Yes, because a court that found immunity in the constitution where there is none will give one flying fuck about a statute.
Do something real like campaign on adding non corrupt justices.
this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2024
236 points (98.8% liked)
News
37090 readers
2407 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Or arrest them for being terrorists. And then toss them in gitmo. No laws in gitmo. They made sure of it. And when a president does it, it isn't a crime. So go on Dark Brandon, toss em in the brig. Don't forget the forced rectal feeding! Doctor Describes and Denounces C.I.A. Practice of ‘Rectal Feeding’ of Prisoners
If they're in gitmo they're still technically justices. Better for Biden to just kill them outright so that there are six "vacancies" for him to appoint new people to.
Take the shot Papa Joe. Take the shot.
I don't see how that would work.
Setting aside the question of whether Congress can alter the matter short of a constitutional amendment, doing so using something like federal legislation, if the bill would actually apply to the incidents of Jan 6, I have a hard time seeing how that wouldn't amount to being an ex post facto law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law
An ex post facto law is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions that were committed, or relationships that existed, before the enactment of the law. In criminal law, it may criminalize actions that were legal when committed; it may aggravate a crime by bringing it into a more severe category than it was in when it was committed; it may change the punishment prescribed for a crime, as by adding new penalties or extending sentences; it may extend the statute of limitations; or it may alter the rules of evidence in order to make conviction for a crime likelier than it would have been when the deed was committed.
Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the United States Constitution in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 3 (with respect to federal laws) and Article 1, Section 10 (with respect to state laws).
Uh ... because:
In remarks on the Senate floor, Schumer said that Democrats are seeking to classify Trump’s election subversion acts as “unofficial” acts that are not subject to legal immunity.
That removes immunity by explicitly saying those acts cannot be official. It doesn't change their atatus, it clarifies it.
Whether a crime was committed there is a different story for a trial court to determine.
Hey look it's the liberals forming subcommittees while the boots thunder down the hall.
From now on I'm going to call these articles and the related actions a "Boots Subcommittee".
Schumer called a Boots Subcommittee. It wasn't very effective.
If they need to make what he did legal and official then what he did was illegal.
They need to do a shit ton more than just hint.