Emasculated just because we have a minority in Congress? That doesn’t keep people preparing legislation outside of Congress. Isn’t that what groups like the Federalist Society have been doing? Isn’t that what people supporting suffrage for freedmen and women did in the 19th century?
4 Likes
This is nonsensical. “Unconstitutionality” is not a crime. Only crimes are crimes.
8 Likes
Sure, sure… and then SCOTUS says ‘nope, that’s not what that means and/or doesn’t apply to POTUS if he’s a Republican’.
Laws are wonderful things, but they’re enforced and interpreted by human beings. What we need is to get better human beings doing those jobs.
Every election is always about the Court.
7 Likes
The J6 case didn’t involve Cannon, but yes the Supreme Court likely would have added more delays. There was a brief moment there where even Republicans knew his actions were wrong though.
4 Likes
The J6 case didn’t, but Smith’s mandate wasn’t just the J6 case. And Cannon was just an example of how the Trump-friendly parts of the judiciary were dragging their heels on purpose.
3 Likes
I fully expect tRump to charge people under the Insurrection Act.
4 Likes
For things like ‘donated to the Democratic Party’.
5 Likes
Americans will shrug and move on.
4 Likes
This week.
1 Like
Meanwhile, Hunter Biden’s Special Prosecutor report was also released, and Weiss attacked Pres Biden for pardoning Hunter and “selective prosecution”.
Best of all, the Weiss report contained this laughable statement:
“Far from selective, these prosecutions were the embodiment of the equal application of justice — no matter who you are, or what your last name is, you are subject to the same laws as everyone else in the United States,” Weiss said.
Unbelievable in these times.
12 Likes
Too bad trump seems to not be in that " no matter who you are or what your name is" group. If trump were subject to the same law he would’ve gotten a much different sentence for his 34 fraud felonies and he would be subject to charges stemming from the SP’ report released today(vol one). If Volume Two were released we would see trump charged with theft, obstruction and breaking the espionage act all serious charges. And Volume One could result in sedition or other serious charges. But he is home free on Monday free of all legal entanglements. To me it’s no justice at all. He is treated as being beyond all law. No law applies to him. It’s deeply wrong.
9 Likes
Yes, but get them on the record for legal historians. Then since they have also established that stare decisis is moot, we can over-rule them when we get the SC back. Or, with a new generation of Democrats that are willing to fight back, we use the “it ain’t illegal if the Pres’ does is” ruling to allow the Executive to simply ignore them, ala Andrew Jackson.
6 Likes
" Terms like “insurrection” or “incitement to insurrection” are broadly undefined…"
If it walks like a duck, swims like a duck and looks like a duck, It’s an offing DUCK!
3 Likes
KBJ (I think she has already earned this implicit comparison to RBG) has made me think of Harlan on a number of occasions.
5 Likes
Applies only to Trump, not to any future Democratic president.
4 Likes
Then fine - but I can still see the value in making the case. Its more useful than petty hush money cases…
2 Likes
Right, getting a precedent that undermines the rule of law and wouldn’t change a single vote is much more useful than a conviction.
2 Likes
To arrendis’ point, true enough, but.
They all need to be on the record. Because if this country is to survive as a democracy a lot of this Court’s, and its predecessor’s, decisions will need to be revisited and vacated, and decided in line with law and common sense. Not at the whims of someone so deeply corrupted in their mind.
4 Likes
Welcome to the Shadow Docket, where they’d just dismiss the case without a written opinion.
5 Likes
Dred Scott was thrown out. The Roberts BS can be too.
10 Likes