• xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Absolutely, it’s insane that congress passed an ammendment that said a thing and now the Supreme Court is saying “no, it doesn’t say that thing, if you wanted that to apply you’d need to pass a congressional act on a case by case basis.”

    Imagine if everytime someone committed tax fraud congress had to officially vote to investigate that specific person. Imagine if a country like America was unable to delegate any powers.

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      It’s because they don’t actually care what the constitution or the bill of rights or any of the amendments says. The Tribunal of Six only cares about ensuring their political compatriots - that is, the GOP - can cement their power for good. And if that means that we sink into fascism… they don’t care. Because they’ll be calling the shots.

  • Kbobabob@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Has Trump actually been found guilty of insurrection? It seems this could be where the issue lies. I know he’s an insurrectionist, you know he is an insurrectionist but unless convicted how do you apply the law?

      • hydrospanner@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        So… what’s to stop a Texas or a Mississippi or a Florida from deciding that Biden has participated in an insurrection, and requiring no conviction, uses this as grounds for removal from the ballot in November?

        As much as I want Trump off ballots and believe he’s an insurrectionist, it’s important to remember that anything that can be done to hamper his chances that requires no (or a low bar) legal framework can also be done to help his chances.

        If a court in Colorado can sit down and decide he’s off the ballot because of their opinions, and that decision is enforceable and unassailable, then we’re establishing that a state court can strike any name from any ballot because they say so.

        With that precedent, I would fully expect states with GOP leadership to appoint judges who would then find reasons to call some aspect of Biden’s presidency an insurrection (in a similar vein as the Mayorkas impeachment), and remove him from their state’s ballot.

        • thesporkeffect@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Literally nothing. If they were able to they would do it already, in several cases they are kind of half-assedly trying. Mutually assured destruction isn’t the principle of operation when one side is generally acting in good faith and the other side is actively pulling the copper out of the walls.