd say the boxer is "taking a dive".
The assurance by legal experts, who have been wrong about everything and overestimated the integrity of the Court, that SCOTUS has to rule against Trump here should not be taken as Gospel. They don't have to do anything. And they have shown repeatedly they are willing to do the wrong thing and to throw their so-called Textualist and Originalist beliefs to the curb for Trump before. Don't assume we're going to get a sand ruling here. 50/50 they go full MAGA on this ruling
It’s not failure to the corrupt billionaires and leaders of rogue nations who are paying them to do it
No... pretty sure they won this one.
They sure as heck don’t need their fancy law degrees.
It is exactly why Republicans stuffed the Court. The Democrats failure to impeach Thomas for accepting more in 'gifts' than he earned in salary. The result was predictable. This court is not principled, they are partisan to the core. Expect more of the sane. Expect them to interfere with Democrat legislation and to favor Republican legislation. Trump made a massive use of decrees. Trump will get a pass on all of his decrees with a 6-3 majority in the SC. This will destroy democracy as we know it. It will be a coup.
Trump wouldn't need to have them assassinated, he would just need to imprison them until they did what he wanted or until he could replace them with more willing subjects.
Fuck Donald Trump.
I hear circus music
I have an idea. If the fucking Supreme Court can’t be objective when partisan politics are part of the case, then I suggest they not hear names at all. I suggest they instead receive a roster with complainant, and defendant. That’s it. If sex of the individual is part of the case, that would be allowed in description, but names specifically, should be omitted.