• John_McMurray@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    It was already effectively legal, presidents have been ordering people killed for how long now? And often not even in wartime scenarios. Just cause they wanted them removed.

  • OccamsRazer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    I can’t believe people in here openly advocating to assassinate supreme court justices. You all need to step away for a bit, take a few breaths and go talk to some real people.

  • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    I once made up an idea for an action thriller, called “President Psycho”, where a serial killer gets elected as the president, and immediately legalizes murder involving brutal torture for himself and his friends, if committed to the “right target”. God my ideas are becoming reality before even realizing them, and the worst is that I had an idea for an edgy magical girl metroidvania that set in a dystopian world which has been completely overthrown by fascists, all while I just started to take more seriously a much more simpler and smaller game idea (Arkanoid clone that is basically a hacking minigame but bigger).

  • lennybird@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    For how long this took — for the mere fact they took this case — and given their previous rulings, I’m more stunned the experts are stunned.

    • samus12345@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      *is continuing to fall. The next time any Republican becomes president, the end of the fall will be imminent.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        the end of the fall will be imminent

        We’ve got so much farther left to go. Go check out how Argentina is handling its Trump-style President, and even they’ve got a ways to go. Check out the Philippines under Duterte and Marcos. They’re getting closer, but still plunging.

        Now Haiti? Libya? Ukraine? Sudan? That’s your rock bottom.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            Country devastated by natural disasters and civil wars.

            Country devastated by civil war and foreign occupation.

            Country devastated by civil war and foreign occupation.

            Country devastated by civil war and natural disaster.

        • samus12345@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          It’s still possible to save it at this point, although the chances get worse and worse every year.

  • CrystalRainwater@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    Remember that this whole time biden could have packed the SCOTUS and turned the Republican majority into a Democrat majority. Nothing in our Constitution says only 9 supreme court appointees. He’s just not willing to do it because he is a liberal and doesn’t want to use his power to crush the Republicans like they need to be.

    If it was trump he would have (and did) wielded the knife of political power with no hesitation but the moment Democrats have the knife they hold it with fear the Republicans would accuse them of being partisan.

    • Fades@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      He’s just not willing to do it because he is a liberal and doesn’t want to use his power to crush the Republicans like they need to be.

      This is ABSOLUTELY wrong and /u/exanime pointed that out to you already. Manchin and Sinema said they would have blocked it. It would not have succeeded because they sold their souls NOT because biden is tOo LiBeRaL. Jesus christ.

      The Biden admin has fought tooth and nail for things that are actually fucking possible and the average american has benefited. We all want to expand this illegitimate court but you simply CANNOT pin the blame on Biden’s chest.

      What about Obama?? Where was the packing of the court then? You know, that time in which he could have forced RBG out and chosen a pick but instead mitch pushed for the AmErIcAn PeOpLe to get the choice (and then did the exact opposite when it was trumps turn). Too much of a lib as well?

      • CrystalRainwater@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        So much lib apologism holy shit. First of all I responded to the users comment. They are correct about that but just because the two said they would oppose doesn’t mean biden did his best.

        The biden admin fought tooth and nail? What did he fight for? You think I’m supposed to accept the one thing he fought for, student debt cancellation as some sort of pity policy? Trump came out all the time pushing the window to the right, fighting for his policy. You literally could not make him shut up about the border while Biden hardly ever used his platform meaningfully to bully others in the government into doing what needed to be done to build political power for the democrats. If you can’t see that then I think you might not understand the full extent of the power of the presidency. Where’s decriminalizing weed? When did he push for the minimum wage? Those were like his main campaign promises. The worst part is especially with weed he could have just descheduled it but instead he just lowered it by a single schedule to raise his approval rating.

        I don’t get why you have such a hard-on for biden. He did some good things but that doesn’t excuse his negligent misuse of his political appointment at a time when our democracy depends on it.

        With regards to Obama, do I have to complain about every politician I don’t like whenever I criticize any other politician? Obama sucked at this too and this is in many ways more his fault than Biden’s but do I really need to bring him up every time I go to criticize other democrats?!

      • CrystalRainwater@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        It’s possible but there was at least an opportunity to try putting forth some moderate judges which would have a chance to pull over center Republicans or Sinema/Manchin. Or at least force the issue. I believe they also had a chance after Roe V Wade before election time in November when the political will was more there to defend the abortion issue by getting a supreme court more favorable on the issue

    • samus12345@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      And what would stop the next Republican president from packing the court further to have a conservative majority again?

      • CrystalRainwater@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        I hate this reasoning. They would do it anyway! They attempted a coup. You really think they would stop because there’s some gentleman’s agreement not to add more?

        Trump and the GOP have always used these gentleman’s agreements against the Democrats when they are in power and ignored them when it was their time. Obama did the same shit when he was in office not forcing through the supreme court appointee.

        • samus12345@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          One thing that people seem to be missing is that the President cannot add SCOTUS vacancies. Only Congress can.

          • CrystalRainwater@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            Dems had majority in the house and senate. If they managed to get all dems to agree (which is not guaranteed) in the Senate on the appointee) then in all likelihood they would be able to increase the size with congress

            • samus12345@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 days ago

              They’d have to have a supermajority in both, which is an impossibility with current gerrymandering. Really, I think the Judicial branch needs a serious overhaul from the bottom up. 9 unelected lifetime appointees getting to decide what the law means for over 300 million people is ridiculously easy to exploit, which we’re seeing now.

              • CrystalRainwater@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 days ago

                They would have to do the nuclear option and crush the filibuster. I agree with you though on the lifetime appointees thing. They really should have terms and elections

          • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            And it is the President’s responsibility to nominate justices, so if the majority party just nullifies every single nominee until they can secure the presidency, we shouldn’t pretend that they aren’t obstructing the operation of government to try to seize power.

            All of this “but the government actually works this one specific way” argument isn’t much of a real argument when the issue is that bad faith actors are exploiting and weaponizing the way our government works in order to destroy it and to turn it into a dictatorship.

        • samus12345@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          Packing the court solves nothing as it can be immediately reversed as soon as a Republican is in office.

          • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            The new surpreme court could chance the laws so that is no longer possible.

            Undo the current surpreme court laws, and weaken the powers of the president before Trump gains power.

          • CrystalRainwater@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            In the case they reverse it then we are back at square 1 except we had a more progressive supreme court for a bit. I don’t see how this makes our situation worse. I guess we should also give up and never bother with executive orders since they can just be undone when the Republicans get in

            • samus12345@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              It’s moot, anyway, as the President doesn’t have the power to add Justice vacancies. That’s Congress’s job.

    • ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      He’s just not willing to do it because he is a liberal and doesn’t want to use his power to crush the Republicans like they need to be.

      Liberals love to maintain the status quo with small, incremental changes.

      • Tilgare@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Capitalism loves unfettered, infinite growth. This is such a small minded, short term mindset. I much prefer a “controlled and sustainable” growth approach. Liberals are trying to build an equitable country for all of us and our progeny, the other side is trying to cash out before it all comes crashing down. It’s disgusting. But history repeats itself, because humans are the common factor and humans, broadly, suck.

        • b161@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          You can’t say Liberals are trying to build an equitable country when they clearly are not, while trying to pin the blame on “humans”.

          Humans are not the problem, capitalism is the problem. The capitalist system is working exactly as intended - putting all the wealth in the hands of a few men while making slaves of the rest of us.

          You cannot build an equitable or sustainable society in the capitalist system. It will always lead to fascism and ruin.

          The capitalism that the Liberals love is the same capitalism that the Republicans love. It doesn’t make much difference if you stick a rainbow flag on it. There is no nice version of capitalism. There’s nothing “controlled or sustainable” about neoliberal capitalism.

          Please stop trying to blame humans for being forced with violence, homelessness, and starvation to try to survive in a cannibalistic system that forces people to become greedy. I’m tired of hearing the Malthusian untrue “humans suck” meme. Humans learn from the conditions they are raised in. There is nothing inherently greedy in humans. That is purely conditioning. If we lived in a society that rewarded cooperation and didn’t threaten us with homelessness and death for not being obedient slaves we would be cooperative and have the possibility to work toward building a sustainable society.

          • aesthelete@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            Humans are not the problem, capitalism is the problem.

            Oh yes, that magical system that was created by ghosts or ghouls or something other than a human.

            Humans are the problem and have always been the problem. Hell, we even invented the word problem to describe all of the problems we have, and cause!

  • zbyte64@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    What a can of worms. If Texas can ignore SCOTUS then with this ruling what’s to stop the president from ordering his staff to do the same?

  • rayyy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    It goes by beyond murder. It includes terrorism by goons blessed by government pardons - MAGAs included if they step out of line. All dissent will be crushed. He warned us of his intention but some are way too stupid to understand.

  • John_McMurray@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Barack must be relieved he’ll never be prosecuted for conspiracy to commit murder and first degree murder.

  • thedarkfly@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    You know in the game Secret Hitler when the board has sufficiently advanced into fascism that it becomes strategic for the liberals to vote fascism and unlock a bullet? Honestly makes me think of that.

    Not saying this is what needs to happen. I honestly don’t know how americans can do to get out of their quagmire.

    • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      In my experience, the liberals lose games like that 9 times out of 10. Either they kill a liberal and doom themselves, or they kill a fascist and then lose the game anyways because the deck is stacked.

      What this would actually look like in effect would be if Biden had Trump assassinated by their own rules, either Biden would get impeached by the republicans + a few breakoff dems, or it would start a precedent of political assassinations in the U.S., which would end with a lot of blood.

      Either way, it will be a disaster. I don’t want to be a doomer, but I don’t see a way to salvage this shit show.

      • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        That’s not doomer, that’s being a realist. Either Biden becomes a dictator and risks MAGA civil war, or Trump becomes a dictator and risks a rebellion. Those are the 2 choices.

      • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Have the opposing judges and Trump assasinated on the same day. Court is now in your favour so its an official act and no impeachment.

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    Would be a shame Dark Brandon used his newfound powers to execute the supreme court for treason.

    • AlbertSpangler@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      The powers now suddenly granted are decided entirely by the SC for what they seem “official/unofficial”. Those jokes about how they’d try and do “immunity, but only for trump”?

      That’s what they’ve done.

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    weird that the constitution says nothing about “immunity” but the courts keep creating various forms of it. Its almost like we explicitly need an amendment that says courts are not allowed to declare things “immune” from the law.

    • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      weird that the constitution says nothing about “immunity” but the courts keep creating various forms of it.

      Also weird that it explicitly prohibits warrantless search and seizure of personal property and documents as well as due process, but, the courts have allowed personal property to be stolen via civil asset forfeiture (somehow, it’s considered legal to accuse non-sentient objects of crimes, for which there is little to no recourse because they have no consciousness) and >=90% of the country which is within 100miles of a border (international airports are considered borders) are vulnerable to detention without charge by the Border Patrol.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      It’s crazy because so much of the constitution is about ensuring no one is above the law, because they were trying to get away from a monarchy. Somehow this SC either can’t read or understand the constitution though because here we are.

  • cyd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    US presidents acting in their official capacity were always immune to prosecution for murder. Johnson and Nixon wiped out entire villages in Vietnam, never held accountable.

    • nomad@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      True, but now it’s legal do wrap Trump and all his judges in American flags and throw them out a third floor window. The flag makes it official business. Welcome to Putin town.

    • Mog_fanatic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Couldn’t they just vote that it wasn’t an “official” presidential action and try him for murder? With this new ruling and the absurdly vague definitions of what is or isn’t official it seems like absolutely anything is legal but only if the SCOTUS say it is. So right now it certainly seems like if you wear red you could do anything you want and if you wear blue you are screwed six ways to Sunday. I may be misunderstanding this whole thing tho.