Originally published at: The Supreme Court’s Final Test Approaches
This article is part of TPM Cafe, TPM’s home for opinion and news analysis. Sooner than we may think, the Supreme Court will have to decide whether it will continue to expand presidential powers beyond anything imagined in the Constitution, or if it will uphold the separation of powers it purportedly reveres. One aspect of Donald Trump’s…
2 Likes
In the case of Roberts 2025 vs. Roberts 1985, the Supreme Court today ruled 6-3 against Roberts of the past, with Roberts of the present recusing himself in order to bring Elon Musk a sandwich.
17 Likes
So basically, the Union now holds according to the whims of Leonard Leo?
16 Likes
What the article fails to point out is that Donald Trump has nothing to lose and everything to gain. That is the worst that could happen to Trump is he has to do what every other president has had to do, follow the constitution as his Party full of Trump sycophants runs congress. Whereas the best that could happen to Trump is that the Supreme Court makes him a dictator who does not need a congress or Supreme Court.
17 Likes
…the Trump administration’s goal to illegally impound funds in order to tee up a question for the Supreme Court to resolve.
Legality is only determined after illegality is committed?
Illegality is “saving the country”?
6 Likes
The Justices will have decide between the survival of American Democracy and rule of law OR the flow of bribes, gifts and luxury junkets…
It’s not going to be even close…
21 Likes
We can be pretty certain how 2 of them will vote. The others not so much.
8 Likes
Pretty sure that at least two of them have rejected veiled Unitary Executive arguments in the past.
6 Likes
Correct. Courts don’t do advisory opinions.
9 Likes
So that brings us to 4–2 each way.
3 Likes
Voter purges notwithstanding, He was elected, right? So, it’s up to us if he’s a President or a King. SCOTUS has already ruled he’s above the law. But he’s still not above elections. Plus, he’s termed out, and the odds of getting a constitutional amendment to allow a 3rd term are slim to none.
5 Likes
I’d take odds that it would be 9-0 on the merits of the impoundment. Also willing to take odds that there would be at least a couple dissenting on some procedural or evidentiary bullshit.
10 Likes
What inspires your confidence? Do you have any fears that having the Eternal Reich one decision away will seduce the worst of them?
5 Likes
There is also the issue of the scope of his authority to fire officials and workers.
3 Likes
It’s settled, uncontroversial law. They’re willing to do trump political favors and advance their own ideological agenda, not to render themselves irrelevant.
11 Likes
So what exactly do we do when Uncle Thomas and Drunky Brewster let Diaper Don have a bukkake party all over the constitution?
5 Likes
IIRC, TSF re-allocated funds for his wall on the first go round and SCOTUS was fine with it. So not confident they’ll enforce the ICA.
8 Likes
The so-called strict constructionists bend to the whims of their personal biases and/or benefactors.
3 Likes