• 📚 Admin Project Update: I've added a major feature to PictureBooks.io called Avatar Studio! You can now upload photos to instantly turn your kids (and pets! 🐶) into illustrated characters that star in their own stories. Give it a try and let me know what you think!

SCOTUS news and opinions

All Biden needs to do is make Trump's murder an official act by employing his role of Commander in Chief and order Seal Team 6 (or others) to do so because of Trump's risk to national security.
 
All Biden needs to do is make Trump's murder an official act by employing his role of Commander in Chief and order Seal Team 6 (or others) to do so because of Trump's risk to national security.

Isn't it up to Scotus to determine what's an official act?

And the Comnander found refuse illegal order? Biden may be immune the commander isn't
 
All Biden needs to do is make Trump's murder an official act by employing his role of Commander in Chief and order Seal Team 6 (or others) to do so because of Trump's risk to national security.
He is probably better off doing it between the election and the inauguration.

Presumably with the set order of precedence there is always a set of people that can be killed to change the party of the presidency. If it would not be a Dem on Jan 20th Biden could legally kill the right set of people to ensure it is on Jan 19th. That basically ensures that the party in charge never need change again. It is a good job this happened during the reign of such a strong, decisive left wing president...
 
And the Comnander found refuse illegal order? Biden may be immune the commander isn't

Biden could also just pardon everyone else involved with carrying out the order.
 
Biden could also just pardon everyone else involved with carrying out the order.

Wouldn't it violate state law?

And if it's an illegal order will the military follow it? What happens if they refuse then go public he made such an order?
 
Emily Bazelon helpfully provided a kind of "score card" for the recently-concluded SCOTUS term, a partial list of who won and lost each of the Court's decisions.

(Some of the) winners of Court decisions:
  • Donald Trump
  • Donald Trump
  • January 6th defendants
  • Deregulators
  • Polluting states
  • Securities fraudsters
  • Koch-funded deregulators
  • Companies suing [government] agencies
  • Politicians who take bribes
  • Cities without any services for homeless people
  • Buyers & sellers of bumpstocks
  • Starbucks
  • The National Rifle Assoc.
(Some of the) losers of Court decisions:
  • The Biden Administration
  • The Biden Administration
  • The EPA and 'downwind' states getting polluted
  • The SEC
  • The National Marine Fisheries Service
  • The Federal Reserve Board
  • Homeless people
  • People who might like to be protected from [guns with] bumpstocks
  • Workers at Starbucks
  • The State of New York
  • The Colorado Secretary of State
Bazelon notes that each of these decisions can be defended or explained individually, but they add up to paint a picture*. She characterized the larger trend of these decisions as "the strong over the weak." I see corporations shucking off the chains of regulations and being allowed to generate profits as they see fit. Of course, I just watched Dark Waters, the Mark Ruffalo movie about Dupont literally poisoning the entire planet. Note that all of these were decisions rendered just this term (which is the first Monday of October to the end of June). We can anticipate the Court to be issuing decisions like these for decades.


* Note that the U.S. Supreme Court chooses which cases to take (from among the cases that are brought to them). So it's very much within their power to choose cases they know they can justify a particular decision on. You know how many justices are required to take a case? Four. If you want to know why the 5-4 conservative majority wasn't bad enough, and why a 6-3 majority is devastating, this is why.
 
Wouldn't it violate state law?

What state law? Why would states have laws on what does and doesn't count as an illegal military act?
 
The supreme court judges have really not thought this through.

What happens when the POTUS threatens to shoot one of them ?
You think they did not think of that?
 
What state law? Why would states have laws on what does and doesn't count as an illegal military act?

It would still be murder. So a pardon wouldn't apply possibly illegal order so debatable if military would follow such an order. Biden theoretically immune person doing it isn't.
 
It would still be murder. So a pardon wouldn't apply possibly illegal order so debatable if military would follow such an order. Biden theoretically immune person doing it isn't.
He is the president of the United States, and you wonder if he could find a squaddie who will follow his orders? He could end the world with a word, the chance he could not knock some off if he wanted sounds implausible to me.
 
He is the president of the United States, and you wonder if he could find a squaddie who will follow his orders? He could end the world with a word, the chance he could not knock some off if he wanted sounds implausible to me.

American army does have an illegal order clause iirc.

What I'm saying is he could probably find someone but there's a good chance others wouldn't.

And then you've got the military picking sides.
 
American army does have an illegal order clause iirc.
Yeah, most armies do. It does not seem to stop them much, and an order from the president is a better reason than getting a good selfie.
 
Yeah, most armies do. It does not seem to stop them much, and an order from the president is a better reason than getting a good selfie.

Military also swears loyalty to the constitution. Biden theoretically has immunity the person doing it does not.

So they have to kill someone on US soil without due process.
 
And what's more, the president is even immune from having his motives considered. He can literally say, "I'm doing this to settle scores," and that won't be admissible.

As Nixon said, "when the president does it, it's not illegal."
 
Back
Top Bottom