Even progressive darlen AOC voted for this bullshit. You know who won’t Sanders.
Comment on Congress Moving Forward On Unconstitutional Take It Down Act
just_another_person@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Another waste of our time and money. It’s a bill to try and force companies to remove content they don’t like…or else.
This will be shot down in court (again), and since the platforms themselves will be respontfir removing content, will not be forced to comply. It’s unconstitutional and unenforceable, so just a big ass waste of everyone’s fucking time. So dumb.
Fredselfish@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Zexks@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
You’re assuming the courts will shoot it down. That’s a big assumption these days.
just_another_person@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Show me one case where a judge has ruled an unconstitutional thing is suddenly constitutional in all these court cases. Even SCOTUS isnt playing that game.
EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
At least two members of SCOTUS are definitely playing that game
just_another_person@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Two members that know what would happen to them if they fracture codified law and intentionally do not. 300 million of us vs thousands in government.
DrDeadCrash@programming.dev 3 weeks ago
Allowing trump to run again after inciting an insurrection?
just_another_person@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Again, not been a court case. If he tries, it will be shot down. There is no wiggle room for bullshit in the constitution about this.
Zexks@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
The deportations. The arrest of the college op-ed journalist.
vurr@lemm.ee 3 weeks ago
I think presidents having immunity is essential to have a functioning democracy. Otherwise the party currently in power could arrest the previous president for something they allegedly did while in power and would set a bad precedent. I think it is best for the presidents to be immune unless impeached by both the house and senate for something particularly heinous. And yes, Trump should probably have been impeached already after the insurrection, but that doesn’t change the fact that you can’t just willy-nilly arrest some ex president. There is separation of power for a good reason: to not give too much power to any branch of government.
Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
Presidential immunity. It’s a blanket statement of “you’re wrong” to everything you could possibly follow up with attempting to rebutt that statement.
just_another_person@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Presidential immunity doesn’t extend to every other person acting at the direction of the President. In fact, it extends to nobody. It may not even work if prosecuted, because that’s not what SCOTUS actually said. They only said that president couldn’t essentially be held liable for presidential actions, and then didn’t clarify exactly what those were. They intentionally didn’t specifically make a list of this actions, which depending on your viewpoint, means it’s everything, or nothing.