@jackofhearts I did a quick scan regarding Biden's next moves and got that his countermeasures will be successful.
Disgusted with the Supreme Court but not surprised. Very disheartening news today.
I believe this decision is going to cause chaos with society and within the courts.
Don't want to design a wedding invitation for an interfaith couple because you only believe in Christianity? ok cool.
Invetro-fertilization against your beliefs? No birth announcement design. No baby shower cake either.
To have this ruling come out on the last day of Pride month unacceptable.
@fnwilliamson is it possible his strategy is to let everyone see just how self-serving the Republicans and SCOTUS are, so that Biden and other Dems can come in with good ideas and fix things?
There does need to be something done about the current farcical SCOTUS. However, it won't be tomorrow. Or next year. I agree that Biden will do all he can do to right what has been put asunder. He did sort of pooh-pooh the thought of expanding the court in this week's aftermath. We must consider why. He is long in the tooth, experience wise. He knows that if he backs such an idea, he'll rile up the orange supporters. How dare they attempt to address the court we've packed? First, there has to be a clear majority in both the House and Senate willing to undertake such issues. Now, whether it is expanding the court, or getting the votes to impeach those who have done such things as lie during their confirmation hearings, or not reported gifts as they should have-not to mention failure to recuse oneself when their wife tried to overturn a fair election. There will be plenty of repercussions from all that has been done in the last year. The youth will be riled up.
There will be people refused services for things they never dreamed of-on both sides of the aisle. Interracial or interfaith weddings-nope, you are denied service. But they never dreamed that when they are marrying a second time, that too is now cause for denial of service. Out on a date with the mistress? Who did you vote for questions before service is given? I know, that's a little far-fetched. But it made news when Huckabee Sanders was denied service at a VA restaurant just because of who she was and who she represented, so I won't be surprised to see occasional events like this in the offing. Especially with those who are so disgruntled by what this court has done. Wouldn't it be a real wake-up call if they were the ones to be denied service, yet I can picture that happening. The court will be held in contempt by the general public for taking on a non-vetted case. The documents listed in the court case list falsified information. The gay man in question in the documents is neither gay (married for 15 years to the same woman), nor would he ever request someone to make a web page, since he himself is a web designer. How does one go about getting to the supreme court when there is no standing? The highest court in the land isn't supposed to give advisory opinions, they are there to interpret the constitution and federal law, not make laws or advise. This house of cards too will fall.
The "abnormality" of SCOTUS is not only with the decisions that they are making (and those are concerning enough), but also in the WAY they are making their decisions. In their briefs, their personal biases are clearly evident, which was never the intention of their roles as envisioned by the founding fathers. Also, by inviting and contriving certain arguments and not others, SCOTUS has powerful unchecked powers to steer America's future into a less educated, less diverse and far less successful future.
The recent SCOTUS rulings are disheartening, but once you tie in all the predictions here and elsewhere in the forum you begin to make sense of how this will likely play out. Overturning Roe was the first step in motivating people to resist. Now with the cake-designer ruling (a complete farce and most people know this), and the fact that President Biden almost immediately came forth with his “Plan B” counteroffensive to the student Loan ruling, it gives hope to the millions of people struggling to survive, and everyone of them is being given the impetus to vote out Republicans who invent for devious methods to oppress them. It’s more or less a last-ditch political suicide mission by Republicans, because they know they are losing support with every terrible decision or state law that comes down intending to punish ordinary citizens. The 6-3 split on the SCOTUS will not last, obviously, and this they also know, and Biden is becoming more and more popular for his administration’s accomplishments and resistance to Republican policies than any of these right-wing nutjobs are ready to admit. It’s going to take a little time, but I would think that even by the end of Biden’s second term we might see a Democratic majority on the SCOTUS - and the beginning of the reversal of some of these decisions coming down now. If some of these purple states (Texas, North Carolina, etc.) actually turn slightly more blue, we could even see a revival of the old Equal Rights Amendment, which lamentably died in 1979 when I was on the cusp of adulthood.
@toma I agree, and I think the first step after taking back the house would be to pass articles of impeachment against at least three of the current SCOTUS justices, not only for blatant ethics violations, but as Justice Jackson pointed out, the majority actually violated their Constitutional mandate by even accepting the wedding case. The Court is not advisory; it's supposed to hear and rule only on actual cases, not hypotheticals. I'd say that acting in violation of the Constitution would count as "high crime and misdemeanor"
If some of these purple states (Texas, North Carolina, etc.) actually turn slightly more blue, we could even see a revival of the old Equal Rights Amendment, which lamentably died in 1979 when I was on the cusp of adulthood.
I hate to say it but Texas is not purple. The major cities are blue, yes. Houston, Austin, San Antonio, even Dallas, and I think perhaps Lubbock, tilt blue. But there are a lot of Texans who don’t live in those cities, as well as plenty of Texans who do live in those cities and vote red. Every election year Democrats get their hopes up and every election year Texas elects Republicans for every statewide office, both Senate seats, and goes for the Republican presidential candidate. Every.single.time. Beto has lost three times in a row now and he is a highly qualified and charismatic candidate. Ted Cruz is universally disliked on both sides of the aisle, and yet he keeps getting elected.
I would love to be wrong about this but the evidence says otherwise.
On the Supreme Court canceling Biden's student debt forgiveness, I am noticing what Justice Elena Sagan wrote in her dissenting opinion:
“At the behest of a party that has suffered no injury, the majority decides a contested public policy issue properly belonging to the politically accountable branches and the people they represent,” she wrote. In exercising authority it does not have, she concluded, the Court “violates the Constitution.”)
In other words:
1. SCOTUS made a decision at the behest of the Republican Party who has not even suffered any injury from a cancelation of student debt. (The Republican Party hasn't been injured by the cancelation of student debt, they are just racist, cruel, mean haters of people less fortunate then they who would like an education that they don't want those people to have.)
2. Furthermore the Republican Party did not elect the president and his branches, i.e., Department of Education. The last election decided the make up of the Dept of Education. Put another way, the majority of people who voted in the Biden Administration have given the Biden Administration's branch that controls student loans and debt, the deciding authority to cancel student debt, since they have the authority to grant student loans.
3. Finally, SCOTUS has exercised authority it does NOT have, and thus violates the Constitution.
Also, to @enkasongwriter's prediction that Biden's remedy to this SCOTUS decision will be successful:
Biden's plan B:
"The Department of Education has already initiated a new rule-making process to open up different paths to push through debt relief, including using the Higher Education Act of 1965, which contains a provision giving the secretary of education the authority to “compromise, waive, or release any right, title, claim, lien, or demand.” It also announced other changes that would cut borrowers some slack, including a more affordable repayment plan and a year-long “on-ramp” to repayment." -- Atlantic Daily
Note that this Plan B will take many months to implement.
Of course, the mean-spirited SCOTUS majority would love to pass a law that says, no, Biden, you can't do that. But they'd be wading even further into unconstitutional territory of over reaching into a a duly elected Administration. No doubt, the zealots at the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation are busy as bees trying to stop Biden from lifting the debt burden off kids. I apologize if the link I posted is behind a paywall.
Biden’s Plan B for Student Debt
@impassionate The short answer is no, there's not much that can be done at this point or - barring party control change in the House - for the foreseeable future. He could be impeached, but that would have to begin in the House, and we all know how that would turn out. Even if they did manage to impeach him, the Senate R's would still be in full protect mode, so that route is unlikely at best. The Constitution grants life tenure otherwise, and despite the hype about the self-written "code of ethics" that SCOTUS put out a few weeks ago, it has no enforcement mechanism and no punishments.
@kathleen I apologize for taking so long to post this. It's been...a day. ;-)
Anyway, to your question in the AI thread, I believe the documents case is stuck quite simply because of the SCOTUS (obviously, at least to me) intentional dithering and delay on the immunity case. Jack Smith likely already has enough evidence about Judge Cannon's questionable legal calls, recalcitrance, and slow-walking in the documents case to have already gone to the 11th Circuit to have her forcibly recused from the case. However, I suspect that in spite of that evidence, he hasn't done so at least in part because of the uncertainty around the (completely bogus, IMHO) immunity claim before the court.
Let me address that first. The immunity claim should never have been taken up by the court because it's based on the faulty premise that he cannot be tried for crimes committed while in office because he was never impeached for those same crimes, even though that flies in the face of the actual words of the Constitution, which are these from Article I Section 3, Paragraph vii:
Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.
In plain English, the impeachment process has nothing to do with criminal acts. It is solely a determination of whether the officer (the President is not the only one that can be impeached) committed acts that rise to a certain level of malfeasance. Regardless of the outcome or even whether the person is impeached/convicted, he or she is still subject to trial for any criminal acts committed (note the part that says "shall nevertheless be liable"). The fact that Nixon was never impeached for his crimes but Ford pre-emptively pardoned him anyway so he could not be tried under the law completely shreds the "no impeachment" argument for immunity for TFG.
As for the J6 and documents cases, I think it's a given that at least four of the Justices are already firmly in TFG's camp and would like to give him immunity. Unfortunately, for them, if they do so, then that means they are also handing the very same immunity to the current and all future Presidents, so if they do try to uphold it, they have to figure out a way to give it to TFG without giving it to anyone else. I suspect the decision has already been made (likely a split vote) and I hope they won't give it to him, but based on other recent rulings from this court, I'm honestly not holding my breath.
Since TFG was still President when J6 happened and most of the document theft occurred before he left office, if SCOTUS gives him the immunity decision, both cases would be exempt from trial. If they even give him only qualified or partial immunity, all of the evidence in the J6 case and at least some of the evidence in the documents case would be inadmissible, and no trial could occur, which is why I think Jack Smith isn't moving in the direction that I think he truly wants to. In any event, SCOTUS most likely won't release their decision until the very end of the term in June to delay both of the cases for as long as possible.
@tgraf66 Thanks, as usual, very helpful! I didn't realize that if SCOTUS grants partial immunity that it will apply to both federal cases and make them unlikely to be heard at all. I recall that Barrett suggested that if the government believed that there was urgency for the case to go forward that it should narrow its scope. I wondered why Jack Smith didn't do so, but I'm sure that he surmised that it would be a wasted effort if the SC gave Trump wide or partial immunity. It will be a very dark day for the US if these cases never see the light of day, and would put the nail in the coffin for this particular SC. I thought it was a travesty when Ford pardoned Nixon at the time, and looking back after many years it set a terrible precedent. I believe that the Republican Congress wanted to wipe their hands of the mess that Nixon had made and put it firmly in the rear view mirror. They were also worried about opening up a Pandora's Box if he went to trial and implicated many more in their party.
I believe that the Republican Congress wanted to wipe their hands of the mess that Nixon had made and put it firmly in the rear view mirror. They were also worried about opening up a Pandora's Box if he went to trial and implicated many more in their party.
That's exactly correct, in my opinion. There were likely more R's at the time who could and would have faced criminal liability for what was going on if a proper investigation and trial had happened. I think we're looking at the same thing now, at least with the J6 stuff, because the potential crimes with that reach literally clear up to the Supreme Court *cough* Ginny and Clarence *cough*. However, the only way that can be avoided for the implicated lower echelons (Senators and House Members) is for TFG to not go to trial on those issues. Their solution is, of course, to try to make sure he gets re-elected so he can pardon both them and himself because they know they're screwed if/when they fail. If/when Biden wins, look for multiple J6 cases to be brought against various Congress critters and others after the dust settles from the election.
@tgraf66 I'm not given to conspiracies and I've been reluctant to believe there were uglier things than just power and money grabs going on in Congress. However, this orchestrated move toward autocracy and control is beginning to make more sense. How could it be that this lawless, incompetent, repugnant and mentally ill man has been so successful in controlling his party and has also achieved deference and protection from the SC? He has had help. Trump should have lost all credibility in a right-sided world, but it's just not happening, or at least not yet. Not only does that explain the federal courts' attempts to undermine the two trials, but it might also suggest that Jack Smith and the DOJ know that there's nothing they can do until after the election (assuming that Biden wins). I hate feeling this way about the country that I love, but dark, hidden things have happened before and here we are again.
He has become the figurehead that he is simply by being a controlled asset. He is the ventriloquist's dummy that holds our attention while the ones who operate his mouth stand "silently" behind him. He is the face, the distraction that keeps from looking at those who are actually doing the work behind the scenes. His statements throughout the trial have been pre-written by others to keep him on message. Does anyone actually believe that he creates the screeds that he posts online from his own addled brain? I would almost bet my life savings that someone else composes those posts, shows them to him, and after he agrees with them, all he does is press "send". He will do and say whatever he is told to do and say by whomever controls his purse strings. This, I think, is the reality of TFG.
@kathleen I felt this in my soul. While I TRULY believe TFG will NOT win, I'm disgusted nonetheless. I used to feel so patriotic and I'm sad to say that I just, well, I'm so unpatriotic now that I'm not sure I'll get it back. Maybe some day. I try to tell myself otherwise but it's 💯 gone. I'd rather just hope for the best of all humanity, everywhere, I am completely disillusioned with America and if we do go down, we absolutely deserved it. Sorry if that upsets anyone, but that's where I'm at, as a human being. Hopeful but disgusted and disillusioned.
Tara, I have been feeling that way for various reasons for a long time. I find what helps is to imagine that the political stuff is a symptom of a country that need healing on an individual as well as larger scale. I have never seen so much narcissism from men (in general) ever, and I'm not convinced it is a female's job to fix it. Additionally, I have never seen so much toxic bullying from women ever. I am not sure where that comes from but if we are to "rise" that needs to be tossed aside.
The dictators are addicted to their brutality, false strength, and spotlight on the world stage. They have their plan, but they can't seem to take a break and ask themselves if their path is just and correct themselves. They are taking their personal dramas and expanding them to the "world stage." They can't manage to let people be themselves and find their own way in peace.
I believe many of the more benevolent people are just worn out and exhausted from trying to navigate their personal struggles as well as trying to guide others to peaceful solutions.
I can't do this often but I think the key is to see the destructive leaders as injured people. I don't think that tfg has enough understanding of others motivations to be fully blamed for this mess, but he is responsible for carrying it out.
I'm finding that educated people from other countries that have seen this sort of game before might be the ones that help on a micro level.