and if your view is “of course they will” then you really need to grapple with the strong evidence that the overarching goal of the roberts court has been to concentrate power in the hands of scotus!
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
I was pretty sure the Presidential Immunity decision would go differently because it could undermine SCOTUS power, and they still did it, so while I *generally* agree that SCOTUS is going to protect SCOTUS first, there are some (apparent) counter-examples.
You're right about Roberts. That's why we're going to see a conflict between Trump and SCOTUS. At some point, Roberts and (probably) Barrett will say no to something.
Thus, Trump and the Project 2025 boys will have their chance to outright undermine the courts by ignoring the ruling.
Agreed, and also wonder how much bts negotiations (or fancy dinners in Thomas' case) will influence their rulings on certain rulings. They'll obviously part with Trump with some things and I'm curious as to if there will be strategy there 👀
Will be an interesting test case of what happens when their desire to pretend the 14th Amendment doesn't exist and their desire to stop any other branches from acting as constitutional interpreters come into conflict, yeah
I think an interesting tension is between Roberts’s single-focused desire to consolidate SCOTUS power vs. Alito and Thomas’s desire to do the horrible shit Trump wants. Can Robert’s rein in fascist overreach in order to preserve his own importance, or will the radicals usurp him.
I’m sure they’ll figure out a way to do both. For some of retirement age it’s a win-win, immense power for fun now or another RV to play with, maybe a yacht this time?
If that were to happen, the whole constitutional amendment process is essentially dead, right? If the president can basically alter the constitution on a whim via executive order, the constitution isn't really alive any longer.
This is definitely true of Roberts, but we haven't seen Barrett on the bench really with Trump in the WH. He doesn't need Roberts. It's simply a question of whether we have faith in Barrett and Gorsuch. And experience has taught me to not put in faith in white conservatives.
Isn't it a matter of determining what SCOTUS, as presently constituted, wants America to be? I am sure Trump and the Republican law makers will have to, in part, institute that vision in exchange for getting what they want. There will be give and take between them I would think.
While thats certainly Roberts goal, as player out in his actions throughout his tenure, the other conservatives, especially the ones not named Neil, are committed partisan far right foot soldiers who will do anything to advance social conservatism and laissez-faire capitalism
When you give the Executive immunity, you have not concentrated power in your own hands. He can fire or imprison any of them this afternoon. Who will stop him? He wants us to protest so he can shoot us.
So maybe they will rule that you can *sometimes* deny citizenship to the children of undocumented immigrants, but *sometimes* you can't, and only they are capable of deciding.
trump v. us specifically does not include a workable standard for what constitutes an official vs an unofficial act specifically because the lack of a standard allows the court to decide on a case by case basis!
Fair point. But what does SCOTUS do if Trump just ignores them? Couldn't he pardon himself? Is it a "crime," per se, to just ignore the Constitution? What is the penalty and enforcement mechanism for it? Not trying to be reflexively pessimistic, but these questions keep coming up under Trump.
It'd result in a constitutional crisis that forces the people tasked with enforcing his unconstitutional orders, and ultimately the military, to decide between Trump and SCOTUS.
That's not nearly enough, a single idiot that nobody respects being the head of the military isn't going to make everyone else in the chain of command violate their oaths to the constitution. You are talking about a full-blown civil war scenario.
Well, one goal of the Roberts court was to have abortion be technically legal while making it impossible in practice. But he’s got 5 fully Fox News-brained compatriots now, and they may not be able to help themselves
I'm curious what evidence you think you have that they don't ALSO view birthright citizenship as invalid? SC precedent? They have no respect for that, that's been amply demonstrated.
so is a "well-regulated militia". That pesky "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" clause could give them the cover they need to arrive at the conclusion they want.
It really doesn’t. Not being subject to U.S. jurisdiction is the equivalent of having diplomatic immunity (that clause mainly exists because of diplomats)
Not being subject to U.S. jurisdiction would mean the US couldn’t, for example, try them for crimes
Well, you and I agree on that. I assume we also agree that there is no special legal exemption for the President in the Constitution. You see the problem?
I’d say the overarching goal of the Roberts court is to pare back the administrative state in order to bring about the desired political outcomes for conservatives.
They haven't taken any high-profile stances in opposition to Trump policies lately. I expect they will show the same backbone as Republican senators did during the second impeachment. Romney said in his book that they were afraid of the Trump mob. I don't see why this would be different.
If Trump doesn't get everything he wants from this version of the Supreme Court, he'll just appoint a few more justices, which, of course, this Senate will vote for and *voila* he'll get what he wants.
then the question is whether scotus with all its power agrees or disagrees with the decision. this need not be a concession of power if their aims are aligned
It’s fascinating to watch the expansion of the executive branch over the last 40 years snap back over the last 15 years through the Roberts Court. And remember the Right’s whole “progressive judges legislating from the branch” campaign. How’s that looking now lol
We need to see past the Kayfabe. It’s always about attacking places of liberal power and saying that locations of conservative power are where power is legitimate
That’s why it changes depending on where conservatives hold power
They haven’t snapped it back though. They have altered several important precedents (like Chevron) so the court has more say. In the past in several of these cases there was automatic deference to admin’s position *period*. But now SCOTUS says that now, whatever an action an admin takes in these /1
in these areas, *we* get to decide if it is legal via a so-vague-as-to-be-meaningless guidance. The practical effect is to leave the admin power intact for GOP administrations but give the courts the ability to thwart a Dem administration’s actions if it wants to
I think we’ll gain a clearer understanding of the price they’re willing to accept for their corruption—Thomas for example, only needed a vacation and few dinners. The equivalent of what you receive from a timeshare presentation.
“Justice Clarence Thomas has accepted…a total of 103 gifts totaling $2,402,310. Fix the Court identified an additional 101 gifts…based on news reporting. The additional $1.7 million in gifts brings Thomas’ gift total to over $4 million.”
Comments
Thus, Trump and the Project 2025 boys will have their chance to outright undermine the courts by ignoring the ruling.
Not being subject to U.S. jurisdiction would mean the US couldn’t, for example, try them for crimes
There are not colorable arguments that that sentence of the 14th does anything OTHER than establish birthright citizenship. That’s sovcit level stuff
Not power-seeking so much as rubber-stamping and knocking off early.
That’s why it changes depending on where conservatives hold power
https://www.courthousenews.com/justices-gifts-add-up-new-report-reveals-3-million-in-handouts/