Skip to main content

in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

Meanwhile, in my closing remarks to the first year law students on the last of torts, I directly discussed the challenge they face entering the American legal profession when so many of its most visible members are simply shilling for a political movement that holds American law and governmental design in contempt. 4/
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh all seem blatantly more committed to maga-ism than to justice, let alone to pluralistic democracy. Thomas is bought and paid for. Roberts and Coney Barrett can’t seem to summon the clarity of mind and the courage to stand on the right of history. 5/
This entry was edited (1 week ago)
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

Isn't the thing they are overlooking that all of their hypothetical justifications apply to Biden as well as Trump? If they move to protect Trump, it's Biden's move. No?
in reply to Larry Smith

@stargazersmith
they're not overlooking a thing, they understand human psychology better than you do

Biden is not going to commit a crime to stop 45 from destroying democracy, you are asking too much of him

yes, in theory, he could end our long national nightmare in a moment if they ruled that POTUS could not be prosecuted for any crime but he won't do what people are thinking or even openly suggesting

decency is disadvantaged in a culture of corruption

OtownKim reshared this.

in reply to peachfront

@peachfront
But if they rule in protecting all actions of Trump, whatever Biden did post such ruling would NOT be illegal.
in reply to Larry Smith

@stargazersmith @peachfront Ah, but here is what you miss: they ignore precedents whenever it suits them. You might think that what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, but they will just rule case by case that Trump can do whatever but Biden cannot. They don't have principles.
in reply to Larry Smith

@stargazersmith
they don't care, they don't have to care because they understand -- as you may not-- that Biden won't do these things

he won't arrest the bribe-taking SCOTUS judges, he won't arrest or Gitmo Trump, he has made every effort to stand aside & let law enforcement do its thing impartially as decency demands

he ain't gonna suddenly change because corrupt judges said being a corrupt POTUS is fine, jump on in & join the party

in reply to Larry Smith

@stargazersmith @peachfront
That's the weird part. Not only would it be legal, you could argue it would be an obligatory part of his duty.

Like, he could detain members of that SC, install new ones, delete the second amendment, outlaw gerrymandering, write a new constitution, have new elections and resign.

That is upside down world.

in reply to dingodog

@dingodog19 @peachfront
I don't think the right wing SCJs are able to follow their thinking through.
in reply to Larry Smith

@stargazersmith @dingodog19 @peachfront
Remember that a core part of conservative thinking is that the rules do not apply equally to everyone. We would call this hypocrisy, they would call it the whole point. You and I may believe that a just court must apply precedent equally but they do not, and they're the ones who get to decide.

Alberto Fujimori phrased this as "for my friends, everything; for my enemies, the law."

in reply to Larry Smith

@stargazersmith To your point. If SCOTUS hands extreme immunity to the President predicated on an originalist legal theory, President Biden should IMMEDIATELY TEST THE BOUNDARIES OF THE THEORY by launching tactical squads on conservative justices residences, Mar-A-Lago, and Trump Tower. I would love to see #UncleThomas and #Ginny paraded in their night clothes in the streets.
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

What a contrast to judges like Arthur Engoran, Juan Marchan, and Tanya Chutkan, judges who, without sacrificing law and legality, have shown that the law need not kowtow to Donald Trump. Ditto for the majority of the Colorado Supreme Court. 6/6
This entry was edited (1 week ago)
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

listening to the hearing today my prediction is a 7-2 or 8-1 ruling:

1) Trump (& all former Presidents) can be prosecuted right away for all "personal" actions (I think the special counsel called it "office seeking") - basically all election related stuff since the President has no role in that - to the extent they can be severed

2) He can be prosecuted for some official acts that aren't the sole discretion of the office after a review process in lower courts, prob with a test of some sort - so all meetings with other electeds, statements, orders to staff, etc

3) He can't be prosecuted for other official acts like appointments and lawful orders to military

4) Maybe some guidance/allowance for introducing actions from (3) as aggravating or establishing state of mind or motivation for (1) and (2)

I fully expect Thomas wants to go full Nixon (if the President does it it's not illegal). I think Alito wants to also but might not if Roberts leans on him.

in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

Please add to the list of laudable judges the judges on the D.C. Circuit Court who ruled so carefully and clearly on Trump's immunity claims.

Heidi Li Feldman reshared this.

in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

Does someone have Biden's ear, or the ear of someone who has Biden's ear?

If Trump gets immunity, Biden MUST swallow his principles and use the newly granted powers to solve the twin issues of The Russian Asset and the corrupt SCOTUS justices that were appointed by a Russian Asset.

He MUST do that, immediately, or it's GAME OVER for Democracy in the US.

This entry was edited (1 week ago)
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

Engoran is kowtowing by not enforcing the gag orders against trump like they would've for any other defendant. They too are proving there's no justice, just judicial fascism.
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

Beyond concerns about democracy, a decision that makes the president untouchable would be generally destabilizing. Anyone (domestic or foreign) dealing with US institutions would be that much more concerned with shifting patterns of influence and lines of force than with constitutional authority. Government would lose coherence. It would push the Interesting Times meter to 11.
This entry was edited (1 week ago)
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

I am flabbergasted that otherwise smart people don't seem to realize the entire "stolen election" thing was completely fabricated to feed the orange thing's ego? 🤷‍♀️ It appears even scotus is drinking the Kool aid. 🤬
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

You used the word courage. My wife used the word coward. I think that’s right. They really are acting like they are afraid of what will happen (to them) if they rule against him and if he were to win. That reinforces the idea that these are really mob boss trials, and our justices are compromised (willingly or not).
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

Thomas seems to be not on the same page as Alito and Kavanaugh.
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, the #FoxPropaganda caucus.
This entry was edited (1 week ago)

Ned Hamson reshared this.

in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

they are also signing the death warrants on the liberal justices if Trump or a similar MAGA takes the White House? After all, assasinating a Supreme Court justice would also be an official act, no? To create vacancies?

We need to amend the constitution to create a check on this unbalanced court. Where we the people get to vote on whether to retain them periodically.

Also, has anyone filed ethics complaints with bar associations where these justices are licensed?

in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

@heidilifeldman: I am not a lawyer. I'm an engineer by education and by vocation (albeit a retired one at this point), so logical analysis is in my skill set. That the rogue SCOTUS majority seems to be willing to abandon the rule of law and the core principle that nobody, not even a sitting or former president, is above the law is terrifying. Without the rule of law, we'll have no democracy.

This also seems to be reinforcing the GOP's tactic of using investigations and prosecuting political enemies to smear the public's image of them no matter the cost to the country. If they are too afraid of the GOP to follow the rule of law in their reasoning, they have no business serving on the bench at any level let alone in the highest court in the land.

in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

I'm not sure why you separate out roberts and barrett. They are just as bought and paid for as any of the others. They should all be thrown in the back of a cargo plane and dumped off at gitmo.
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

American law still sanctions slavery for convicts.

It's not difficult to hold that in contempt.

Moreover, that is just one of countless issues with American law presently.

GhostOnTheHalfShell reshared this.

in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

I know that you’re getting a lot of feedback here so sorry for the noise.

It seems that bad faith action against an imperfect system (maintained imperfectly, though generally in good faith) being actionable against the imperfect system is a great lesson for future molders of that legal system.

We’re in everything everywhere expansion all at once, and to know that is not only advantage, but necessary.

The western post ww2 set in stone righteousness idea was always childish.

This entry was edited (1 week ago)
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

Did they pay attention to West Virginia versus EPA. SCOTUS mandating that we have to suffer from global warming was a big and terrible decision in my opinion anyways.

Gail Waldby reshared this.

in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

They've been on a roll for sure. SCOTUS reform is on the ballot in 2024!
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/359

reshared this

in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

any of them can break free at any time. they're lifers, it's over. they can ultimately do what they want.

but it's also the reality that when this shit breaks, it will lead to some killings. no one wants to be on the front line rn

in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

The mere fact that today's arguments were so much as entered into the record of the highest court of the land indelibly stains every symbol of our society with inky black shame.

Gail Waldby reshared this.

in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

Bush v Gore made me lose faith in the SCOTUS and it hasn't been restored yet.
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

@rdviii

#JoyceVance on #SCOTUS "debate" of #Trump #immunity

“a Court that has shown a propensity to abandon first principles, precedent, history, common sense, and the good of the American people when their political allegiances demand it.”

in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

Nothing, really. He was completely ignorant of all things related to law when he appointed them.
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

Didn't Abe Fortas resign when he was merely accused of corruption? It doesn't appear that's how the Roberts court rolls.
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

A back alley mush-brained rapist thug working for Russia and Saudi Arabia got to anoint three corrupted Christian soldier shills with the closest thing to immortality that we have, while three of the older bastards have been partying for decades on the tab of billionaires who were dedicated to seeing that those others all made it to where they have, and people want to convince us it’s cool, there are checks against it.
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

They are focused on that fact. They're focused on enabling it.
This would be the culmination of all the work of the RW side of the court since 2000.
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

He did not "attempt to overthrow an election". He told his supporters to go home twice on Twitter, & both tweets were deleted. He also offered National Guard, but pelosi refused. Legally he couldn't send them without her permission. Learn the facts, & stop spreading lies.
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

We all know the buck stops at the Supreme Court. What we didn't realize is how many friends it brought with it for those vacations.
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

they have laid the foundation for a New American Order they are simping for Trump in the most degrading way. This election in Nov is the most important patriotic act by Americans since the signing of the Declaration of Independence
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

They worry about precedent going forward but have no concern about past precedent. It's as if they think their malicious opinions will be written in stone forever.
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

Incredibly disappointed that the liberal justices willingly participated in this farce.

Their very presence there lends normalcy and credibility to a hearing that should be seen as insane and corrupt.

in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

I don't for a second believe they are clueless. Instead I believe they know exactly what they are doing.
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

Four of them were appointed by presidents who lost the popular vote. Why would we expect them to care about actual democracy?
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

SCOTUS is a fucking fraud corrupted by Leonard Leo and his billionaire backers.
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

SCOTUS today refused to address the facts of the coup attempt. Instead they blabbed about what-ifs and save-our-own criminality. They will invent some lame bullshit to delay justice and abet their gang boss.
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

#Activemeasures #bannon
#FBI
#DoJ
#law
The #Project25 agenda and the #scotus 'what if we don't protect executive immunity - what will happen in the future' focus are #RussianFSB fka #Kgb engineered dynamics intended to force the US into a scenario where the establishment will have to abandon the peaceful transition of power if the #GOP win and thus destroy our most sacred civil tradition and topple us from moral leadership of the Free World.
This entry was edited (1 week ago)
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

As long as we're doing insane hypotheticals, let's say SCOTUS completely immunizes the POTUS thinking Biden wouldn't abuse the power. Then Biden becomes incapacitated or dies. Kamala Harris becomes POTUS goes rogue. Has trump arrested and detained, interrogated and uses his forced confession to unilaterally convict him. Then declares Marshal Law to put down the MAGA protests.
Careful what you wish for...
This entry was edited (1 week ago)
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

It’s very clear that they think they are above such mundane things. They believe that rather than applying the law to the present, their destiny is to shape law for the future. So they create controversy when there is none. Nobody asked them to decide the scope of presidential immunity; they were asked to decided whether a president is immune from all prosecution. That should have been an easy question. But they wanted a more complex one …
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

the only future president they are worried about is their mutual benefactor, tRump.
in reply to Heidi Li Feldman

If they don't fix this, there won't be anymore Presidents: we'll have a Monarchy instead.