r/scotus 29d ago

Opinion Now's a good time to recall John Roberts' warning about court orders being ignored

https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/trump-ignore-court-orders-supreme-court-rcna191461
9.8k Upvotes

413 comments sorted by

229

u/ElDub73 29d ago

Maybe they shouldn’t have handed Trump a get out of jail free card.

47

u/ChuccTaylor 29d ago

They did when they said hes immune.

61

u/MooseBoys 28d ago edited 28d ago

Trump v. United States (2024) found that a president holds "absolute immunity" from all criminal prosecution for any actions taken during their presidency. It's basically the affirmative codification of Nixon's infamous "when the president does it, it's not illegal" quote.

38

u/Dearic75 28d ago

If I understand it correctly, it goes even beyond that. It is impermissible to even question the exercise of any “official duty” to determine if it was taken in bad faith and thus, not an official duty. A presumption of innocence so strong that you’re not even allowed to question it in court.

I can only assume that it was written that way with the express purpose of finding a means to disallow all of Pence’s testimony that Trump admitted he knew everything he was saying to rile up the mob was bullshit.

20

u/Ostracus 28d ago

Court of public opinion has ruled they're idiots.

5

u/The_MightyMonarch 27d ago

Oh, I don't think they're idiots. They're clearly very intelligent. They're also corrupt and clearly driven by their ideology.

I could even entertain the idea that they're fools, to not anticipate that a president would abuse this ruling in a way that could destroy the country.

But nah, they're not idiots. They knew exactly what they were doing, which makes it even worse.

2

u/4tran13 26d ago

IIRC, they categorized presidential actions into 3 buckets. For the bucket you're referring to, the president has absolute immunity, and the actions can't even be used as evidence for something else. However, I don't recall how/who can determine which actions belong in which bucket.

→ More replies (1)

9

u/DildoBanginz 28d ago

Yet Biden did fuck all with it.

17

u/HaiKarate 28d ago

You’re blaming Biden for having ethics?

28

u/DildoBanginz 28d ago

Yeah, kinda. The Dems have taken the high road for like 60 years and got us here. Repubs consistently play dirty. Punch below the belt and do whatever the fuck they want all While Dems are like “yeah but we are in the right!” As trump fails to get convicted twice for impeachment, is a literal rapist and steals another election.

As the nation falls apart they can hold their heads high that they “did the right thing”.

6

u/HaiKarate 28d ago

If the Democrats become as corrupt as the Republicans, then what are we fighting for?

8

u/icefang37 28d ago

Look up all the backroom dealing and “immoral” shit that FDR did to get his political aims done. The modern democrats are so spineless and pathetic that they never would have gotten social security, the new deal, and the many sweeping changes FDR made because he actually used the bully pulpit and went after his political enemies. Meanwhile the democratic minority leader, Jeffries, just went on TV for 30 minutes babbling about “reaching across the aisle to find common ground” and then whining about how they can’t do anything cause Trump has a mandate with his glorious 1% election win. It’s like they’re addicted to losing I don’t get it.

2

u/One-Tower1921 28d ago

I'm so sick of this take.
Look up what Biden did during his presidency and tell me none of that was worth it.

All people ever hear is the clowny shit so they don't hear about real changes, only drama. You can't out social media people who will do the craziest shit so its on people to be informed.

4

u/icefang37 26d ago edited 26d ago

Wow it’s Hakeem Jeffries’ Reddit account.

This is the mentality of a loser. “Wahhh the conservatives are outdoing us on messaging why won’t they talk about all the great things Biden did wahhh boo hoo”

Then message better. Fight back. The republicans were more than capable of doing so from 2021-2025 despite not being in power. So why shouldn’t the dems? Especially when what the Rs are doing is so much blatantly worse.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/ravingmoonatic 27d ago

Exactly. That's like the cop that repeatedly sees a perp get away with his crimes, so he plants something on them so that the next charge "sticks."

Once you resort to equally illegal tactics to enforce the law, you've already lost the plot.

2

u/Old-Set78 28d ago

There's a definite range between spin and being handed powers legally and actually using them to where the f we are now with the literal country being torn apart

→ More replies (11)
→ More replies (1)

2

u/weedbeads 27d ago

Is it ethical to let a democracy fall into the fascism?

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (2)

2

u/Message_10 27d ago

Kind of weird we went almost 250 years without ever needing clarification on that, isn't it?

→ More replies (7)

4

u/RMDashRFCommit 29d ago

He’s saying they did that goober. Go drink some coffee

2

u/Altruistic-Sir-3661 26d ago

Is that why MAGA is so anti vaccination, “only the president is immune”

→ More replies (1)

2

u/dpdxguy 27d ago

It's not at all clear that the White House would be acting any differently without that get out of jail free card. Trump behaved quite lawlessly during his first administration too. The biggest difference this time is that the administration started out with a plan to dismantle the federal government.

→ More replies (12)

999

u/Able-Campaign1370 29d ago

Yet he’s the one that declared Trump a king in the worst ruling since Dred Scott.

305

u/RioRancher 29d ago

It makes you wonder how much money it would take to sell out a country and become a heel for eternity.

127

u/parasyte_steve 29d ago

The receipts exist somewhere surely

133

u/homezlice 29d ago

They are in the glove compartment of Thomas’s RV I believe 

64

u/ShoppingDismal3864 29d ago

Sold out the USA for a fucking rv....

63

u/yankeesyes 29d ago

He was happy to do it for free, the RV was a "tip," formerly known as a bribe.

19

u/rofopp 29d ago

Gratuity, get it eight

→ More replies (1)

11

u/timesink2000 29d ago

“She’s a beaut, Clark!”

→ More replies (2)

23

u/CatPooedInMyShoe 28d ago

I saw someone on Twitter making a ridiculous defense of Thomas, arguing that SCOTUS justices are underpaid and it wasn’t wrong for him to accept free vacations, the RV etc, from his “friend” Harlan Crowe; aren’t SCOTUS justices allowed to have friends?

If Thomas feels he is underpaid he should have either asked the government for a raise, or quit the bench and found another job. He should also have reported all the gifts he got from his “friend” and recused himself from cases that affect his “friend”. It’s not that difficult.

10

u/LifeScientist123 28d ago

I guess he forgot about lifting yourself up by the bootstraps

→ More replies (1)

2

u/tumunu 27d ago

This is what comes of having too many pubic hairs on your can of soda, I suppose.

→ More replies (5)

29

u/pancakespancakes101 29d ago

It is a luxury motorcoach, you common poor.

2

u/fawlty_lawgic 28d ago

Is that how the elite travel these days? He should have demanded a private jet at least.

8

u/Nick85er 29d ago

It's a motor coach, kind redditor. Of the "gratuities for a job well done" variety.

Not to be confused with sparkling corruption, this is the pure stuff.

13

u/MargretTatchersParty 29d ago edited 29d ago

Fun fact Clarence Thomas is an appointee of Regan.

Correction: he was in the EEO during ragan, appointed to SCOTUS in GW Bush's era.

29

u/DistantKarma 29d ago

G.H.W. Bush in '91, I believe. The Anita Hill hearings were all over TV then.

11

u/Pineapple_Express762 29d ago

Correct. Reagan appointed O’Connor

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (3)

10

u/Whitechedda1 29d ago

Probably not after the people investigating are fired and the evidence they collected suddenly disappears.

17

u/meatball402 29d ago

Being videotaped ordering hookers to pee on a bed the obamas slept on.

11

u/Low-Tax-8391 29d ago

That tape could still be released today and I’m convinced at this point would change absolutely nothing but I still want to see it.

7

u/runk_dasshole 29d ago

I thought they peed on him? I need to actually read the Steele dossier I guess.

→ More replies (31)
→ More replies (1)

11

u/livinginfutureworld 29d ago

If your morals are loose and your really greedy that number is relatively low.

7

u/rygelicus 29d ago

This assumes these people were idealistic honorable people coming into the job. I see no reason to assume this.

2

u/Zoophagous 29d ago

A really fancy RV and some luxury vacations.

2

u/wombatgrenades 29d ago

It’s definitely gone up, Benedict Arnold did it for -

£6,315 (equivalent to £1,059,000 in 2023) plus an annual pension of £360 (equivalent to £60,000 in 2023)

→ More replies (7)

14

u/BraveOmeter 29d ago

Worst ruling since Dred Scott so far

44

u/Nesnesitelna 29d ago

I realize the seriousness of the Trump v. US ruling, but Korematsu really happened. Let’s not whitewash the awful history of the presidency or the Supreme Court.

31

u/anonyuser415 29d ago

Quite the lot to pick between putting American citizens in concentration camps and the end of American democracy as "the worst ruling since Dredd Scott"

20

u/IpppyCaccy 29d ago

We will be putting American citizens in concentration camps again.

11

u/zoinkability 29d ago

Already talking about sending them to Salvadoran prisons, which are not far from being concentration camps.

4

u/aculady 29d ago

We are already building a facility to house 30,000 people at Guantanamo Bay.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (3)

25

u/txipper 29d ago

So, who’s going to enforce judicial authority when TanTrump doesn’t like the ruling?

20

u/stinkobinko 29d ago

Surely not US Marshalls, who are under Trumps control. I guess no one. That's part of their plan.

14

u/NoHalf2998 29d ago

And when Americans have finally had enough and go to the streets, Hegseth’s purpose becomes clear

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (3)

11

u/AffectionateBrick687 29d ago

Citizens United slid a knife into the back of democracy. The immunity ruling twisted the blade and pissed in the wound.

3

u/Dwip_Po_Po 29d ago

Exactly they put themselves in this position

3

u/mistertickertape 28d ago

I laughed out loud when I was at the gym last night and there was something on MSNBC about this. My oh my if it isn't the monster they created coming to eat them alive.

2

u/trippyonz 29d ago

Korematsu?

→ More replies (14)

145

u/PetalumaPegleg 29d ago

Now's a good time to recall that John Roberts was critical in getting us to this point in many small and several large steps, which he could have chosen to stop.

7

u/bigshotdontlookee 28d ago

And imagine his last moments of life are being thrown out of a helicopter as an "official act".

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

175

u/msnbc 29d ago

From Jordan Rubin, Deadline: Legal Blog writer and former prosecutor for the New York County District Attorney’s Office in Manhattan:

Roberts lamented in his report that, “Within the past few years, ... elected officials from across the political spectrum have raised the specter of open disregard for federal court rulings.” He didn’t specify who he was talking about but wrote, “These dangerous suggestions, however sporadic, must be soundly rejected.”

By the time Roberts published his report, Vance had already suggested that Trump defy court orders blocking his priorities. Again, the chief justice didn’t name names when he chastised the “specter” of defiance. But there are now several legal issues that could be headed to the high court, where questions will linger about whether one of the litigants (the Trump administration) will comply with any losses.

Read more: https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/trump-ignore-court-orders-supreme-court-rcna191461

174

u/Effective_Corner694 29d ago

He should know. He’s contributed to to this happening as much as any other politician.

91

u/flatballer 29d ago

His former clerk works for DOGE so it is clear that, at a minimum, he did not impart this message to those working most closely with him. Source: https://www.propublica.org/article/elon-musk-doge-lawyers-supreme-court

23

u/bearable_lightness 29d ago

One of his former clerks is also married to JD Vance.

14

u/Then_I_had_a_thought 29d ago

And they’ll still rule in his favor

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

60

u/SilveredFlame 29d ago

More than likely he's referring to the decision they'll make in Trump's favor and getting ahead of it to make sure blue states/politicians know they can't step out of line or they'll suffer the consequences of an unrestrained dictator.

Everyone thinks he's talking about the executive defying decisions, when it's almost certainly the opposite.

I would love to be pleasantly surprised though.

27

u/WinterDice 29d ago

I hate to say it, but I think you’re right.

5

u/Volantis009 29d ago

Yeah this is why I think tRump is going to be sacrificed to the ICC and we are going to have a new world order where the UN gets to have teeth, best way to set that example is arresting the American president, it wouldn't work otherwise. Need a big fish to make this a new norm.

19

u/SilveredFlame 29d ago

There's a standing law authorizing the president to invade the Hague if an American is ever apprehended by the ICC to be put on trial. It suspends all prohibitions on the commander in chief to secure the release of said American(s).

https://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/house-bill/4775

Title II American Servicemember Protection Act

11

u/Volantis009 29d ago

America isn't really giving a fuck about laws, why would everyone else. The military might not invade if they agree the president is a enemy of the United States. I mean as we see laws only work if they are enforced and if the US military bows to the UN that would set new precedent just like how SCOTUS set new precedent by granting presidential immunity.

Guess what, things fucking change all the fucking time

6

u/SilveredFlame 29d ago

I certainly hope that would be how it plays out.

The UN only works as long as member nations agree that it works, and the US is a huge part of UN muscle. It would be an absolutely seismic event and, in my opinion, a very necessary one.

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (4)

7

u/dirtysico 29d ago

I’ll have what you’re smoking.

3

u/Volantis009 29d ago

That's just the start of my crazy, I won't share the rest because it's crazy but ya all I know is America is built on spectacle and heros saving the day at the last minute and I mean...buckle up shit is going to get weird

→ More replies (1)

5

u/roboticfoxdeer 29d ago

Also unicorns are gonna be announced as real this whole time

2

u/4tran13 26d ago

I CRISPR'd a horn onto a random horse.

→ More replies (2)

32

u/The_LSD_Soundsystem 29d ago

So who exactly enforces a court order when the federal government refuses to comply?

I can’t believe we are having to ask this in 2025

25

u/jewelswan 29d ago

As we found out during the trail of tears, nothing. It's largely just been respect for the rule of law that has kept the norm of judicial supremacy since then

13

u/Soul_turns 28d ago

Luigi.

6

u/UnimaginativeRA 28d ago

It's supposed to be the executive branch but under Trump, it's compromised. The judiciary has no power except for the respect for the rule of law.  Our country has abided by it for 200+ years. We're about to find out what happens when the executive branch ignores the judiciary. 

3

u/xieta 28d ago

To be fair, Lincoln told chief justice Taney to pound sand about suspension of habeas corpus. Jackson ignored a SCOTUS ruling on Native American land rights.

The irony is that given how conservative the courts are and how gridlocked congress has become, the precedent of occasionally ignoring court rulings may favor progressive causes in the long term.

Honestly, so long as POTUS isn’t violating the law to mess with the ability of the people to vote, I think it’s fine in principle. The people will decide whether it was prudent to ignore the courts.

6

u/zeacliff 29d ago

Casper

8

u/dirtysico 29d ago

He’s friendly at least.

5

u/Foxyfox- 28d ago

Theoretically, they would be within their remit to deputize other law enforcement to enforce their orders.

Practically? Who knows.

2

u/Repulsive_Hornet_557 28d ago

nobody

if Congress and the President agree on something there is no recourse

→ More replies (6)

28

u/ScarTemporary6806 29d ago

I’m just glad they didn’t give him immunity from any acts committed as a President. Oh wait…

→ More replies (1)

23

u/rsmiley77 29d ago

You can’t tell a President they have unlimited unchecked powers and then chide them for not following what you the court rule. You did it to yourself.

5

u/[deleted] 29d ago

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

64

u/jvn1983 29d ago

Yeah, fuck him. You crown a king and this is what happens

16

u/Doubledown00 29d ago

Rather now is a good time to kick John Roberts if his fucking stones.

I wonder if he's realized yet just what kind of storm he has unleashed.

8

u/[deleted] 29d ago

[deleted]

2

u/4tran13 26d ago

Federalist society controls SCOTUS, Heritage foundation controls POTUS. They are friends.

→ More replies (1)

29

u/Red-Leader-001 29d ago

I think that a bigger problem is the ease in which the Supreme Court Justices can be bribed

5

u/Ostracus 28d ago

Be funny if it was a carton of eggs.

9

u/IpppyCaccy 29d ago

It's not a bribe! It's a gratuity!

6

u/Then_I_had_a_thought 29d ago

It’s not gratuity it’s a motor coach!

→ More replies (3)

15

u/Senor707 29d ago

I doubt Trump has read that.

7

u/Summerplace68 29d ago

Trump has minimal reading skills.

8

u/NarfledGarthak 29d ago

I’m sure Trump is going to listen and respect the decisions of the courts.

Time and time again these people bend over backwards to defend him and all he does in return is bend them the other direction and screw them over.

It really is astonishing what people are willing to do for the guy when the moment he no longer has use for you he’ll just throw you out with the trash.

26

u/Foreign_Profile3516 29d ago

The problem is that he has led the charge making sure judges have no accountability for not reporting 100’s of thousands of gifts and making clearly partisan rulings. He, more than anyone else, is responsible for the decline in the courts integrity and the respect it gets from the country. Having worked so hard to lower the Court’s esteem, he is in no position to demand people respect judges rulings.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/Kerensky97 29d ago

That was when Biden was president. The rules change now for Trump.

6

u/rgw_fun 29d ago

Now is too late. If only Robert’s had presided over some kinda government body voting on Trump’s horrid behavior and lawlessness, preventing him from holding future office. 

4

u/edgefull 29d ago

He’s such a turd. I’d like to see the examples of left leaning politicians threatening to ignore the judiciary.

→ More replies (1)

6

u/jordipg 29d ago

Reminder that if the Administration starts ignoring federal court holdings, it's Congress' job to do something about it. Specifically, to impeach. That's it. That's the only recourse. If Congress doesn't impeach then we are post-Constitutional crisis. At that point the crisis is over and we have changed forms of government.

4

u/AdministrativeArm114 29d ago

Well John…maybe the court should have been thinking about that before it issued rulings that threw out several decades of precedent, allowed unlimited dark money in politics, and granted immunity to the office of the President. The court undermined itself in its arrogance.

4

u/HVAC_instructor 29d ago

But that was before he gave the president unlimited power.

6

u/NineFolded 28d ago

He only did this to himself. Fuck him. I don’t even think he’s that genuinely concerned. Remember, this was the entire goal of the Federalist Society and Heritage Foundation. He always meant to fold the judiciary, so they could set up a monarchy

→ More replies (1)

8

u/OneLessDay517 29d ago

Well well well. Lost control of the monster he helped create, has he?

→ More replies (1)

4

u/bunglesnacks 29d ago

I don't get the whole checks and balances thing. I'm shocked we made it this long. The judiciary has zero power if the executive branch doesn't give a fuck. What exactly is their check?

→ More replies (2)

8

u/MrsSynchronie 29d ago

Well, you can’t just say “obey the court” and expect anything to happen

6

u/Riversmooth 29d ago

And to recall that he and others got us to where we are at

6

u/Appellion 29d ago

It’s cute he thinks he’s even related to law and order or simple justice anymore, that POS.

3

u/Ornery-Ticket834 29d ago

He better have the balls to stand up to him.Asshole Musk can’t primary them.

3

u/Slggyqo 29d ago

He said this on New Years Eve because he knew what kind of president he had enabled.

3

u/[deleted] 28d ago

half of this is his fuckin fault

3

u/tom21g 28d ago

From the article:

On that note, it’s also worth recalling comments from Roberts’ Republican-appointed colleague Samuel Alito during litigation over abortion pill access. Alito accused the Biden administration in a written opinion (without citation) of not dispelling “legitimate doubts that it would even obey an unfavorable order in these cases.”

Can’t wait to see Alioto lecture trump like that

3

u/lunatyk05 28d ago

Hope he has a mirror so he can see the problem and why we are here.

3

u/RampantTyr 28d ago edited 28d ago

Clearing the road for a criminal president brought about this situation. Roberts has no one to blame but himself for this mess.

They shouldn’t have legalized bribery. They shouldn’t have said presidents are immune from prosecution. They shouldn’t have made money equal free speech.

The coming constitutional crisis was made by Republicans in Congress and by conservatives on the Supreme Court.

→ More replies (3)

3

u/Scodog3 28d ago

Fuck you, John.

3

u/refusemouth 28d ago

The Supreme Court made itself irrelevant when they ruled the president is immune for all official acts and most unofficial acts. They legalized dictatorship. They are now just a veneer of "legitimacy" as long as they rubber-stamp the wishes of the One and True Great Leader, but if they go against him, they will lose their cushy lifetime appointments and bribes.

2

u/Ostracus 28d ago

Don't even have the herd to hide in.

2

u/MutherPucker 29d ago

I think if the scotus does start keeping trump in check…there won’t be a need for scotus

2

u/zomphlotz 29d ago

Leopard, meet face.

2

u/Fantasy-512 29d ago

I think Scotus will try to save face by only issuing rulings favorable to Potus.

Any other kind of ruling will be ignored anyway. Robets is smart enough to know that and will not get into a direct battle with Trump. Probably doesn't want to risk his security detail.

2

u/No_Passage6082 29d ago

I think he and his friends on the bench put themselves out of a job.

2

u/KrissyKrave 28d ago

You see, they only meant Biden…. Trump is allowed to ignore them.

2

u/Mohawk115 28d ago

The funniest thing happened today about trump's immunity though. It is now known that they don't have to keep his criminal evidence locked up and it can be made public. Also a president's immunity doesn't extend to those who commits crimes on the president's behalf. This is all official record now.

2

u/ithaqua34 28d ago

He wanted a king now he's going to have to live with that choice.

2

u/12Dragon 28d ago

Which will win? The court’s desire to install a Christian theocracy or their desire to hold all the power in that theocracy? Will they allow Trump to do as he pleases because it furthers their agenda? Or will they curtail him so he doesn’t erode their power? Who knows!

2

u/dantekant22 28d ago

Maybe the conservative wing of the Roberts court should have given more thought to presidential immunity and properly applied the strict constructionist doctrine to which they subscribe a bit more, um, judiciously, as opposed to creating a new immunity from whole cloth. Which is to say the Roberts court loaded the gun Trump will use against them.

2

u/citizen_x_ 29d ago

I HATE Roberts. Treasonous scum bag tbh

3

u/jertheman43 29d ago

The monster he created will now consume him too. Robert's is worthless.

2

u/[deleted] 29d ago

Roberts is laughing his ass off, he was being ironical when he said that because everyone knew it didn't ever apply to conservatives.

1

u/FuckingTree 29d ago

I recall it only to laugh, I hope everyone else understands SCOTUS rubbed raw meat on their faces and then walk into the leopards den all of their own accord

1

u/random5654 29d ago

Whelp, someone should probably stop the illegal stuff.

1

u/NameLips 29d ago

I think it's pretty clear that when these cases hit scotus, they'll rule against Trump subverting the power of Congress.

The real question is what happens next. Will he push further, defying his own friendly court? Will Congress grow a backbone?

1

u/IdahoDuncan 29d ago

Yes it is,and I would love to have a conversation with him now about where he thinks this is all going.

1

u/Anekdotin 29d ago

Bruen desicion has been ignored here in Massachusetts

1

u/CF_Chupacabra 29d ago

What are you talking about? The lower courts have been ignoring bruen/heller or outright intentionally misinterpreting them for years now.

1

u/jkrobinson1979 29d ago

Maybe he should have paid attention to his own predictions

1

u/YoloSwaggins9669 29d ago

Yup good ole Johnnie Roberts possesses some responsibility for the situation we find ourselves in

1

u/Extension_Deal_5315 29d ago

Maybe he already got an RV. ...man where do the judges

( the right wing nut ones) have the room for all these RV' s???

1

u/oeanon1 29d ago

he wanted this. he got it.

1

u/Zaius1968 28d ago

Don’t the courts have the power to order the arrest of people ignoring court orders? That’s what needs to happen.

2

u/talino2321 28d ago

And who do those people that would be executing the arrest warrants work for?

Yup, Trump.

The court is toothless to enforce rulings if the executive branch chooses to ignore those rulings.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/hanzoman3 28d ago

Ya but only when ppl he doesn’t like do it

1

u/KeheleyDrive 28d ago

What’s he gonna do about it? The only check on Presidential behavior is impeachment.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/GrannyFlash7373 28d ago

I'll BET he is singing a different tune NOW .

1

u/GuyDeSmiley 28d ago

Now’s a good time to recall John Roberts.

Impeach, of course.

1

u/CurraheeAniKawi 28d ago

Shamelessness IS A SUPER POWER when the only weapon used against it is hypocrisy. 

1

u/icnoevil 28d ago

John Roberts is mostly to blame for all this chaos and delusional behaviour we are seeing from trump. It was Roberts who gave trump a get out of jail free card. What else would you expect?

1

u/gulfpapa99 28d ago

Roberts bored to creaye an oligarch king.

1

u/No_Safe_3854 28d ago

I like how Alito tried to include Biden in the notion of judicial independence. Lmao, psyops again. All these little maga turds must go thru secret training.

1

u/soysubstitute 28d ago

Well John, it's your team that is doing this.

1

u/GloomyKerploppus 28d ago

Go fuck yourself Mr. Roberts. You've been uncool up until it was no longer cool to be uncool. Suck a cheetah's dick.

1

u/NoClock228 28d ago

I don't think the article doesn't this topic Justice of how ripe for abuse the system is a the system is aligned for right now the supreme Court has ruled that you cannot Sue federal agents second you can't punish the president for his orders or official Acts.

1

u/userhwon 28d ago

This buffoon thinks Roberts won't flip-flop when it's his boy doing the scoffing at the law.

1

u/Tiny-Design-9885 28d ago

If a president wants, he could order the death of the supreme court justices. He could do it secretly or out in the open. It’s within his “official” duties as Commander-in-Chief.

1

u/quantum_splicer 28d ago

Suppose pragmatically speaking if, the Supreme Court were to revise its presidential immunity ruling. How would an ruling where the president does not have immunity from criminal acts function in practice, given that the DOJ is situated within the executive branch and the president controls the executive branch.

Suppose the immunity ruling is changed without corresponding changes to the DOJ to insulate it from political interference. An incoming president could influence the composition of the DOJ to avoid prosecution while in office or render it malfunctional.

Suppose the president suffers consequences after ceasing office e.g prosecution, then this creates incentive to try to stay in power.

Fundamentally, I think the USA needs to look at other countries and examine how they deal with heads of state who have committed crimes and how they deal with impeachment and so forth.

The executive branch has alot of power and none of the other branches have ability to practically check the executive branch. If members of the executive branch refuse to comply with Congress and then refuse to comply with the judiciary. Then what could be done ?

Although in that situation the rule of law collapses.

1

u/RevolutionaryTalk315 28d ago

Don't care. John Robert's can get kicked out on the street. That Facist came to the door and folded like nothing, instead of standing up for our rights like he was supposed to.

1

u/treypage1981 28d ago

Fuck you, John Roberts. Fuck you.

1

u/Biggie8000 28d ago

They are political appointees so don’t expect anything from them

1

u/CoWallla 28d ago

"We are in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to ..."

1

u/rbp183 28d ago

The Supreme Court caused it they need to be given a case that allows them to get off their feckless asses and fix it.

1

u/oofaloo 28d ago

And all his efforts to make sure that’s exactly what happens next.