That is the Supreme Court's power alone? Can you show me the part of the Constitution that says trump has immunity?
Schumer introduces the No Kings Act
- Thread starter Hume
- Start date
SmarterthanYou
rebel
I will show you that part of the Constitution as soon as you show me where I said it granted him immunity.
The "problem" with the Supreme Court is that it is no longer dominated by the party.
Once the Constitutionalists gained the majority - you Marxists lost your shit.
You're just babbling. Clearly you failed to read the decision. You want a dictatorship and you want to punish enemies of the party for being enemies of the party.
Technically, you're just a rambling fool that has no basis for the idiocy you're posting.
Then we all have no problem with Schumer's bill saying the president does not have immunity?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
I have a problem with Schumer thinking that he can simply write a 'law' overruling another Constitutional entity that you leftists claim are the ones who tell us all what the Constitution means.
What I said before was it's easy to see how the SCOTUS can rule on the immunity issue because they created immunity for government agents decades ago, so it's just a logical leap to include a president.
so, the question for you is 'are you too partisan to no longer accept the decisions of an entity responsible for telling you what the Constitution means?
The Supreme Court did not rule on the meaning of the Constitution, but actually what the law should be in absence of a law by Congress. If Congress passes a law, it would no longer be in absence of a law by Congress.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
It would also be a law that SCOTUS can simply decide it's invalid/unconstitutional.
anonymoose
Classical Liberal
I hope it passes and we can retroactively prosecute Bush for war crimes and Obama for fast and furious.WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer will introduce legislation Thursday reaffirming that presidents do not have immunity for criminal actions, an attempt to reverse the Supreme Court’s landmark decision last month.
Schumer’s No Kings Act would attempt to invalidate the decision by declaring that presidents are not immune from criminal law and clarifying that Congress, not the Supreme Court, determines to whom federal criminal law is applied.
In an attempt to reverse the Supreme Court's immunity decision, Schumer introduces the No Kings Act
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has introduced legislation reaffirming presidents don't have immunity for criminal actions, an attempt to reverse the Supreme Court’s landmark decision last month.apnews.com
They need to come up with a reason. Their previous reason is that there was no law commenting on it. They would need to find an actual part of the Constitution that was violated by the law.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
SCOTUS does not need a reason for anything they decide. I've read at least a half a dozen cases concerning the 2nd Amendment where the claimant states their case concerning that they have a right to 'insert case here' and SCOTUS simply says 'we disagree'.
ESPECIALLY in cases where something isn't specifically mentioned in the Constitution.
You've been around a while, you know how the courts work this way.
Making laws is specifically mentioned in the Constitution.
Anyway, without an opinion (reasons) the other courts have no case law (guidance) to work from. Their opinions is the Supreme Courts power.
The parties make their own rules. They always have. There is nothing undemocratic in Biden dropping out.