wryturtle.bsky.social
17 posts
8 followers
68 following
Conversation Starter
comment in response to
post
That is not what the dissent said, and the plaintiffs did not bring a breach of contract claim.
comment in response to
post
Not sure what the D strategy is here. Probably they think Trump will not retreat on impoundments, and they can blame the lack of a deal on him. Then the Rs will have to give larger cuts to extremists to avoid a shutdown/default. Ds are counting on these large cuts being deeply unpopular.
comment in response to
post
Grand juries and petit juries now have to assume their historical roles as bulwarks against oppression. FBI still can do a lot of damage simply with burdens of investigation.
comment in response to
post
DoD is chuck fill of wasteful spending but Congress blocked rational reform for years. Now we get a sledgehammer, which is worse.
comment in response to
post
He excluded the Federal Reserve to avoid an immediate market crash, but if this order is upheld he will claim the same authority over the Fed. Wall Street needs to awaken to the risks
comment in response to
post
I think Sullivan and the rest of the SDNY prosecutors understand better than you all the malign consequences of mass resignations followed by Bove replacements.
comment in response to
post
The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.
comment in response to
post
I can understand why mass resignation of honorable prosecutors would be undesirable.
comment in response to
post
And that is another constitutional violation. The new EO is creating new principal officers, wielding effective power over agency heads, who have not been appointed in line with the Appointments Clause.
comment in response to
post
Yes, it is a fully legal pardon. I agree there are no limits upon his power. But a President can misuse his discretion when he issues pardons/commutations to his family (Roger Clinton) or political supporters (Steve Bannon). I don’t think he should override lawful penalties justly imposed.
comment in response to
post
I see. A Democrat can only hold your views.
comment in response to
post
Sorry, meant to type Schick v. Reed
comment in response to
post
The Supreme Court has held that commutations of death sentences to life imprisonment are conditional pardons.see Ex parte Wells (1855); Schrick breed (1974)
comment in response to
post
Commutations are an exercise of the Presiden’s constitutional pardon power. Are you quibbling over whether commutation is textually a “Reprieve” or a “Pardon”?
comment in response to
post
As a Democrat, I am unhappy at this misuse of the pardon power. Pardons should be used for unjust convictions or sentences, not for a President’s personal opposition to the death penalty.
comment in response to
post
Illuminating!
comment in response to
post
A President never has a “mandate” to do pursue some particular policy. People vote for candidates for all kinds of reasons.