A constitutional republic requires not only fidelity to law, but intelligibility of law.
Excerpt:
How am I supposed to explain a shadow docket decision that the Court hasn’t even bothered to explain itself? How do I defend justices who’ve abandoned principles that they’ve advocated for decades, and who, again, did so without explaining why? How can I even articulate an argument in favor of Alito’s position that the Constitution, which has guaranteed citizenship to nearly everyone born in the United States for 158 years, suddenly does not?
The last president of the Reichsgericht, the Nazi equivalent to Chief Justice Roberts, committed suicide when the U.S. military reached Leipzig. We may live to see the U.S. President send the U.S. military to arrest some or all of the Supreme Court Justices. That would be illegal, of course, and a military that takes its oath of enlistment seriously would refuse the order.
well no, actually. This supreme court ruled that if the president sent seal team 6 to assassinate supreme court justices, the president would be covered by immunity, provided it was an "official act".
The law would still exist, but the President could not be prosecuted. The Supreme Court ruled that the President could violate any law with impunity, but every one else involved could be tried and convicted. It may be argued that the President could pardon every military person who broke the law out of personal loyalty to him, but the act would still be illegal, and the UCMJ requires that the order be refused.
[OP] D-R-AZ | 4 hours ago
Observation:
A constitutional republic requires not only fidelity to law, but intelligibility of law.
Excerpt:
How am I supposed to explain a shadow docket decision that the Court hasn’t even bothered to explain itself? How do I defend justices who’ve abandoned principles that they’ve advocated for decades, and who, again, did so without explaining why? How can I even articulate an argument in favor of Alito’s position that the Constitution, which has guaranteed citizenship to nearly everyone born in the United States for 158 years, suddenly does not?
plassteel01 | 2 hours ago
Short answer the court is above the law
JohnSith | 2 hours ago
No, the problem is they're outside of it.
plassteel01 | 50 minutes ago
Same thing outside above either way they don't see themselves being held accountable
_RyanLarkin | an hour ago
Power, not reason, is the new currency of this Court's decision-making.
SemichiSam | 4 hours ago
The last president of the Reichsgericht, the Nazi equivalent to Chief Justice Roberts, committed suicide when the U.S. military reached Leipzig. We may live to see the U.S. President send the U.S. military to arrest some or all of the Supreme Court Justices. That would be illegal, of course, and a military that takes its oath of enlistment seriously would refuse the order.
ep1032 | 3 hours ago
well no, actually. This supreme court ruled that if the president sent seal team 6 to assassinate supreme court justices, the president would be covered by immunity, provided it was an "official act".
SemichiSam | 3 hours ago
>the president would be covered by immunity
The law would still exist, but the President could not be prosecuted. The Supreme Court ruled that the President could violate any law with impunity, but every one else involved could be tried and convicted. It may be argued that the President could pardon every military person who broke the law out of personal loyalty to him, but the act would still be illegal, and the UCMJ requires that the order be refused.