This article is well-argued, well-written, and moot. Rule of law has been replaced with rule of Trump, and it's downright quaint to pretend that precedent, illegality, or the constitution are still in play.
this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2025
449 points (99.1% liked)
politics
20365 readers
3121 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Still good to articulate all the violations. Well informed populace and all that jazz.
Yes. Moot since the Supreme Court said the president is immune from prosecution due to official acts
Long gone are the days where something being against the law essentially meant it couldn't be done. You can scream that the things they're doing are illegal, but at this point it doesn't even matter; the law has lost its relevancy, and won't stop or even slow down the people in charge.
Laws are for other people, duh.
Trump has already been ignoring the rulings of judges. Successfully, I might add. And without any consequences.
This means that the rule of law is now over, and that the constitution is irrelevant and ultimately unenforceable.
This is always the game plan of fascists: to remove from power anyone in a high enough position who would obey legal processes, such that when true opposition occurs, there is no-one left who will enforce the law. Then they can move out into the open, pull down any part of the law or the legal system that they don’t like, and start doing the truly reprehensible stuff.
It’s why they objected to Obama filling that Supreme Court position that opened up (which he had full legal rights to re-fill), so that they could pack it with a crony that they could control, stacking the Supreme Court in their favour. And just look at how corrupt it has become.
Mark my words, shit is going to get really dark within the next six months to a year. Like, concentration camp dark.
I sure wish you were wrong, but you're not, damn it.
The first amendment and the rest of the constitution is only as valid as it is enforced.
The legal justice system has allowed Trump to shit all over the law with zero consequences (other than some showy mugshot and pony-show bullshit like that) thus far.
The armada of military personnel and federal employees who've sworn an oath to defend the constitution from all threats foreign and domestic, have yet to step up.
The only route to justice with even a shred of possibility of actually happening is if the next guy doesn't fucking miss... and there aren't many people willing to gamble their life/freedom on taking that shot. There likely aren't any people left who're willing to take that shot. But that fantasy is the basket holding every single one of our eggs.
Tldr, the law doesn't mean shit, and we're most likely fucked.
Pretending that the law matters during a fascist coup is not productive.
Wow, someone should tell Trump he's not allowed to do that!
The only thing evil needs to succeed is for good men to do nothing and that is exactly what is happening. But are they really good if they stand by and do nothing.
Well someone better tell the people doing the firing, I guess?
Oh so they cannot oh.. Okay... Cool... Yeah... Let me guess, it's against the law? The law that the same loyalty purge persons uphold and the same laws that your dictator explicitly said he will ignore? Those laws?
Backed up by what? Stern talking to? Fear of embarrassment? Public pressure? A moral compass? Perhaps there is another Amendment that applies when all else has failed...
Ultimately, by jail time for contempt of court
I appreciate the discourse and that you took the time to link the article. Unfortunately, I think the only thing that article does is lay out an effective strategy for the offending party to delay, escalate, enrich, and flee.
To the final point of the article saying that eventually you would get all sorts of pressure to restabilize from entrenched parties... This administration is incapable of understanding the implications of a destabilized United States. Literally incapable. Their world view is so skewed and their echo chamber so closed that it would be like a cancer having to realize that limiting its growth is good for both it and the host. It doesn't have the mechanisms to self regulate. Neither does our current oligarchy.
This is why they get them to resign in disgust / protest as well.
McCarthy begs to differ
🤣😂
Does anyone actually believe that "The First Amendment forbids" matters to the current occupant(s) of the Oval Office one tiny whit...??
And I've little to no faith our current courts will either care or, if they do care, will have any teeth.
🫏🤡🫏🤡
We’re gonna be fine. All the Second Amendment folks have assured us for decades we had to let them keep their guns because the Second Amendment is there to protect the First Amendment.
In this scenario, everyone should be a second amendment person.
literally what I've been telling anti-gun leftists for years, the sort that want them all outright banned -- I know my history well enough to know what happens when people without guns go up against people with guns. It doesn't end well for the people without guns.
The Second Amendment is for everyone, not just Republicans. The genie is already out of the lamp, we can't put it back, all we can do now is make sure we're just as well prepared for a fight.
Sure they can. Trump doesn't care if it results in thousands of suits against the government he isn't on the hook for any of this. He never will be. It's disgusting.
Clearly they can be.
And be reinstated by the courts. But that takes time
So far courts are also being ignored. It’s going to take time to work its way up, but eventually will depend on whether there is enough integrity in the Supreme Court to uphold the constitution and the court’s prerogatives. It depends on whether there is enough integrity in Congress to uphold separation of powers, the Constitution, or at least enough self-interest to protect Congress’s prerogatives
And non-complicit judges.
We've had a lot of those so far; for the most part, people are getting court orders to put things back. It's that the Musk/Trump administration keeps doing new things, for which there isn't yet a court order telling them to stop it.
Well also, Trump hasn't pulled the trigger on ignoring court orders yet.
If he runs out of new stuff to try he's probably going to pull an Andrew Jackson i.e. "The Court has made its ruling, now let them enforce it."
Too bad the people supposed to be enforcing that part of the Constitution are the ones doing the firing right now.
It's not yet clear that the courts will go along with it.
laws and court orders are literally meaningless if no one enforces it
The other civil servants around them are likely to welcome back colleagues.
