General Discussion

soothsayer

(38,601 posts)

3. Boo!

Reply to still_one (Original post)

Mon Jan 25, 2021, 10:56 AM

Jan 2021

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

87 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Supreme Court dismisses emolument cases against trump because he is out of office. This is quite [View all] still_one Jan 2021 OP

That's very disappointing. n/t Laelth Jan 2021 #1

Sounds like a super catch 22 Walleye Jan 2021 #2

A president now has the right to grift big time. nt Irish_Dem Jan 2021 #16

Boo! soothsayer Jan 2021 #3

So he is above the law. Irish_Dem Jan 2021 #4

This pisses me too but Trump is really screwed as per his finaces Botany Jan 2021 #7

Beyond disappointing; this is a kick in the face for the rule of law. lagomorph777 Jan 2021 #5

So basically Snackshack Jan 2021 #6

Trump is still in deep shit ... Last Friday was not a good day for him Botany Jan 2021 #12

Well, the robber is no longer in the bank UpInArms Jan 2021 #13

It's not as bad as that. StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #34

Is the supreme Court indicating the only remedy for presidential violations is being kicked out of.. uponit7771 Jan 2021 #44

No. StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #52

Thx, I saw your well reasoned OP. I do think its bad because if they hear a future case right ... uponit7771 Jan 2021 #54

They probably could have moved faster but this case would never have been resolved during his term StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #55

Thx !!! uponit7771 Jan 2021 #56

Wait a minute. Wasn't the case filed before he was out of office? Liberal In Texas Jan 2021 #8

The SC used the criteria not when it was filed, but whether he is currently in office of not still_one Jan 2021 #15

So, that drunk driver C_U_L8R Jan 2021 #9

So SCOTUS strategy was to wait out Trump's reign of Terror in the WH to then deny Accountability msfiddlestix Jan 2021 #10

The judiciary and other institutions have held. Turin_C3PO Jan 2021 #33

On this account they have not held at all this is a total failure uponit7771 Jan 2021 #45

We're definitely not in a good place Turin_C3PO Jan 2021 #59

I'll retract my claim because of StarFish's post (link) but I think on its face it wasn't good for uponit7771 Jan 2021 #61

This decision in the context of now, cannot be dismissed as merely terrible in my mind. msfiddlestix Jan 2021 #57

No. StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #58

Thank you for enlightening me.. msfiddlestix Jan 2021 #60

I misunderstood it at first, too StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #62

Wait. I just read on AP twitter feed, that SCOTUS dismissed ALL emoluments cases against Trump msfiddlestix Jan 2021 #71

The Court dismissed two cases StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #73

ALL preplanned (what a joke) bluestarone Jan 2021 #11

This is truly the scum pond that was put in place by REPUBLICANS, rushing through BComplex Jan 2021 #28

all a bdamomma Jan 2021 #36

This is bizarre and inexcusable unblock Jan 2021 #14

It is a terrible decision because it allows the same behavior for future administrations still_one Jan 2021 #19

And now if they hear any cases for future administrations they are playing politics uponit7771 Jan 2021 #47

Ally, ally in free! marble falls Jan 2021 #17

This is absurd. He either violated the clause, or he didn't. He should be held accountable Firestorm49 Jan 2021 #18

So, they've just erased a part of our Constitution. An SC with dictatorial powers was a bad idea. Crunchy Frog Jan 2021 #20

If he still has the money he stole while in office it's not moot StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #21

They are not even bothering to hear the case. Isn't that a dereliction of duty? still_one Jan 2021 #23

I think so, but I haven't read it yet StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #26

Thanks still_one Jan 2021 #31

It looks like the Court didn't issue an opinion. Just ordered the lower court to dismiss as moot StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #32

The complaint sought injunctive relief. So it became moot when he was out of office onenote Jan 2021 #38

Exactly StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #41

That's bullshit. If he is protected while in the office of the presidency, Vivienne235729 Jan 2021 #22

Exactly! Ligyron Jan 2021 #35

Yes! I was thinking the same thing that they need to expand SCOTUS now! Vivienne235729 Jan 2021 #37

Could the Biden team bluestarone Jan 2021 #24

Absolutely sickening. panader0 Jan 2021 #25

So this should make a case, gab13by13 Jan 2021 #27

We're back to the days of divine right of kings. Really. BSdetect Jan 2021 #29

Thanks to a few rw justices. triron Jan 2021 #39

this is BS given he's untouchable while he was in office & now out of office the SCOTUS refuses to onetexan Jan 2021 #30

Entirely predictable, which is why there were no dissents. onenote Jan 2021 #40

The Supreme Court wiped away four lower court decisions this morning because they have become moot: mahatmakanejeeves Jan 2021 #42

The justification of Trump being out of office intimates "out of office" is the only remidy ... uponit7771 Jan 2021 #43

Too bad it took so long to get to the SCOTUS. jalan48 Jan 2021 #46

They're already working on that lame54 Jan 2021 #48

Perhaps SCOTUS would like Congress to pass DeminPennswoods Jan 2021 #49

That would be helpful for everyone StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #63

You do realize... jmowreader Jan 2021 #50

No, that's not what the Court did at all StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #53

I don't think this is bad as it initially seemed StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #51

Maybe they'll dismiss the Senate impeachment trial too Polybius Jan 2021 #64

They can't do that. StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #65

If they find rule that you can't have an impeachment trial for someone out of office they can Polybius Jan 2021 #66

Courts don't step in and dismiss an impeachment because they "find a rule" StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #67

No, I'm talking about this Polybius Jan 2021 #68

I agree that this is an iasue StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #72

Hypotactically, let's say Roberts agrees with Luttig Polybius Jan 2021 #78

No. StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #79

Correct me if I'm wrong BGBD Jan 2021 #69

The court can't rule about whether anything Congress does IN an impeachment is constitutional StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #74

That seems BGBD Jan 2021 #81

No, that clause does not settle it StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #82

so we don't BGBD Jan 2021 #83

I don't understand your question StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #84

Has BGBD Jan 2021 #85

Not that I'm aware StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #86

So you can't prosecute while in office, or even after they leave office? So they have total lindysalsagal Jan 2021 #70

Not exactly StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #75

Thanks for clarification. lindysalsagal Jan 2021 #77

Time to expand the court. I think there's no filibuster for SC justices? aidbo Jan 2021 #76

Democrats don't have the votes to expand the Court StarfishSaver Jan 2021 #80

There were no dissents recorded to this decision. onenote Jan 2021 #87