Supreme Court

[Incogneeto]

This is like 5 good decisions in a row.

Trumps picks are paying off.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/01/politics/takeaways-trump-immunity-scotus/index.html

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-chevron-deference-power-of-federal-agencies/

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/live-blog/supreme-court-decisions-student-loan-lgbtq-live-updates-rcna91936

[neurosis]

This is like 5 good decisions in a row.

Trumps picks are paying off.

Does this mean that Biden can declare Trump a threat to democracy and have him executed without having to worry about being prosecuted?   

This country is becoming such a joke. 

[Del.]

Does this mean that Biden can declare Trump a threat to democracy and have him executed without having to worry about being prosecuted?   

This country is becoming such a joke. 

He pretty much has already done that

[Incogneeto]

Does this mean that Biden can declare Trump a threat to democracy and have him executed without having to worry about being prosecuted?   

This country is becoming such a joke. 

That's a good and valid point.

I'm surprised.

What it does mean is That Presidential Powers are in Force.

And the Three Branches of Government have separate Powers.

Just like it was meant.

One checks the others.

[JParis]

This country is becoming such a joke.

In this vein...

Reading Sotomayor's dissent was painful....the stretch she makes and dots she is trying to connect, it plays to the absolute lowest form....sadly it's done by both sides at times but sheesh, I would have expected a dissent would be better thought out.

At times I think I expect too much of others.

[Incogneeto]

He pretty much has already Tried that

Fixed.

[Incogneeto]

In this vein...

Reading Sotomayor's dissent was painful....the stretch she makes and dots she is trying to connect, it plays to the absolute lowest form....sadly it's done by both sides at times but sheesh, I would have expected a dissent would be better thought out.

At times I think I expect too much of others.

What is a woman.

[Incogneeto]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/sotomayor-says-the-president-can-now-assassinate-a-political-rival-without-facing-prosecution/ar-BB1pdwU5?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=be4e999f80cb43d7908c905cb5bc8c9d&ei=78

[neurosis]

In this vein...

Reading Sotomayor's dissent was painful....the stretch she makes and dots she is trying to connect, it plays to the absolute lowest form....sadly it's done by both sides at times but sheesh, I would have expected a dissent would be better thought out.

At times I think I expect too much of others.

I haven't read her dissent so can't comment on it much. I did hear part of it on the radio today and the part they played/read on the air didn't sound like that much of a stretch. In a Country led by politicians who care more about tit for tat politics and who write laws based on spite and revenge, I don't see that leading to a better outcomes for US citizens.

I could be wrong.

[JParis]

I haven't read her dissent so can't comment on it much. I did hear part of it on the radio today and the part they played/read on the air didn't sound like that much of a stretch. In a Country led by politicians who care more about tit for tat politics and who write laws based on spite and revenge, I don't see that leading to a better outcomes for US citizens.

I could be wrong.

It is very simple...it would be an illegal order....not in ANY WAY an execution of the enumerated duties of the Office of President.

Anyone saying anything different is off their rocker

[neurosis]

Reading Sotomayor's dissent was painful.

For the record, this was the part they played on the air on a local radio station.

"Never in the history of our Republic has a President had reason to believe that he would be immune from criminal prosecution if he used the trappings of his office to violate the criminal law. Moving forward, however, all former Presidents will be cloaked in such immunity. If the occupant of that office misuses official power for personal gain, the criminal law that the rest of us must abide will not provide a backstop. With fear for our democracy, I dissent."

I'm sure I'll hear the rest when I get home.  I'm sure it's going to be plastered everywhere.

[JParis]

Here is the complete decision

https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/b135ae03-8c5a-467e-96b8-7fd371855fa3.pdf?itid=lk_inline_manual_7

and all the talk about things Trump said & did about the election, I would go so far as to say this decision does NOTHING to shield him from that portion...

It will likely be up to a court to determine that much....so that part of her argument goes right out the window. because in no way can his claims and actions be claimed to be part of any of the official duties of a duly elected President,

[Incogneeto]

I haven't read her dissent so can't comment on it much. I did hear part of it on the radio today and the part they played/read on the air didn't sound like that much of a stretch. 

I could be wrong.

Let me Guess NPR??

and yes you are wrong.

Let's express the most (Stoopid) sorry , outcome of assassinating rivals as opposed to clear thinking.

That perhaps the President of The United States.

May have to make some Decisions in the Best Interest that may bend the laws you and I are held by.

That is why you vote for and elect the best possible option.

Soleimani ?? Killed many Americans. Trump took him out and is being threatened with charges.

you convey that your only focus concerns crimes committed against a domestic rival.

Soo far the only President doing that is? Lawfare.

[neurosis]

and all the talk about things Trump said & did about the election, I would go so far as to say this decision does NOTHING to shield him from that portion...

I'm more concerned with how this decision can be abused moving forward. And not just by Trump.

[neurosis]

Let me Guess NPR??

I stopped reading your post right there.  lol.