Donald Trump’s lawyer pushed an outrageous line of thinking on Thursday during oral arguments at the Supreme Court over whether the former president has immunity for trying to overturn the 2020 presidential election: that a U.S. president could order a military coup d’état with almost no chance of repercussions.

Justice Elena Kagan asked lawyer John Sauer about a hypothetical president who “ordered the military to stage a coup.”

“He’s no longer president. He wasn’t impeached, he couldn’t be impeached, but he ordered the military to stage a coup, and you’re saying that’s an official act?” she asked.

“I think it would depend on the circumstances whether it was an official act,” Sauer replied. “If it’s an official act, there needs to be impeachment and conviction before [criminal charges could be pursued].”

In response to other questions from the justices, Sauer defended a hypothetical political assassination ordered by an American president, the argument that sank Trump’s case in the D.C. circuit.

  • Neato
    link
    fedilink
    English
    7117 days ago

    Biden should just have Trump arrested and sent to gitmo. If the president really does have all this unilateral power only able to be stopped by impeachment there’s no real way to prevent a dictator. Just arrest anyone in Congress who’d vote to impeach you.

    It’d absolutely be the end of this country but we’re already staring that in the face as Trump tells the SCOTUS what he plans to do.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1417 days ago

      What you’re suggesting is actually fucking hilarious because if Trump wanted out of gitmo he’d have to argue that there should be limits on the president’s powers in which case he’d lose the case… or he could win the case and remain in gitmo.

      This is how fucking ridiculous this is.

  • @snekerpimp
    link
    47
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    Schroeder’s Schrödinger’s president. He is both president and not president, depending on if it hurts or helps his case.

    • teft
      link
      1217 days ago

      Schrödinger*

      The scientist is named Erwin Schrödinger.

    • @Potatofish
      link
      -517 days ago

      Depending on whether it hurts your feelings…

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4717 days ago

    Jesus. I don’t know how many times I have to say this but impeachment is a political process, not a criminal one.

    Just because you weren’t impeached doesn’t mean you can’t be charged with a crime.

    I swear if Trump has been impeached, they’d be saying that he can’t be criminally charged because then it’d be double jeopardy.

    • @whereisk
      link
      516 days ago

      I think they did at the time.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    3217 days ago

    This is insane. The Constitution clearly says that the President doesn’t have unilateral power.

    • tjhart85
      link
      fedilink
      4117 days ago

      Sure, if you read it, but what about if you just go on feels like they do with their holy book?

    • TimeSquirrel
      link
      fedilink
      8
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      Constitution is a piece of old paper. What matters is if enough people give a shit about it anymore.

  • @njm1314
    link
    2117 days ago

    It’s amazing how all these strict constructionist conservative justices who believe in in the Constitution exactly as it’s written and Justice Alito who believes in things that have been enshrined in our traditions and history are all so willing to make this huge change based on fucking nothing. With 200 years of presidents not needing this, 44 presidential precedence, and nothing even remotely resembling this in the Constitution and yet these pillars of constitutional Theory abandon everything. Of course they’ve done that like two dozen times in the last 3 years already so ain’t nothing new I guess.

  • Monkey With A Shell
    link
    fedilink
    1417 days ago

    So in effect he says if a partisan Congress that most certainly does care about political affiliation won’t convict you then the (theoretically) non-partisan courts can’t touch you right?

    Makes perfectly good sense, your buddies should get a say in if you broke the law. Let’s apply that everywhere, just round up some friends to vouch for you as a good person and you’re free to do whatever you like.

  • @Rapidcreek
    link
    1017 days ago

    "In the end, if it fails completely, it’s because we destroyed our democracy on our own, isn’t it?”

    — Justice Sonia Sotomayor, during oral argument in Trump v. United States.

    • @IphtashuFitz
      link
      English
      716 days ago

      I saw a post somewhere else suggesting Biden should deploy a SEAL team to just hang out at the steps to the courthouse in NYC where Trump is on trial, and a second one to the steps of the Supreme Court. No orders beyond just being there for the time being.

      The minute the SCOTUS hands down its decision issue new orders to the teams…

    • @whereisk
      link
      5
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      Arrest a few Supreme Court justices - that should focus some minds.

    • @LifeInMultipleChoice
      link
      216 days ago

      Guantanamo Bay for security measures. Poof. He all the sudden was treated like every other , tyrant Trump wouldnt execute

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    817 days ago

    SCOTUS has ruled against the trumpster several times. I hope they remember what a vindictive little bitch he is, because if he regains the power he’s seeking, they may find themselves in a Mike Pence situation one day.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      116 days ago

      The Conservative Majority is definitely leaning his way. Be prepared for him to evade justice. Again…

  • @TokenBoomer
    link
    616 days ago

    America is in a domestic violence situation with fascism. It thinks it can take it right up to the edge, without repercussions, because the sex is great. But it’s eventually gonna end up with half the country dead on the kitchen floor.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    417 days ago

    There are many times I wish cameras were allowed in Supreme Court hearings. That way we can immortalize Kagan’s face when she asks a question with two possible answers, one of them abjectly stupid, and the lawyer answers it that way, anyway.