• TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    If the SCOTUS were to put President outside of the constitution like that, they have all but declared the office of President a King, and the 14th amendment has no barring on the office at that point anyways. And a King has no want for a “Supreme Court”, and would dismantle them as one of the first acts in power. A King dislikes and fears oversight, so really the Court is deciding if they will continue on, or if they and the whole US experiment is over.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Well, if we want to game theory this road (We shouldn’t, being that tired is an altered mental state but I love wild hypotheticals), Kings absolutely use courts to help maintain their legitimacy. So do dictators. As an example one of the things in Venezuela was packing the high court so they couldn’t protest the de-powering of the legislature. I do agree though if we ever get a fully immune president we’re screwed. Previous presidents agreed with that and subjected themselves to oversight, and even in one case, a speeding ticket.

      • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        I was talking specifically the Supreme Court, as that would be the only court with more power than the President/King/Dictator. He would absolutely use all lower federal courts to bring the states in line, and prosecute anyone that threaten his power.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Interesting fact, there’s no Constitutional cap to the size of SCOTUS. If I were him I would find 10 people beholden to me financially and by blackmail. The court would then be 19 people.