tristansnell ,
@tristansnell@mstdn.social avatar

No no no, SCOTUS. Do NOT try to quote Alexander Hamilton to support this horrendous immunity decision.

Hamilton's Federalist No. 77 SPECIFICALLY cites "prosecution in the common course of law" as a check on the president.

And you amateur historians just ignored it.

"Original intent" my ass. You're making it up as you go, in whatever way suits you.

tristansnell OP ,
@tristansnell@mstdn.social avatar

Federalist 77:

Does [the presidency, as created by the Constitution,] also combine the requisites to safety, in a republican sense, a due dependence on the people, a due responsibility?

tristansnell OP ,
@tristansnell@mstdn.social avatar

The answer to this question has been anticipated in the investigation of its other characteristics, and is satisfactorily deducible from these circumstances; from the election of the President once in four years by persons immediately chosen by the people for that purpose; and from his being at all times liable to impeachment, trial, dismission from office, incapacity to serve in any other, and to forfeiture of life and estate by subsequent prosecution in the common course of law.

tristansnell OP ,
@tristansnell@mstdn.social avatar

Justice Sotomayor's dissent gets this right, properly looking to Federalist 77.

deborahh ,
@deborahh@mstdn.ca avatar

@tristansnell question from a Canadian: how final is a.SCOTUS ruling? Is this it? 😣

icastico ,
@icastico@c.im avatar

@deborahh @tristansnell

No, as we know from Roe v. Wade, Dred Scott, etc.

But it ain't good.

otownKim ,
@otownKim@toot.community avatar

@icastico @deborahh @tristansnell It's fucking horrifying!!

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • test
  • worldmews
  • mews
  • All magazines