Any effort to rule against the President in a way that binds him should have to go through the Supreme Court to go into effect. - ThreadSky

voicefromthemtn.bsky.social • 1 day ago

Any effort to rule against the President in a way that binds him should have to go through the Supreme Court to go into effect.

Comments

cbowers.bsky.social•1 day ago

which means, in effect, that the president gets to do whatever he wants. your solution is that there should be absolutely no way for the president to be constrained absent impeachment. This has no basis in the law or constitution

I'll again say that there is zero chance you believed this a year ago

voicefromthemtn.bsky.social•1 day ago

What other way is there to restrain the President?

cbowers.bsky.social•1 day ago

restraining orders and injunctions. Trials that impose duties based on their verdicts.

cbowers.bsky.social•1 day ago

please, be clear on why you think that (republican) presidents should not be restrained by law. Why do you think (republican) presidents should be allowed to act in a lawless manner? why do you want a king?

voicefromthemtn.bsky.social•1 day ago

Because I like the way it pisses you off

cbowers.bsky.social•1 day ago

For once I think you are saying something honest

As with many MAGA folks, your highest good is harm to others - especially those you hate. This is, obviously, opposed to the gospel. But rejecting Christ has never been an issue for you