• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    1 year ago

    I honestly don’t think they will. Because if they rule that Trump couldn’t commit any crimes while president, it also means that Biden can’t. Which means Biden can do whatever the hell he wants. I don’t think SCOTUS will go for that.

    • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      I would hope at least one justice would be smart enough to figure out that if presidents are immune from criminal prosecution for deeds while in office, the President could just kill a couple Supreme Court judges and install their own people.

      • TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Or the VP could walk down the hall, shoot the president and then, as president, be immune from criminal prosecution. It’s absurd on its face.

        She could also do the same thing if presidents are allowed to pardon themselves.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Exactly. The person I’m talking to seems to think it’s a foregone conclusion that Trump will win the presidency, which is why they would rule in his favor. I do not think they believe it’s a foregone conclusion.

    • prole@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah but they know Biden won’t do whatever he want in that way, and that Democrats will willingly hand over power to Trump if he legitimately wins (which he still could).

      Then once that happens, no more elections.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think they do know that, nor do they want to risk it. Especially if Trump doesn’t win. And they know that’s a possibility.

        • prole@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          What, in the history of the modern Democratic party, suggests that they would do anything besides peacefully hand over power? Liberals love to brag about the “peaceful transition of power” of whatever the fuck, and talk about how they’re able to pass the position onto the next person, even if they’re from the other party (which can be admirable, sure).

          But Obama showed us that liberals will willingly hand the reigns over the outright fascists, and still brag about how civilized and enlightened they are, while the GOP ruins peoples’ lives left and right.

          Biden won’t do shit if Trump wins. He’ll hand over power like liberals always do.

          Don’t get me wrong, I’m not even necessarily saying he shouldn’t. I’m just saying that the GOP knows he won’t.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            You seem very fixated on Biden. You seem to think it’s a foregone conclusion that Trump will win and there will never be a Democrat in office again because he will win. I guarantee you that SCOTUS is not assuming he will win and they are not assuming Biden will be the last Democrat ever in office or that a Democrat would never do things Republicans really didn’t want to happen even though the Democrat had the legal right. Because those are not safe assumptions.

            • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Biden will hand over power peacefully. The questions are whether he does that in 1 year, or 5 years, and who will receive the powers he currently wields.

            • prole@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Huh? Where did I suggest it was a foregone conclusion?

              I think you’re naive if you think the Democrats would ever do anything meaningful in that situation. If that were the case, something would have been done years ago. They will not do such obviously unethical things (even if the potential outcome is good). That’s not how they have ever operated.

              Also, what would they even do?

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Where did I suggest it was a foregone conclusion?

                Where you made this all about Biden as if there would never be another Democrat in the presidency again.

                I think you’re naive if you think the Democrats would ever do anything meaningful in that situation.

                Unlike you, I do not believe I can predict the future with that confidence. And I don’t think SCOTUS believes they can either.

                • prole@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Take it down a notch, dude, you’re coming in real hot and it’s not clear to me why.

                  I never claimed I could predict the future. You really like putting words in my mouth.

                  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    This is what you said:

                    I think you’re naive if you think the Democrats would ever do anything meaningful in that situation.

                    That is literally a prediction of the future. I did not put any words in your mouth.

                    As far as “coming in real hot,” you are welcome to interpret what I say to you that way, but you would be incorrect.

          • TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That only matters if Trump wins. He could, but I don’t think he will. I think we will look back at this time with disbelief that we were so worried about him winning.

    • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      it also means that Biden can’t.

      It actually probably doesn’t mean that. In 2000, when the supreme court decided the election in George W. Bush’s favor, their ruling included language saying the decision was not to be used as a precedent for any other SP decision. There’s nothing stopping them from doing the same thing in this case.

    • doctorcrimson@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Unless they realize a DNC candidate won’t abuse the power in any meaningful way, making it solely a power wielded by conservatives. What’s Biden gonna do? Shoot Trump with a 9 and claim immunity? In our dreams.

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lmao the mental imagery of Joe Biden getting Mission Impossible’d into Clarence Thomas’ bedroom.