Chuck Darwin on Nostr: When questioned during confirmation hearings, the Republican-nominated members of the ...
When questioned during confirmation hearings,
the Republican-nominated members of the Supreme Court of the United States
assured U.S. Senators that they would honor precedent.
Although Democrats were probably focused on Roe v. Wade when they asked those questions,
it turns out that the six had something else up their sleeves:
the unitary executive or imperial presidency.
In the last days of the 2023-24 session, the Court has
eviscerated the power of agencies to write regulations;
muzzled the SEC;
made bribery of a public official legal if the “gratuity” is delivered after the official’s term of office;
and criminalized homelessness when people have no shelter.
Its coup de grâce:
naming the president king with the Court as his interlocutor (in defining what constitutes an official act).
As former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance writes: “
If Nixon had known he had immunity like [the ruling 01 July 2024], he wouldn’t have resigned.”
From Justice Sotomayor, with whom Justice Sagan and Justice Jackson join, dissenting:
Today’s decision to grant former Presidents criminal immunity reshapes the institution of the Presidency.
It makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law.
Relying on little more than its own misguided wisdom about the need for “bold and unhesitating action’ by the President, ante, at 3, 13,
the Court gives former President Trump all the immunity he asked for and more.
Because our Constitution does not shield a former President from answering for criminal and treasonous acts, I dissent
https://themoderatevoice.com/a-radical-scotus-majority-asserts-that-trumps-efforts-to-overturn-the-election-consist-of-official-acts/
the Republican-nominated members of the Supreme Court of the United States
assured U.S. Senators that they would honor precedent.
Although Democrats were probably focused on Roe v. Wade when they asked those questions,
it turns out that the six had something else up their sleeves:
the unitary executive or imperial presidency.
In the last days of the 2023-24 session, the Court has
eviscerated the power of agencies to write regulations;
muzzled the SEC;
made bribery of a public official legal if the “gratuity” is delivered after the official’s term of office;
and criminalized homelessness when people have no shelter.
Its coup de grâce:
naming the president king with the Court as his interlocutor (in defining what constitutes an official act).
As former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance writes: “
If Nixon had known he had immunity like [the ruling 01 July 2024], he wouldn’t have resigned.”
From Justice Sotomayor, with whom Justice Sagan and Justice Jackson join, dissenting:
Today’s decision to grant former Presidents criminal immunity reshapes the institution of the Presidency.
It makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law.
Relying on little more than its own misguided wisdom about the need for “bold and unhesitating action’ by the President, ante, at 3, 13,
the Court gives former President Trump all the immunity he asked for and more.
Because our Constitution does not shield a former President from answering for criminal and treasonous acts, I dissent
https://themoderatevoice.com/a-radical-scotus-majority-asserts-that-trumps-efforts-to-overturn-the-election-consist-of-official-acts/