Not Even the Trump Supreme Court has entirely abandoned Justice for Trumpery

Confidence in U.S. Supreme Court Sinks to Historic Low​

Activist judges appointed to the Supreme Court caused Americans to lose a residue of respect for the institution when they overthrew a half-century of established, accepted law concerning reproductive freedom. Politicians in retrogressive states seized upon the opening to inflict authoritarian repression upon their citizenry.

Outrage ensued, yet the Court is still conniving to defer justice for Trump and his contention that he is above the law.

At the same time, a duly-chastised Supreme Court is showing signs of not entirely abandoning the law for extremist, ideological fantasies.

Supreme Court rejects Kari Lake’s voting machine lawsuit

Supreme Court Deals Blow to Mike Lindell

Supreme Court rejects latest Peter Navarro bid to leave prison

Mark Meadows asked the Supreme Court to recognize his 'just following orders' defense.
A right-wing justice wasn't buying it.​

​

 

Mean while it looks like about half of Jack's DC case is about to go in the crapper.

 

Really? If the SC rules in favor of something which favors the democrats, they are caving into pressure, but if they rule in favor of something which opposes the democrats, they are showing their bias??

 

it is not a partisan matter. The vast majority of sworn testimony against the perp is being provided by Republicans.

 

Maintaining a veneer of fidelity to the rule of law for Trump's sock puppets once they have outlived their usefulness to the MAGA Messiah gives the Court's conservatives more latitude when it comes to His Orangeness.

 

You sure sounded partisan.

 

Justice for trumpery means revenge for losing in 2016.

If you people quit focusing on vengeance you might actually get a decent candidate instead of a barely alive placeholder.

 

That's kind of a twisted take, but it prompts what I think is a good question regarding the SCOTUS and the so-called "total immunity" case.

If they rule in Trump's favor, essentially saying that the president can do anything without fear of prosecution, would that make it legal for the current president to have Trump assassinated?

People really should be careful what they wish for. Lately, it seems like the more that the right achieves it's desires, the more followers/voters they lose.

 

There is no "total immunity" case.

 

So, you've just shot down your tribes attacks on SCOTUS right wing leanings. We done.

 

This is exactly it. Its the way leftists are. You either support them 100%, or you're doing something wrong/illegal/bias/racist/phobic/bigoted blah blah blah.

 

I want to know if it would give the current president the legal right to fire at least 50% of the Supreme Court and install his own people

 

rabidly so

 

Of course you think so.

 

wow, that's a stunning response there. wow. Of course I think so, that's why I said it. DUH

 

Well I mean your too hyper partisan to think any other way.

 

Does a President have the power to fire anyone in the Judicial Branch? No? Then of course it wouldn't. Thats a stupid question.

 

Okay line ‘em up in front of a firing squad because if there are no limits on presidential actions…..

 

Whoever claimed there are no limits on Presidential actions? No one. It is a lie spread by leftists who are refusing to admit that the argument is that Presidential acts are covered, PERSONAL ACTS ARE NOT. Lining up the Justices to shoot them just because of a political disagreement is NOT a Presidential Act. Now if those Justices were threatening (credibly) to blow up the Whitehouse THEN it would be a Presidential Act to kill them....if they were not able to just be arrested.

One more time...

PRESIDENTIAL ACTS ARE COVERED BY IMMUNITY.
PERSONAL ACTS ARE NOT COVERED BY IMMUNITY.

 

As I clearly noted, "... the Court is still conniving to defer justice for Trump" accommodating "his contention that he is above the law."

 

Is it not obvious? If they think right now that Joe is the best they can do or he would be gone. That should tell you all you need to know about the current iteration of the Democratic party. It is corrupt, misanthropic, nihilistic, and so lusts for power that it is at the top borderline insane.

 

Both parties are corrupt and lust for power. To claim it's one sided is hyper-partisanship at an insane level

 

Obama had a 16 year old American assassinated McCarthy gave a very interesting break down on that yesterday.

 

This supposed "immunity" does NOT mean that therefore everything from a President is constitutional and not subject to judicial review. It only means that in order to be indicted for a crime for official acts in office they would first need to be impeached. Nothing more, and nothing less.

Yeesh.

You are smarter than that. This has not one thing to do with the USSC serving as a judicial check on the executive branch. The only people suggesting messing with the number of Supreme Court justices have been the Democrat Senate which frighteningly enough has that legal ability.

 

If you regard upholding certified democratic elections, opposing a loser's goon attacking outnumbered police defending Congress, opposing fake elector schemes, opposing attempts to intimidate election officials into fraudulently misrepresent their constituents' vote, and being contemptuous of crapping on America's judicial system as partisan, that is your prerogative.