“(With) today’s Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity, that fundamentally changed. For all practical purposes, there are virtually no limits on what the president can do. It’s a fundamentally new principle and it’s a dangerous precedent because the power of the office will no longer be constrained by the law even including the supreme court of the United States.”

Throughout his address, Biden underscored the gravity of the moment, emphasizing that the only barrier to the president’s authority now lies in the personal restraint of the officeholder. He warned vehemently against the prospect of Trump returning to power, painting a stark picture of the dangers such an outcome could pose.

  • catloaf@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    100
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Apparently “when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal” is now law.

    • Beetschnapps@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      So again it’s now a matter of “what is allowed” vs “what is ethical or moral”…

      We all joke about the high road of democratic vs gop approaches. But how much does the difference matter?

      The hard part is we all get it, Biden is now technically allowed to do whatever. Is that a reason to immediately do the worst possible thing?

      Should he now cast aside the law and commit hate crimes purely to prove a point?

      The courts will never allow such a performative action, but they’ll allow the creep of fascism.

      • Sanctus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah he should. Shock everyone. Show them how bad this ruling is. I’m sure there are impermanent ways to display this.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        2 days ago

        These people are proving that anarchy would never work. The second murder became “legal” they all jumped to suggest it.

        • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Murder happens all of the time in Capitalist society, too, you know? Even though it’s ‘illegal’ and all that.

          Anarchy does not mean no rules, it just means there is no state to enforce those rules. Communities can still enforce their own rules in Anarchist society, and one of those rules can be ‘don’t murder’.

          • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 day ago

            I know what anarchy is. You’re assuming murder would be forbidden in every community, but if a lot of people in this thread started communities, (at least they themselves) would be allowed to murder. That was my point.