The ruling wasn’t that the President could create our interpret law. It was that the President couldn’t be prosecuted for breaking the law.
Him illegally appointing justices wouldn’t result in him being jailed, but those justices would have no standing because they weren’t appointed through the proper procedure.
If a law were to be passed saying that stealing credit cards is legal, the banks would still cancel the cards when they were stolen.
The constitution offers zero instruction on how to construct the supreme court and the responsibilities of the court. There might be some text about congress should give advice but the court we have today is completely of its own invention.
If it’s illegal for biden to appoint judges without congresses approval then the Supreme Court has given him complete immunity.
Declining to prosecute someone for a crime is different than going along with it.
If Biden were to declare by executive order “these 26 people are now Supreme Court Justices” that doesn’t make it true if the Courts and Congress don’t agree to go along with the illegal order.
It actually applies to Trump too. He stole classified documents, Judge Canon dismissed the case, but the national archives aren’t going to be giving the recovered documents back to him. He illegally tried to overturn the 2020 election results. The case may be dead now that he has immunity, but that doesn’t mean he’s allowed to overturn the election and that he’s President now.
The prosecution of biden will have to… go through the courts… if a lower court trys to block it the Supreme Court will just pick it up.
Edit:
I don’t know why you’re arguing. The supreme court has given biden the right to play Calvin ball. If you’re putting your faith in a court system run by fascists; a congress deadlocked because of fascists; you are playing right into the hands of fascism.
Because people think this ruling is something it isn’t.
It doesn’t give A President the right to break laws. It gives him freedom for consequences for laws they break.
The difference is that it’s only useful to a President willing to use violence to enforce their will. It benefits fascists, but does nothing to otherwise empower a President against a hostile Court and Legislature.
The ruling wasn’t that the President could create our interpret law. It was that the President couldn’t be prosecuted for breaking the law.
Him illegally appointing justices wouldn’t result in him being jailed, but those justices would have no standing because they weren’t appointed through the proper procedure.
If a law were to be passed saying that stealing credit cards is legal, the banks would still cancel the cards when they were stolen.
The constitution offers zero instruction on how to construct the supreme court and the responsibilities of the court. There might be some text about congress should give advice but the court we have today is completely of its own invention.
If it’s illegal for biden to appoint judges without congresses approval then the Supreme Court has given him complete immunity.
Declining to prosecute someone for a crime is different than going along with it.
If Biden were to declare by executive order “these 26 people are now Supreme Court Justices” that doesn’t make it true if the Courts and Congress don’t agree to go along with the illegal order.
It actually applies to Trump too. He stole classified documents, Judge Canon dismissed the case, but the national archives aren’t going to be giving the recovered documents back to him. He illegally tried to overturn the 2020 election results. The case may be dead now that he has immunity, but that doesn’t mean he’s allowed to overturn the election and that he’s President now.
The prosecution of biden will have to… go through the courts… if a lower court trys to block it the Supreme Court will just pick it up.
Edit:
I don’t know why you’re arguing. The supreme court has given biden the right to play Calvin ball. If you’re putting your faith in a court system run by fascists; a congress deadlocked because of fascists; you are playing right into the hands of fascism.
Because people think this ruling is something it isn’t.
It doesn’t give A President the right to break laws. It gives him freedom for consequences for laws they break.
The difference is that it’s only useful to a President willing to use violence to enforce their will. It benefits fascists, but does nothing to otherwise empower a President against a hostile Court and Legislature.