- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Senator warns of US getting ‘closer to a constitutional crisis’ as Samuel Alito’s dissent signals deference to Trump
Minnesota senator Amy Klobuchar warned on Sunday that the US is “getting closer and closer to a constitutional crisis”, but the courts, growing Republican disquiet at Trump administration policies, and public protest were holding it off.
“I believe as long as these courts hold, and the constituents hold, and the congress starts standing up, our democracy will hold,” Klobuchar told CNN’s State of the Union, adding “but Donald Trump is trying to pull us down into the sewer of a crisis.”
Klobuchar said the US supreme court should hold Trump administration officials in contempt if they continue to ignore a court order to facilitate the return of Kilmar Ábrego García from El Salvador, the Maryland resident the government admitted in court it had deported by mistake.
You must log in or # to comment.
Why stop at the lieutenants?
Because the court made him immune
deleted by creator
And the SC determines what’s an official act
The infamous immunity ruling gives the President a lot of immunity from criminal prosecution.
But besides that, there’s an older precedent in civil litigation that no judge can write an injunction directly against the President in the performance of his official duties. So all of these TROs and injunctions, including the Friday SC order, either do not apply to the President himself, or they are illegally broad*.
Under this theory of law, the President could theoretically arrest and deport all the people he wants with no judicial intervention – just as long he does all the arrests by himself, and flies the planes by himself, etc. In reality, the fat man is always going to have underlings doing the stuff for him, and they do not have this immunity from civil injunctions.
*This is one of the points raised in Alito’s dissent: the SC order applies to “the Government”, without saying whether the President is included or not.
They are the supreme court. They can change precedent for presidents for reasons.
deleted by creator
As long as it’s a federal court holding them in contempt, Trump can just pardon them.
Criminal contempt has this problem, but civil contempt is not pardonable, because there is no crime to pardon.
Judge Boasberg is trying to proceed with criminal contempt on the “turn the planes around” order. Whatever happens there, it is unlikely to end in convictions that stick.
Judge Xinis is proceeding towards civil contempt. If she finds someone in willful contempt, she can imprison them until they choose to comply. And the evidence standard in civil contempt is “clear and convincing,” not “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
deleted by creator
The only thing I can think of that SCOTUS to do right now to try and head this off would be to make a ruling defining what is or isn’t an official act
Couldn’t they reverse the ruling on his immunity? They reversed Roe v Wade with the flimsiest of justification. They could do the same here. I realize I’m being hopeful.
deleted by creator
Every level of government staffed by conservatives is compromised. They will only yield when they are met with direct force.
This time. This will be the time. I can feel it.
This time they will truly be slammed
Cowards. Unwilling to follow their duty as congress to impeach them.
Was it not this so-called Supreme Court that has already granted the president more rights than a king? How is that supposed to be constitutional in a democratic country?
It seems to me that the constitutional crisis has long since occurred.
I don’t really understand why anyone should appeal to the corrupt judges who are responsible for this. It’s a waste of time, because the outcome of all such attempts is already known in advance.
Or is the plan to buy Thomas & Co. another nice house - or maybe a new boat, or yet another luxurious vacation?
