• BadmanDan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    14 hours ago

    I wish the constitution was done 😭. But I know the second a Dem president gets in office and tries to enact parody campaign funding or court debt relief, the 6-3 SCOTUS will strike it down as unconstitutional.

    • Amberskin@europe.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      13 hours ago

      He can do a Trump with them. Just fire them. It would be an official act, so he would be allowed to do it. Didn’t one of your presidents say something about ‘how many army divisions do the SCOTUS have’?

      • BadmanDan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        13 hours ago

        lol, wish it was that easy. But nah, the presidential immunity protects can’t fire justices or A3 judges. They’re in that shit for LIFE.

        The best move is to just expand SCOTUS to like 13 seats and a Dem president appoints a bunch of liberal justices. If Dems can get a majority in the senate and everyone’s on board, they can definitely do it. Just gotta get all 50 or more senators on board with the nuclear option. Problem is, if republicans gain power, now with the precedent set, they’d expand SCOTUS even more and pack it with conservative justices, and they’d most likely keep going back and forth until we’re at like 2050 with like 60 judges on the Supreme Court 😂. But fuck it, let’s do it.

        • tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          12 hours ago

          The president is legally a king now. I want all the corrupt scotus judges in jail until a new scotus rules that a president can’t put judges in jail.

            • tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              8 hours ago

              What did that scotus ruling mean then? I was under the impression that the president has immunity from prosecution for any acts taken as long as they’re done as part of the job, or whatever the wording was.

              • BadmanDan@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 hours ago

                You just answered your own question, apart of his job (official acts). Throwing judges in jail, even if they deserve it, isn’t the president’s job. The judges would have to be properly investigated and prosecuted. Which if a judge is going down for corruption, might as well draw a target on Congress 😭.

                Only was the president CAN throw them in jail by himself, is calling a national emergency and arresting judges off the bases they’re domestic terrorists. And he BETTER be able to prove it, or it’s curtains for him

                • tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 hours ago

                  part of his job (official acts). Throwing judges in jail, even if they deserve it, isn’t the president’s job.

                  I wish I had your faith that the corrupt SCOTUS won’t see literally any action as part of the president’s job. Or at least they won’t be discerning until a dem is back in office.