• Ashyr@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    146
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Honestly, if they were to rule that Trump is immune, Biden should immediately arrest the affirming justices and replace them with his own appointees, screw the process.

    He’s immune, after all.

    Of course, the new justices would probably hold Biden accountable and then recuse themselves to allow the displaced justices to return.

      • III@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        11 months ago

        If they go the route they did with Roe it would be because of some European dude who believed in witchcraft that died before the United States was formed. Very reasonable… /s

      • PersnickityPenguin
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        11 months ago

        “Based on 11th century English Law of the Lords, that is, a law made up on the spot by the local Feudal Lord to order his minions to cut off the heads of anyone he wants, Trump can do this too and override every law in American legal history.”

        “It’s what the Founding Fathers wanted.”

    • Xanis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      At this point I am sorta on the fence to break rules to fix things. Wisdom says that’s a terrible idea, yet somehow it keeps popping up in my head.

      Not sure we’re quite there…yet. Damn if this climb isn’t running out of stairs though.

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Only a fool sticks to something like rules when fighting terrible people who ignore rules.

        If you want to feel good about it, stick to moral axioms, like minimizing suffering. It becomes very, very easy to despise Republicans for being literal monsters.

        If you want to know where to draw the line on your morals, stick to the paradox of tolerance. Who is being intolerant of whom, and what’s the big deal?