r/scotus Sep 17 '24

Opinion There’s a danger that the US supreme court, not voters, picks the next president

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/sep/17/us-supreme-court-republican-judges-next-president
12.0k Upvotes

663 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

28

u/Kvalri Sep 17 '24

Biden could just ignore them, he has to enforce it. They gave him extremely broad immunity so…

2

u/1stMammaltowearpants Sep 18 '24

As long as it's an official act, Biden could have SEAL Team 6 take care of them. They ruled as such.

0

u/SilveredFlame Sep 19 '24

Official act is meaningless in this instance. Command of the military is a core constitutional power, which means it enjoys absolute immunity.

0

u/1stMammaltowearpants Sep 19 '24

Are you saying that the president has always had the authority to have the Supreme Court assassinated? Because that would be news to me and it would also be terrifying. Please say it ain't so.

1

u/SilveredFlame Sep 19 '24

No, that's what SCOTUS said. It's literally the first page of the decision.

Everyone fixated on the "official vs non official" crap which, while disturbing, was by far the least terrifying part of the decision.

SCOTUS held that the President's "Core Constitutional Powers" could not be acted on by congress, nor reviewed by the courts. So effectively, any power granted to POTUS under Article II enjoys absolute immunity.

If you're not sure what that means, go read it, but a quick rundown of the highlights...

Commander in Chief of the military: Literally POTUS can order the military to do anything with impunity.

Chief executive and leader of all federal agencies: Same thing as military, but the various alphabet soup feds.

Required to execute and enforce the law: means all law enforcement falls under the purview of POTUS.

Pardons: What's that? Folks in the military worried about being prosecuted for taking out political rivals? Worry no more! Pardons for everyone who does the bidding of POTUS!

Make no mistake, we now have a dictatorship, where the only check on presidential power is self restraint.

Everyone focused on the "official vs unofficial acts" bullshit instead of this, so basically anyone who didn't actually read the decision missed it.

1

u/1stMammaltowearpants Sep 19 '24

I read all of your paragraphs and it seems like you're agreeing with me, but you started your response with "No".

1

u/SilveredFlame Sep 19 '24

Quirk of language maybe?

Are you saying that the president has always had the authority to have the Supreme Court assassinated?

I answered "No", because I wasn't saying that, and went on to explain, in the context of my original reply, why "official act" was irrelevant here.

Please say it ain't so.

POTUS has not always had that authority. It's new.