Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Politics In General Watching the Supreme Court

I wonder. I wonder if anybody has every charged the Supreme Court for not doing their job. Apparently virtually everybody who understands, and is watching the Supremes, seem to be on the side that says that they are just not doing their job! That being the case I wonder what would happen if somebody actually brought a case against them for not doing their job.

Interesting times.............

Thoughts?

It appears to me the conservative justices have ventured into the realm of politics by wondering what if future presidents would prosecute former presidents. If a former president committed crimes ... of course .... otherwise not likely (unless they would be Trump).

They should answer the question whether a president has unconditional immunity or are there limitations just as the Founders thought.

Seems obvious to me ... but I am but a simple citizen, who has no immunity from prosecution for any crimes I should commit

Them, that have been put there by Trump, are, obviously, going to not decide this one. They get to pay back to their Lord and Master for all his whatever.

Wouldn't it be nice if we had a congress that actually did their job. When dealing with the supremes one might even think that a serious congress would, at the very least, make the Supremes behave as the Supremes themselves force the rest of the courts to behave. I know, too much for anybody to actually expect.

The fact that the SCOTUS hasn't returned a decision on Trump's immunity claim - which they should have returned a decision the next day stating that a POTUS is not immune from committing crimes - tells me that the SCOTUS is trying to craft a positive decision that will only apply to Trump and not any other POTUS.

THAT is how corrupt our SCOTUS has become. These conservative judges would never bend-over backwards for a D-POTUS.

The Major Supreme Court Cases of 2024

The consequential cases, with decisions arriving by late June or early July, include three affecting former President Donald J. Trump, two on abortion, two on guns, three on the First Amendment rights of social media companies and three on the administrative state.
Still awaiting rulings:

Immunity for Former Presidents
Jan. 6 Obstruction Charges
Abortion Pills
Emergency Abortion Care
Gun Rights
Restrictions on the Homeless
Rights of Social Media Platforms
Disinformation on Social Media
Opioids Settlement
Power of Federal Agencies
Administrative Courts
Cross-State Air Pollution
Bump Stocks for Guns

I admit, I am very nervous about these.

I note that they have actually started to function and do their job. I would be interested in your thoughts on their work. This one, for instance, is of interest (at least for me):

The Supreme Court has overturned the bribery conviction of a former Indiana mayor, the latest in a series of decisions narrowing the scope of federal public corruption law. Seems its OK if you get paid off after you do what are are going to be paid for and not before. Almost clever. I wonder if the one paid made sure to pay his tax. What is even better is that nobody even bothered to actually say anything about this one. Its been kinda ignored. I suspect that "series of decisions narrowing the scope of federal public corruption law" should have caused some kind of interest - Oh Well.........

Oh, the sentence, beginning with "The Supreme Court" was taken from apnews.com.

I hear this crap about liberals not liking the opinions handed down by the SC, because it doesn't fit liberals beliefs. Well BS. I object because they have handed down what I consider politically ideological opinions instead of legal opinions.

Democracy is on ecmo ... will it survive? Faced with Trump loyalists at every important entity processing the election, there will be no more Gov Kemp's or Herschmann's stopping a visible public in your face coup, and not a single thing anyone can do about it.

Trump will disengage the machine as we will all watch Democracy slowly expire.

As an aside: Liberals say MAGA will destroy Democracy but as P has pointed out MAGA says the same about liberals. Of course I can ask the simple question what exactly are each group doing to destroy Democracy and get two disparate answers. For liberals we can point directly to policy changes in Project 2025 which subverts the very notion of Democracy and replaces it with a fascist agenda. Imagine going after political opposition because they disagree with Trump. But when MAGA responds it is always some nonsensical gibberish. Let me clear it up. I believe I can make a case MAGA thinks liberals destroys Democracy because liberals have compassion for non-whites. JE Hoover posited the CR's movement was funded by communists. It doesn't take a genius to see the thread from Hoover tying blacks to communists which implicitly means Democrats are communists. This is supported by the well known fact a huge percent of MAGA are bigots.

There is no deus ex machina ... we have lost

If you are now aware of the latest SC opinion on Presidential Immunity you would have heard the Death knell of Democracy .... Presidents are above the law

I hope the deafening silence I hear is shock of the SC immunity opinion.

While I don't hear anything on this board .... I do hear the bells ringing out ... Democracy is Dead in America

Correct me if I'm missing something, but isn't it true that the only times the subject of presidential immunity has come up are when Nixon broke the law and wanted to dodge prosecution, and when Trump broke the law and wants to dodge prosecution?

Both due to efforts to subvert an election?