Let's be Honest About The Supreme Court Immunity Decision

[gab13by13]

The immunity is only for Republican presidents, not for Democratic presidents.

The Supreme Court is a threat to our democracy.

The court will rule that a Republican president's acts are official acts but will rule a Democratic president's acts are not.

We need to win all of government in the election.
We need to abolish the filibuster and add 4 justices as soon as possible.

There is a good reason to add 4 justices; there are 13 Appeals courts divisions.

[Walleye]

1. Since they don't care about precedent at all, they will just change decision when a Democratic president gets in there

[gab13by13]

3. There is a very slim likelihood

that a Democratic president will break the law.

[Walleye]

7. Exactly, I agree. That's why they feel safe and doing all this stuff and letting Trump off the hook. They're counting on

The Democrats to be ethical and honorable. Because we usually are. It’s straight from the KGB playbook.

[walkingman]

2. Agree 100% - there is no reason to not expand the court, if ever possible, to resolve

the threat to our democracy. None of this is based on legal issues, it is blantantly political and Alito and Thomas have no shame. That doesn't excuse the others - especially CJ Roberts. This is a corrupt court.

[gab13by13]

4. I was very wrong about Roberts

he is just as evil as Clarence Thomas and Sam Alito.

[ScratchCat]

5. Actually

All they did was delay a case and make a vague reference to "Official Acts". Its equally likely that they ultimately agree that nothing Trump is charged with falls under the powers delegated to the Executive Branch and office of The President in the constitution. Its a better soundbite to say they gave him immunity when in reality, all they did was delay the case with a vaguely worded ruling that intentionally didn't define "official acts" at the time.

[gab13by13]

10. Not true at all,

Prosecutors have dropped some of the charges against TSF because of the Supreme Court.

Also, prosecutors are no longer charging J6 insurrectionists with impeding an official act of Congress. That is because of the Supreme Court.

[uponit7771]

17. Charges have been dropped because SC said as long as the act is official the motivation can't be even brought up

[MadameButterfly]

20. They gave him immunity for future official acts, which makes him a dictator

They will rule as they please as to what is an official act. This is a mechanism that gives them the power to decide which presidents get to be king.

In addition, the immunity ruling tells us that they aren't staying out of the election any more, or limiting themselves to any normal interpretation of the law. So when Trump starts filing election lawsuits, if they want to appoint Trump president, they will. And it seems they are inclined to do so.

[republianmushroom]

6. Totally agree with you and term limits on supreme court justices.

[captain queeg]

8. I think the president should worry for their safety. I think Guantanamo with be safe place for them.

[DENVERPOPS]

13. Or

Along with Trump and all his administration having a life time in Colorado Super Max.............each having their own cell with absolutely no contract with the outside world, except seeing their attorney........

[-misanthroptimist]

9. Hopefully, Democrats will gain the House, Senate, and Presidency

If they do, then it is essential that USSC be expanded by four new members. Additionally, an enforceable code of ethics must be imposed on the Court. I wouldn't mind seeing one or two of the current "Justices" impeached for bribery.

[gab13by13]

11. It's too late now

but Clarence Thomas and Sam Alito should have been investigated by DOJ.

[-misanthroptimist]

16. I doubt that there is a statute of limitations for Impeachment.

Yeah, they might not be able to be charged criminally, but they can still be removed from office. (My "not a lawyer" opinion)

[Jmb 4 Harris-Walz]

21. Why is it too late exactly?

It won’t change the immunity ruling, but they could be ousted if impeached!

[MadameButterfly]

22. we have to win all three, expand the court

add DC and Puerto Rico as states, and never lose to Republicans again or they'll do it right back to us and never let go.

How do we save democracy in the long run? Something has to be done about the disgruntled white men who will destroy everything rather than give up their privelege. *

There are the rich white men who don't think they are ok without endless tax cuts and absolute power.
Then there are the poor and working class white men who are struggling more and more as the wealth gap increases.
Both groups are deluded about what will make them happy. The first group has an unquenchable thirst for more money which will never give them what they really need: love, a sense of purpose, and the rewards of doing good in the world.
The second group is blaming the wrong people for their shrinking opportunities. They fall for the lies from the Right. They are pawns who work against their own self-interest and get angrier and angrier with the result.

I remember a quote from Myles Horton, I paraphrase, that the reason the establishment didn't want Black and White working people sitting down together at lunch counters was they might find they had something in common. And if all the working people united, they'd be unstoppable.

Somehow we need to end the division of working class voters, inspire in them enough hope, self esteem, opportunity, and common sense to embrace change instead of trying to destroy it.

*(Please understand that I am speaking statistically and not meaning all white men)

[lastlib]

12. I still like the idea of a National Court of Appeals.....

Congress can do this. Strip SCOTUS of all its appellate jurisdiction. All appeals go to the national court of appeals. It could be established with 25 young progressive judges. SCOTUS would be left with its constitutional original jurisdiction, so Clarence can take all the naps he wants, and Sammy, John, Neil, and Beer-boy can't do any further damage to our democracy.

[erronis]

18. Who would decide which cases go to the National Court of Appeals and which to the SCOTUS?

An awful lot of cases seem to involve both constitutional and non-constitutional issues.

[lastlib]

19. Article III defines SCOTUS original jurisdiction.

Everything else would go to Nat'l court of appeals. Under this plan, SCOTUS would not have any appellate jurisdiction; NCOA would be final. It pretty much guts the Supreme Court.

[Trust_Reality]

14. I absolutely agree, especially with 4 more justices.

And, we need to realize that justices from the Federalist Society are not so-called conservative justices, they are special interest justices.

[Deminpenn]

15. They handed Biden a weapon he could use against them knowing

he wouldn't.

But he should have. The first thing Biden should have done when the ruling came down giving him complete immunity regarding management of DoJ was to order Garland to open investigations of Clarence and Ginny Thomas (conspiracy against the US - same as Smith did with Trump), Alito (corruptiona ala Menendez) and Kavanaugh (sexual assault). All legitimate avenues of investigation.

What was SCOTUS going to do? Their only course would be to reverse their decision.

[bluestarone]

23. Ok, i gotta ask this question here.

So IF we get the house the Senate and the white house in Nov. (by SOLID majority) can any Supreme court judges be Subpoenaed by either house? If so what would the penalty be for perjury?