Predictions:
Homelessness can be a felony
Healthcare must save the life of a pregnant woman, but she can be criminally charged for unborn child neglect and/or murder
Trump and Trump alone is immune from all prosecution at all levels and in all jurisdictions, but all other presidents are subject to any and all prosecution
Bonus: Boof bro chugs beer out of a bong shoved up Thomas’ ass on a lobbyist yacht. Gorsuch doesn’t participate but sneaks a glance at Gini’s exposed ankles and Coney-Barret looks down her nose at women who didn’t just go dump their babies off at the hospital before their health issues began in the first place.
Boof bro chugs beer out of a bong shoved up Thomas’ ass
I want to will this prediction into existence.
Can they rule in favor of presidential immunity without setting precedent? I’m not an attorney, but I’m under the impression that the ruling can be used in future defense of presidential wrongdoing.
Their ruling would have to be incredibly narrow and focused exclusively on Trump’s crimes in order to not apply to any other presidents, unless they commit the same crimes as detailed in the ruling.
given the way they have been ruling lately, and given the schedule, this is what I’m expecting.
I see. So it’s unlikely to see exclusivity without exceptional bias, and more likely will be applicable to future presidents if passed?
"Supreme Court will hear a case regarding whether the former president could attempt to overturn a national election and not face criminal charges. "
If they allow this for Trump, then the peaceful handover of power is done in the US as every President can stage his own insurrection and attempt to maintain power without it being treason. An insurrection every 4 years will be the norm and we become a banana Republic with nukes
I think the election every 4 years bit will probably end after the first successful one
More like a busy Friday at 4:30pm when they dump all these unpopular decisions before running for the weekend.
They do get paid to work.
But how much and by whom?
I’m sure you and I can differentiate between “salary” and “bribe”
Can they?
If the difference between bribery and salary is not specifically written in the US Constitution, then it must not be applicable to the Supreme Court if you ask the Roberts court.
This would make a good onion article… so obviously it’s going to happen.
That statement and “Santa is real,” have the same amount of evidence.
Ol’ Beer Bong Brett has some big decisions to make
I tell you the gals over at strict scrutiny are probably going to have a aneurysm this week
