President also says presidential immunity for crimes should be removed and ethics rules for justices should be stricter

President also says presidential immunity for crimes should be removed and ethics rules for justices should be stricter

Joe Biden has called for a series of reforms to the US Supreme Court, including the introduction of term limits for justices and a constitutional amendment to remove immunity for crimes committed by a president while in office.

In an op-ed published on Monday morning, the president said justices should be limited to a maximum of 18 years’ service on the court rather than the current lifetime appointment, and also said ethics rules should be strengthened to regulate justices’ behavior.

The call for reform comes after the supreme court ruled in early July that former presidents have some degree of immunity from prosecution, a decision that served as a major victory for Donald Trump amid his legal travails.

“This nation was founded on a simple yet profound principle: No one is above the law. Not the president of the United States. Not a justice on the Supreme Court of the United States,” Biden wrote.

  • @[email protected]English
    1•4 months ago

    What kind of thinking is this? That it’s better to lose as long as you have the moral high ground? Maybe that thinking works for little league, but not when healthcare, women’s rights, and climate are on the line.

    “Sure the fascist uprising happened in record time, but at least we put it on the record that the fascists have occasional issues with intellectual honesty!”

    Only in the liberal mindset does intellectual honesty come with more primacy than physically protecting people who are actually vulnerable.

    The fact that it appears we are 1 or 2 years away from door-to-door gestapo visits, and liberals are still circle jerking about their epic, pragmatic, civil, patriotic, “play by the rules” mindset, means we are most likely doomed.

    • @[email protected]
      3•4 months ago

      I don’t know what got your goat but you’re projecting an enormous amount of non sequitur into my very innocuous remark.

      I was pointing out one itty bitty silver lining of an effort that’s doomed to fail. I never suggested that we should be satisfied with that silver lining and call it a day.

      I’m fully supportive of all actions, including those outside the realm of politics, to defend against fascism. But that’s no reason to stop taking political actions, even those which we estimate to be doomed.

      Porque no los dos?