this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2025
436 points (98.7% liked)

politics

23163 readers
3286 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Shortly after midnight early Saturday morning, the Supreme Court handed down a brief order forbidding the Trump administration from removing a group of Venezuelan immigrants from the United States without due process.

The ACLU claims “dozens or hundreds” were allegedly given an English-language document, despite the fact that many of them only speak Spanish.

The Supreme Court ruled the government must give any immigrant “notice and an opportunity to challenge their removal.”

The Court’s one-paragraph order states that “the Government is directed not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order.”

Though it is just one order, Saturday’s post-midnight order suggests that the Court may no longer tolerate procedural shenanigans intended to evade meaningful judicial review.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mp3@lemmy.ca 180 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

They forfeited their power by making the President basically immune to prosecution, then they get all offended that he will ignore their orders.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[–] AZX3RIC@lemmy.world 85 points 1 week ago (3 children)

This is what drives me crazy.

Ok, the president is immune, the people that execute his orders are not.

If the courts started holding people under the president accountable for their actions there would be a change in the wind.

Yes, for the defeatists, holding those people accountable is complex and the president would just pardon them but, it would start a real process of the branches of government holding each other accountable.

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 46 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Hes not even immune, they get to decide what an official act is. It depends on how complicit they or how much the current situation plays into their own goals and each justice is an individual. It's a fight, every where. Nothing is black and white, but most importantly, nothing is final.

[–] alanjaow@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Since it's the court that decides what's official, I feel that disobeying their order would be considered unofficial, since it's not following the rules, right?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jballs@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 week ago

The president also has unchecked pardon power. He's already shown he's willing to use it to pardon people who tried to overthrow the government for him.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ExtantHuman@lemm.ee 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Technically they made themselves the arbiters of what constituents official duties of the president.

[–] Liberteez@lemm.ee 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

This is a very relevant point

[–] Inaminate_Carbon_Rod@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Buys a house next to an airport, complains about aircraft noise.

Buys a house next to a night club, complains about loud music at night.

Gives the President full immunity because it’s the [R]ight thing to do, complains when he stops listening to them.

It’s all the same attitude from shitty people.

[–] IndianaJones@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 6 days ago

Irrelevant to this discussion but

Buys a house next to an airport, complains about aircraft noise.

Buys a house next to a night club, complains about loud music at night.

With the housing crisis in some countries people just have to accept all the housing they can get or live on the streets. Doesn't mean they cant complain about noise.

[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago

Actually prosecuting a sitting president was always nearly impossible. The immunity thing has to do with what happens after the president is no longer in office, doesn't it? Also, he only has absolute immunity for official acts. So then the question is what constitutes an official act.

And realistically the Supreme Court will eventually reverse itself, assuming that the democracy somewhat survives another decade, which is a good question. Because their ruling about absolute immunity just made no sense. But even if you think it did make sense, there are so many cases that have to go to court to be resolved. If the courts rule against a specific action and the president reads the court order and then does the bad action anyway, does it count as official? I think we can argue that it doesn't, because the courts specifically clarified that it's not allowed. But the president's attorneys would argue the opposite. So then it has to go back to the Supreme Court.

Assuming Trump stays in good health long enough to leave the White House, I think it's unavoidable that the above situation will occur.

[–] FartsWithAnAccent@fedia.io 84 points 1 week ago

"I swear if you blatantly disregard like 12 or 13 more rulings and we're totally gonna get super duper serious!"

-SCOTUS I guess?

[–] boughtmysoul@lemmy.world 73 points 1 week ago (1 children)

“Signals”, “might”.

Next up is the wagging finger, furrowed brow, and tersely worded letter.

[–] ReiRose@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

Dont forget the interpretive dance!

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 66 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'll believe it when he suffers literally any consequences.

[–] Freshparsnip@lemm.ee 4 points 6 days ago (2 children)

One of the Supreme Court judges will go to Trump's house and beat the crap out of him

[–] muusemuuse@lemm.ee 5 points 6 days ago

I wish Ginsburg were still around. She was old and weak but I don’t think she would turn down the opportunity to shank this fucker. And the mental image of it brings me perverse pleasure.

[–] MyDogLovesMe@lemmy.world 59 points 1 week ago

“Keep this up, and I swear we’re gonna leave a very harsh voice-mail on your phone!”

[–] MushuChupacabra@lemmy.world 57 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Are ya gonna bark all day little doggie, or are you gonna bite?

[–] blacklisted@lemmy.org 20 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

They bark all they want but they can't bite. They need the executive to enforce their decisions. Ain't happening. Thanks Citizens United. Oh, wait, they decided that.

[–] MushuChupacabra@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

I'm profoundly disinterested in what cannot be done.

I am intensely interested in the collective American response to their President being an existential threat, specifically by doing what cannot be done, with absolutely no evidence that it was difficult to do in the first place.

I’ll believe it when I see it

[–] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 28 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

SCOTUS: You will abide by the lower court's decision and facilitate the return of the man you admit was sent to a torture prison in El Salvador in error.

Trump's White House: Yeah, no. He's never coming back.

collapsed inline media

SCOTUS: ...or else...?

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Is that a real official communication from the White House?

[–] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

The USA has always been far from perfect, but it was better when grown-ups were in charge.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] foggy@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago (4 children)

So fucking sick of the doomer bullshit on Lemmy. Way beyond sus at this point.

Hugely republican GOP, working on a Saturday night at 1 am to vehemently fight against him.

Fuck anyone downplaying this. That's literally Russia propaganda at the current moment.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 23 points 1 week ago

It's more cynical realism.

What actual consequences has Trump ever faced?

How has he reacted to every judicial order telling him he can;t do something?

I'll be thrilled to see something actually stick to him,, but I'm losing faith that anyone can actually make that happen.

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 13 points 1 week ago

but… this is basically the first time

we can applaud their movement to rationality and still look back at all the horrible things they did to pave the way here

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

are you fucking high??

trump literally reneged on sending this dude to a concentration camp by mistake and then bragged about it

[–] chipacabras@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Do you have a reference for the Saturday night thing? Or are you referring to the Supreme Court’s order? I couldn’t find anything about Congress unless I misunderstood

[–] khannie@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The article says:

Shortly after midnight early Saturday morning

So it's probably what most of us would call "Friday night" but it's still after midnight in fairness which is quite late.

[–] chipacabras@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

Ah thanks. It was paywalled for me.

I think it will take both congress and judicial actually doing something to put me even a little bit at ease.

The court’s order wasn’t even unanimous.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] resipsaloquitur@lemm.ee 24 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] orbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 week ago

Well, it's not too late yet, anyway - but we're damned close.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 8 points 1 week ago

Anything is better than nothing, but when I get a pizza party instead of a raise, it still feels like it could be better. I guess give them yet another chance to show something? How many has it been now?

I’m sure the fascists will respect the courts. This time.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago

Call again once they have him in court, wearing a nice orange jump suit and heavy duty handcuffs.

[–] tehWrapper@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Someone might be getting a strongly worded letter soon.

[–] Zerlyna@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Don’t forget the clutching pearls.

[–] Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 week ago

Yeah but this presupposes that Trump can read.

[–] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Why would the Court be Losing Patience with someone who KEEPS IGNORING THEM? If it was ILLEGAL to Ignore the Court there would be Punishments!

[–] Liberteez@lemm.ee 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Ignoring the court is a dereliction of his duty as president, so he would not be immune from contempt if the supreme Court criminally charged him, per their own parameters when they granted him partial immunity.

[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Eighty more earnings and they're going to issue a strongly worded letter.

Edit: I meant warnings, but... This is actually better.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago

I'm so tired of speculation in articles like this.

When the courts decide to shit or (far more likely) get off the pot, then tell us. Don't waste our time with this "Look! Here's how we could totally get him if anyone responsible for doing so actually bothered to give a shit!" garbage.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

Time to arrest him

If they keep clutching those pearls any harder, they're going to get carpel tunnel.

[–] D_C@lemm.ee 7 points 1 week ago

tRUMP: "lol"

[–] Almacca@aussie.zone 5 points 6 days ago

I got sick of all these 'might' and 'may' headlines in 2021. Why are we still doing it?

[–] Freshparsnip@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago

Oh no, they might give him a reprimand

load more comments
view more: next ›