So, they’re limiting judges’ ability to…checks notes…uphold the Constitution in court?
They’ve been relegated to peanut gallery by the supreme peanut gallery.
For all those copium-takers who have been saying for months now that “Trump has been losing in the courts” (despite all evidence to the contrary) and that our court system would ultimately protect us…
Now what?
He has lost a lot in courts. The problem is that even 1% of his obviously unconstitutional bullshit winning in courts is disastrous.
A glass of water with 1% shit in it is almost entirely water. But it’s still shit water.
But if your goal is to make the water undrinkable, all you need is that 1%.
And that’s all Trump cares about. He’s made far more than 1% of the water undrinkable shit. But all that means is that even though he lost 99% of the time, he still won in the end because the water is just as undrinkable.
This is a stupid ruling, but it’s a stupid PROCEDURAL ruling. Stop being a defeatist and start getting involved.
How does this stop him from using executive orders to do illegal things in the short term?
Executive orders are not laws. As you’ve seen, his bullshit orders keep getting shot down in court. You can’t just DECLARE new laws and procedures, that’s not how it works.
This ruling doesn’t change the existing laws at all, but they’re trying to change the procedures to the laws. This ruling doesn’t do that, but it makes it harder for courts to reject arguments that align with that bullshit, that’s it.
Think you’re downplaying it a bit. They’ve been getting blocked due to injunctions. 23 so far. Now they’re not possible anymore. States will selectively enforce the constitution.
It essentially means states have to independently fight and allocate resources. It’s not the end of the road. Red state residents may be screwed but it depends on how cowardly their red governors are. Red states can’t hide behind national injunctions anymore. The state residents will be forced to harangue their state govt into fighting something in court. It may hurt the republicans in the end as they’re forcing red state governors to either: look weak to their own people or insult trump by having state AGs fight unconstitutional laws.
Sir 48% of voters approve of trumps actions so far. Those red state AGs will be championed for selectively applying the constitution as Trump sees fit. I’d expect prayer in schools and banning of protest will be the first to go.
That’s not what the ruling said, first of all. The ruling said that the 28 states who DID NOT sue won’t be included in the injunctions that are being put in place, meaning these asshats took issue with the lower court issuing a nationwide injunction. Any individuals or groups that sue will still be included in the injunction set to go into effect in 30 days.
Stupid, fuck yes. Overstepping, yup. It is not a ban on lower courts issuing injunctions full stop as you’ve just said.
Yeah technically but still makes it a lot harder, more expensive, and longer; especially for the unlucky ones in red states who now have unequal access to justice. Giving them plenty of time to do whatever the f they want. Already bumrushing people at breakneck speed on the streets and shipping them off to random countries what do you reckon they’ll manage in their remaining 3.5+ years.
The ruling only applies to the nationwide injunction that was issued on this order. As I said in my other comment, any individuals can sign onto this simply by asking. There will be a massive flood of options to do this showing up in Monday, I guarantee, so I’m not worried about that.
It wasn’t a ruling on nationwide injunctions in general, it wasn’t a legal ruling saying that federal judges cannot do this in the future, and it wasn’t an exclusion of anybody from signing on to this.
As far as the next few years…honestly, we just need to make it to midterms. That’s what I’m focused on and worried about. The GOP is already eating themselves alive and fracturing in a million pieces just like his first term, and at record speed. Yeah, shit feels kind of bleak, but people need to think more strategically and manage out how we GET to the midterms without shit getting worse or escalating. That’s the important bit.
Edit: here’s a very smart and measured legal analyst that spells it out succinctly: https://www.rawstory.com/msnbc-2672488166/
Even if the courts eventually shoot down his bullshit orders eventually, they’re not allowed to stop him from enforcing them until the case is over, except against the specific plaintiffs in their court.
So assuming that his birthright citizenship order is defeated, as soon as the SCOTUS 30-day pause is up, he can start stripping people of citizenship and deporting them right away. If that order is overturned? Then he’ll have to deal with whatever the court says he needs to do, but he’ll still have destroyed a bunch of people’s lives in the process
They don’t need to stop them, because they are unconstituit. You can’t make up some bullshit that is UNCONSTITUTIONAL and win in court. Any half-assed lawyer can just file the paperwork to get this shit shut down, but that’s really the cruz here in that they are expecting people to not have the access to legal services to make it happen in the event they are challenged.
There will be more specific cases about this specific thing immediately being heard by the lower courts, they’ll rule against Trump, and this will end up in the Supreme Court again in the next session, no doubt on that.
This is a stalling tactic by Trump’s psychos to try and make it look they are able to bend the Constitution to their service, which will not happen because…it’s unconstitutional.
You can’t make up some bullshit that is UNCONSTITUTIONAL and win in court.
Sadly, this is not exactly accurate. See:
- civil asset forfeiture (blatantly violated the literal wording and any good faith interpretation of the 4th and 6th Amendments)
- qualified immunity (was literally invented with no basis in existing law, violates the wording of the law as passed, which was maliciously transcribed to omit a clause explicitly banning immunity, and violates the 7th Amendment right to a jury trial for civil damages exceeding $20)
These are awful things, but again, you yourself mention “good faith interpretation”. This is a procedural problem with lawmaking in general that if you don’t specifically have an action codified in law that says “you cannot do this”, people will find ways to work around it. This is the case with both of the things you’ve mentioned, unfortunately.
Now, if the existing laws specifically had mentioned these things are illegal AND were in the constitution, and then somebody tried to enact them, thats a different story.
Instead these things exist because of bad faith interpretation of laws, and need to to be routed out by very specific wording or rulings.
This is exactly how Biden managed to forgive millions of people’s student loan debts, before Republicans had the chance to stop him in court.
What? No.
It literally is. He acted through executive orders alone, and .managed to wipe out billions in debt, in several waves. Unfortunately though, those orders were eventually blocked by Republicans, who challenged them in court…but not before millions of Americans had their debts erased.
But now that he has put an order out ending Birthright Citizenship and the SCOTUS ruled that nationwide injunctions aren’t applicable, can’t there now be a patchwork of enforcement where red regions will not honor birthright citizenship while blue regions do?
It seems like in the short term, there is going to be a lot of carnage and damage because this unconstitutional executive order will be followed by his loyalists.
He can put out an order requiring the sky to be green. It’s just words, that’s the point. The only thing he can affect with an EO are things where his sycophants can enable it to the extent they are involved in the executive branch. NOT the Judicial Branch. The judges who order and enforce the laws can’t just ignore the constitution. Birthright Citizenship is in the constitution.
What the SCOTUS ruling here adds is some dumbshit to make the process more stupid than it needs to be for people without legal status it seems, but it is not a change to the law, or enforcement. That needs to be understood.
All it’s going to take is a specifically angled case to ask the question “Is birthright Citizenship in the constitution? Oh, it is? Well then it’s constitutional”
Another court case that isn’t about the procedural nature of obtaining said documentation or status will shut this shit down in a heartbeat, but as others have noted, the legal process of getting it there takes longer than most would like.
The judges who order and enforce the laws can’t just ignore the constitution. Birthright Citizenship is in the constitution.
Again, I’m really sorry to burst you bubble but do think that understanding the reality of our situation and tearing down the illusions is important.
- The Judicial is charged with interpreting the law and arbitrarion. Not enforcement. That’s on the Executive branch.
- The US Constitution has been increasingly ignored in both the Judicial and Executive branches since about the 60s. For example, the SCOTUS invented “qualified immunity” in 1967 to allow the Executive branch to effectively ignite constitutional rights. Their fuckery means that “it literally says it in the US Constitution” is insufficient to show evidence harm from being deprived of constitutional rights. Effectively, an identical case must have been tried, which makes it nearly impossible (because of the circular dependency).
-
You misunderstand this. The Executive is bound to ensure that laws are enforced, but not tasked or powered to do so directly. Congress controls the purse and lawmaking, and the constitution is very clear that President must ENSURE what Congress passes is enforced. That’s extremely clear in Article ii Section iii, and is referred to as the “Take Care Clause”.
-
Sure, this is not untrue, but as we’ve seen over and over again, if ruling against the constitution, you always create a dead end. So they’ve just passed something stupid that is technically an interpretation in its most idiotically simple way, but they’ve then created a disaster on the other side of the legal process. It can’t work both ways. Unless they gain control over every judge and jurisdiction to exactly as Trump says, they won’t have the ability to control jack shit in this sense. Even after today’s ruling, the experts are already saying they’ve just opened the door to completely drown the courts and SCOTUS with challenges and really fuck over Trump because they’ve closed one door foolishly, and opened another to attack this bullshit from.
-
Sure. Just let me know exactly what your plan is.
We could hold protests…until Trump sends in the National Guard and has anyone that looks vaguely brown or uppity arrested.
We could petition our elected representatives, who either are not in power or have willingly ceded power to Trump. I’m sure that’ll help.
Maybe we could get reliable information from the news, if they weren’t already curtailing coverage that’s critical of Trump or anything Trump doesn’t like out of fear of political retribution or retaliatory political action.
We could sue through the court system, which was just stripped of virtually any ability to do anything about Trump.
I mean obviously, we need to get involved in our next election. Which is only 18 months away. Surely nothing catastrophic could happen in such a short period of time, right? Can’t wait to elect deep-blue representatives in my already deep-blue state. I’m sure that’ll accomplish a lot. That’s assuming elections even take place.
And hey, there’s always getting involved locally. Organize a resistance. Go ahead. I’m sure you’re more than willing to be the first to stick your neck out there. And I’m sure there’s no chance that your group is infiltrated long before it gets to anything resembling a critical mass or manages to accomplish anything noteworthy.
You don’t get it, do you?
Trump won. He has full control now. The Supreme Court has now said that not only is Trump legally immune from prosecution, judges don’t even have the right to stop him. Congress has willingly ceded their authority and he’s already using the national guard to quell anything he deems a “protest”. Our educational institutions have bent the knee, businesses are adopting Trump-friendly policies, and the press has severely curtailed criticism of Trump out of fear of retribution.
The only path forward is violence. And even that is a long shot as Trump has control of law enforcement who are chomping at the bit waiting for the opportunity to go full Call-of-Duty on as many brown people as they can. All other pathways have been closed. You wanna be the one sticking your neck out? Go right ahead. Let me know how the weather is in El Salvador. Or South Sudan. Or whatever 3rd world shithole you find yourself taking an involuntary vacation in. But not all of us think that this is a movie where we’re just waiting for John Connor to rise from the ashes and lead us to victory.
My point is exactly what you’re saying though. Being defeatist isn’t productive. Doomscrolling and resigning to the idea that “we’re all fucked, might as well give up” isn’t helpful.
If the tremendous outpouring of rejection for this administration’s bullshit isn’t quite cutting it in the inspiration department for you, then just sit by and do nothing. Your input in the manner you are giving isn’t helpful, and it’s not doing anything to inspire more people to fight against it.
Easily changed though. I would prefer people go the other direction with it and get more involved. That’s all I’m saying.
There is no more rule of law. Don’t assume the legal system will deliver justice (it was never great at that, but now it’s openly, flagrantly rigged).
Its time to BURN THE WHOOOOOOLE FUCKIN THING TO THE GROUND. That is all.
SCOTUS: Supreme Corruption Of The United States
Constitution much?
The Supreme Court and the rule of law:
This is really bad.
It’s bad but it’s not over yet. They’re using this as a way to give him what he wants with regard to his propagandized concerns about “activist judges” while leaving the door open to siding with the Constitution on birthright citizenship. At least that’s how it seems unless someone can set me straight.
I don’t think the birthright citizenship issue would clear a hurdle neatly in this court, but it does seem like they’re arguing in two directions. On the one immediate hand, the majority opinion is how individual cases are being used to blanket stop stuff nationwide (which Biden also disliked); on the other, arguing that stripping birthright citizenship is unconstitutional. The former pertains to the case most directly, while the latter is about what the cases are ultimately concerned with and something down the road, but is not what the Supreme Court case they ruled on was actually about. Will it likely lead to problems with citizenship cases? Oh hell yes. But I’ll agree with you that it’s a form of kicking the can down the road, which they do enjoy.
I think we are going to start hearing about cases where babies are being determined to be foreign nationals and they will use those babies as grounds to force the parents out of the country.
