Cool so now unconstitutional is just a category of action that the government takes against its citizens. I think that’s about the depth of this ruling lol
this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2025
74 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
10341 readers
32 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Not necessarily. Now is a crossroads. Will there be a constitutional crisis or not?
Musk and co will probably drag it out by appealing to a higher court.
Homie we have foreign agents in charge of security agencies and musk has been getting access to data he is never supposed to see. The amount of unconstitutional shit done already can only be described as a crisis
Technically it is only a "constitutional crisis" if a court makes a decision and it is disobeyed by the government, since that would be undermining the "separation of powers" specified in the Constitution.
That’s been happening though
Not in a clear-cut way. It really isn't that simple. In fact I am listening to this podcast right now.
I'm listening to The Daily | Trump’s Showdown With the Courts on Podbean, check it out! https://www.podbean.com/ea/dir-z3qmw-2466f591
But eventually Trump is bound to push the envelope and disobey the courts in a clear-cut way. It is not looking hopeful for Democracy in USA.
Okay but then what’s the point of nitpicking the concept given that it’s clear there is no intention of following court orders nor is there any hope for the fully captured judicial branch
Justice Roberts from the Supreme Court has publicly scolded Trump over the deportation of Venezuelans and Trump's nitpicking over the legality.
Paradoxically...
On July 1, 2024, Roberts wrote the majority opinion in Trump v. United States, writing that a president has absolute immunity for acts committed as president within their constitutional purview, presumptive immunity for official acts, and no immunity for unofficial acts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Roberts
I don't understand the meaning of "within their constitutional purview" though.
He is also the same guy picked up on hot mic a few weeks ago when Trump thanked him for the above. Roberts responded "that's OK".
That he is pushing back is significant. Roberts and his SCOTUS buddies will become irrelevant if Trump ignores them.
It is really precarious and scary but it has not happened yet.
Ooooo, a ruling
I SAY SIR STOP IT OR WE SHALL ISSUE ANOTHER!
Those backing trump paid attention to his last term.
They know full well anything illegal he dose will take time to turn around. Multiple levels of court up to the supreme court. And even if he losses all of that.
They just plan to do so much damage to the structure of government. That Congress will have to spend years fighting to rebuild it.
This is basically an hostile take over of the US government. Until folks take it seriosly as the start of a civil war. Only the hostile side is fighting.
Ha, as though they are listening to judges.