And gives him permission for a despotic second term.
By Adam Serwer
Near the top of their sweeping, #lawless opinion in Trump v. #UnitedStates, Donald Trump’s defenders on the #SupremeCourt repeat one of the most basic principles of American constitutional government: “The president is not above the law.” They then proceed to obliterate it.
Although the pro-#Trump justices attempt to nest the breadth of their opinion in legalese, their finding that the president cannot be prosecuted for “official acts,” & that much of Trump’s efforts to seize #power fall under that rubric, means that the justices have essentially legalized a losing president refusing to step down, as Trump tried to do after the 2020 election.
The Court’s opinion presents an absurd paradox that defeats the purpose of a constitutional #democracy governed by the rule of #law. It has little basis in the #Constitution or in the words of the #Founders. It is the outcome that most benefits the Court’s preferred presidential candidate, while allowing the justices to live w/themselves for defacing beyond recognition the Constitution & the concept of democratic self-determination.
In her dissent, Justice Sonia #Sotomayor puts it plainly. Regarding the question of “whether a former President enjoys immunity from federal #criminal prosecution,” Sotomayor writes, “The majority thinks he should, & so it invents an atextual, ahistorical, & unjustifiable #immunity that puts the President above the #law.” That is the long & the short of it.
Referring to Trump’s scheme to manufacture voter-fraud prosecutions as a pretext for overturning his loss…, #SCOTUS writes that “because the President cannot be prosecuted for conduct within his exclusive constitutional authority, #Trump is absolutely immune from prosecution for the alleged conduct involving his discussions w/ #Justice Dept ofcls.” This refers to discussions in which Trump…told the #DOJ, “Just say that the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me & the R. Congressmen”….
…Chief Justice #JohnRoberts often sounds more like #Trump’s lawyer than the #impartial judge he presents himself as. Roberts writes that “w/respect to the President’s exercise of his core constitutional powers, this #immunity must be absolute.” If that applies …to a sitting president manufacturing a scheme to avoid relinquishing #power after losing an #election, then there is no #legal constraint on a president simply refusing to leave office & using his authority to find a pretext for doing so.
We can debate the nuances of history, the Framers’ intentions, or the text of the #Constitution. What the Founders of the #UnitedStates did not intend to do when they designed a constitutional system of checks & balances, was establish a govt that would allow someone to declare themselves president for life….
#SCOTUS writes that presidents cannot be prosecuted for “use” of their ofcl powers, but what it actually means is they cannot be prosecuted for the flagrant abuse of them.
That renders the plain disclaimer on which the opinion rests—the president is not above the #law—a lie. More significant,the opinion depends on an implicit belief that the only person who would act so brazenly is #Trump, & that bc the majority of the justices…support Trump & want him to be president, he must be shielded from prosecution. In this backhanded manner, Trump’s justices acknowledge that he poses a unique threat to constitutional govt, one they just happen to support bc he’s their guy.
These are not justices; these are #Trump cronies. This is not #legal reasoning; this is vandalism.
…this [opinion] covers its #radicalism w/a pretense of moderation…that would nonetheless allow a president to escape prosecution for the most heinous abuses of power imaginable. #SCOTUS rejects…that a fmr president must be impeached & convicted before being prosecuted, while laying down a standard that makes it impossible for a president who attempts to seize #power to be prosecuted for doing so.
“Distinguishing the President’s official actions from his unofficial ones can be difficult,” #JohnRoberts writes. Then he makes it more difficult, writing that “in dividing official from unofficial conduct, courts may not inquire into the President’s motives.”
That’s the idea: By balancing the possibility of any prosecution on this distinction, & by then making that distinction virtually impossible to discern, Roberts eliminates any chance of resolving the underlying #legal issues of #Trump’s current federal prosecution before Trump has a chance to take #power again. If Trump wins, he can then—wielding the sword of “absolute immunity” that #SCOTUS has provided—dismiss the #criminal investigations against him.
A lifetime appointment means that #SupremeCourt justices can do whatever they wish when they are in the majority. When the justices wanted to force #Colorado to return #Trump to its presidential #ballot after the state concluded that his attempted seizure of #power on #Jan6 barred him from holding office under the #FourteenthAmendment, they moved as rapidly as possible. When they wanted to assist Trump’s strategy of delaying any possible federal trial, they took their time.
…The current composition of #SCOTUS is the result of decades of work by #RightWing activists seeking a permanent #conservative#political ascendancy, & the behavior of the majority consistently reflects that objective. Like other right-wing institutions, it has become thoroughly #corrupted by its obeisance to the #Republican Party leader, the principle to which all others are now subordinate. This is not the Republican Party Court; it is the #Trump Court.
#Trump’s claim was absurd on its face: namely, that former presidents are immune to prosecution for any #crime committed under color of #law unless impeached & convicted. The kernel of logic in that argument, that the powers of the president confer some level of #immunity for certain acts, has been expanded beyond recognition to immunize Trump from prosecution.
…this would mean that a president could assassinate a rival in the name of #NationalSecurity, then avoid impeachment by intimidating members of Congress w/the threat of murdering them as well, & thus be immune from prosecution forever. …& if by some miracle a president who murdered his political enemies were removed, prosecutors would not only be barred from trying him but would also not be allowed to use his conversations w/executive-branch ofcls as #evidence against him.
…The #Trump Court’s decision is not only cover for his actions following the #2020election. The ruling must be understood as a permission slip for the despotic power that Trump has vowed to assert if he is reelected. It is not just a grant of #immunity for past #crimes, but an enthusiastic endorsement of the ones he will commit if given the chance. Trump has said he would be a “#dictator on day one” & has vowed “#retribution” against his political opponents.
#RightWing think tanks are plotting to ensure that the federal govt is staffed by loyal cronies who can turn its immense #power to protecting & enriching #Trump & imposing an #extreme agenda w/o #legal constraints.
…The entire purpose of the #Constitution was to create a govt that was not bound to the whims of a #king. The Court’s self-styled “originalists,” in a perverse contortion of history & the Constitution they pretend to cherish, have…put a crown within Trump’s reach….
@Nonilex I am on your side. But sorry I am bitter today
That becomes tiring the little American refrain about Constitution & the Dream of The Founders
The facts:
Not one! NOT ONE military peace treaty signed with the Native American has been respected!
Great country dont do this
And during Slaughtering at Wounded Knee: the Chief of the refugee camp was shot holding the US Flag offered by some famous US President Abraham Lincoln
That US grandiloquence for the emptiness is a bit choking
sorry
@Nonilex Trump is lucky President Biden is a moral man! SCOTUS is banking on that, too! What if they're both making a deadly error, or are they praying they are okay until Trumpie is back... if he ever is?
@Nonilex We have to ask why people elected to the supreme court are allowed to have a political preference. That doesn't inspire confidence from the get go.
@Nonilex The current court is more the working of Mitch McConnell than of Trump. McConnell withheld the confirmation of Merrick Garland, and this began before Trump had become a candidate. McConnell rushed the confirmation of Amy Barrett--in direct contradiction of his "principle" devised to prevent Garland from being confirmed.
Unrelated, but McConnell could have checked Trump at any point but refused to do so.
@zachvat we vote in a democratic majority in the House & Senate. That’s what we can do about it. Congress has authority over the Supreme Court, but the current House won’t advance any legislation reining in their power by expanding the court or implementing term limits. Congress also sets the terms by which federal judges, including Supreme Court justices, retire & how they are compensated. If we know one thing about the justices it’s that they care about their $$.
@TAI@violetmadder should we rely on the other party? Let’s deal with reality here. There are 2 parties. This is happening now, not in some idealistic multiparty utopian future.
@Nonilex two sides to the same coin. you must buy the incompetence. some of us see the complicity, good cop, bad cop routine theyve played on us. we've never had representation, just false words
@Nonilex i;d say fantasy was believing there actually was a good guy in this equation. it's as silly as believe characters in a movie are real. maturity and wisdom would see the road both parties have taken us down and who it served, it was never us. intelligence requires understand enough offered up to fool the public. you see a lot of intelligence and maturity in the voting public? I don't, not hard to fool the majority
@Nonilex I respect you more than you could know, doesn't not mean I agree all times. on the table, Biden wake the fuck up and reckognize the moment we are in. not many understand the idea the savior may have to look like the villain in the moment.look at the history of some of the most revered, ridiculed and ostracized at the moment. take advantage of SCOTUS ruling, forget trying to look like the good guy. you;re fcking 81, not a lot to lose. All stops to end trump, render the court impotent
@violetmadder & I said vote. But you can also provide transportation to people to go vote, run for office, volunteer for your local election poll, educate people, etc.
@zachvat Congress’s mandate to “make all Laws which shall be necessary & proper for carrying into Execution [its enumerated] Powers, & all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States” implicitly grants #Congress the authority to enact a wide range of #legislation to facilitate the exercise of judicial power. Moreover, Congress has the ultimate power to #impeach & remove justices for bad behavior, which justifies regulation to ensure good behavior
@zachvat Volunteer for local election campaigns. Educate. run for office. There’s stuff. I’m depressed too, but it’s hope or surrender. I’m not ready to surrender to Trump, Clarence Thomas & Samuel Alito.
@Nonilex all of this mess can be laid at the feet of the Senator from KY, Mitch McConnell, starting with when he stole a nomination from President Obama. He enabled this ludicrous and dangerous constitutional crisis. Creating more seats on the court would be a temporary fix, until the next president does the same thing. It’s been a grand experiment, but fascism is here to stay.
@Nonilex you’re so right, but what are we going to do about it? That’s the problem? That is the big big big problem in the room. Talk is cheap. The Supreme Court those bastards need to be held accountable. But they won’t be. I bet you a buck they won’t be.
@WildlifeWorld we need a democratic majority in the House & Senate. That’s what we can do about it. Congress has authority over the Supreme Court, but the current House won’t advance any legislation reining in their power or expanding the court or implementing term limits.
@Nonilex so if Biden removed the right-wing extremists from Supreme Court he now wouldn't be prosecuted for the deed, but the deed would be corrected right away?
@Nonilex
I remember back in 2005 the arguments over Roberts's nomination. One person I know said than that he had the potential to be a great chief justice. I haven't seen them since 2012, so I have no clue if they've changed their mind.
@Nonilex In the midst of all this horror, I have a technical question — while this decision may apply to the president, does it apply to those who carry out any illegal actions he orders? In others words, if he orders a political opponent to be be sent to Gitmo, do those who do the arrest and imprisonment have any immunity for their actions? Or could they be prosecuted?
@michaelgemar the “just following orders” defense? I think they’re only applying it to the president but I suppose it would depend on whether they liked the politician in question or not, which seems to be their only guiding logic.
@Nonilex You overlook the idea that on November 6th King Biden can just declare he won and the scotus will no longer be in session ever and the insurrectionists in Congress have relocated to Guantanamo
@Nonilex But Biden and the Democrats can do the same thing. If Trump attempts something, King Joe can take him out as part of his duties and arrest and imprison the Republicans in Congress as accomplices. They're going to need a new wing at Gitmo.
@Nonilex By declaring that it's ok for him to enact a violent coup to overthrow elections they also gave him permission to have a third, fourth, and as many terms as he wants (though, let's be honest, his health isn't that great. Most likely it will actually be whoever Project 2025 installs ruling the, by then, nazi nation of America at that point.)
A lot of people on the right who think they are safe since they're on the right seriously need to take a look back at history.
SCOTUS gave Biden the same power. He could if he wanted as of today throw the conservative majority into Guantanamo for indefinite detention and save our democracy.
He won't though, because Democrats like to follow rules and traditions.
Trump however will feel no compulsion to do the same.
@Nonilex So as a president without constraints and a judiciary that ignores the Constitution, Biden should say "I'm King President now, and I hearby declare the Supreme Court abolished, and I alone will appoint a new judiciary."