Assuming we have a Democrat in the WH in 2028, is the Supreme Court going

[milestogo]

to allow the extreme leniency to POTUS that it does now?

[NCDem47]

1. Not a chance.

The majority will suddenly decide the President is too powerful.

Same thing playing out with Democratic governors and Republican-dominated Legislatures. for Repubs: Our guy good = rubbertsamp whatever they want. Other guy bad = strip him/her of their powers.

[BlueTsunami2018]

2. There wouldn't be a Democrat in the White House until 2029.

That’s when Piss’ term is up.

But I doubt very highly these fascists are ever leaving unless and until they are forced out. Something that America is woefully unprepared to do.

But to answer your hypothetical, no.

I really don’t think people, even on this site, quite understand what has happened. The system failed, America as we knew it is over. Fascists don’t leave. You cannot vote them out.

[Silent Type]

3. Most of their rulings, like "immunity," will arguably benefit a Democrat. Hope we get to see.

[Queso Delicioso]

4. The court needs significant reform

And I think any Democratic president would be well justified in ignoring anything they have to say until such time as it is carried out.

[Ms. Toad]

5. Most of what we are seeing now is reversing injunctive relief

So two answers for that: (1) We aren't likely to do anything (or at least certainly not at the rate Trump is) that calls for injunctive relief and (2) to the extent we do - yes - if a Democratic president appealed for relief from injunctive relief it would likely be granted.

The presumption is against injunctive relief, so it is uncommon in generally - and has been granted far more here than I've ever seen before. So - predictably - the Supreme Court is reversing it.

The courts aren't well suited to deal with a president run amok. That's more the job of Congress - which has abdicated its responsibilities and in some instances actively handed over its reins to Trump.