I got sick of all these 'might' and 'may' headlines in 2021. Why are we still doing it?
this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2025
440 points (98.7% liked)
politics
23037 readers
4507 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I'll believe it when he suffers literally any consequences.
One of the Supreme Court judges will go to Trump's house and beat the crap out of him
As much as I’d like to see elderly man, one in a diaper, fighting it out on the lawn at 3am, I think they’re might a better way.
🍿
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.
Stop elevating that woman. In her 27 years, she only hired a single black clerk. Her refusal to step down in ailing health ensured the republicans got a SCOTUS pick. A stubborn, racist geriatric clinging onto the power of the democratic party - only to lose it all and shit on your entire legacy: where have I heard this one before?
Never trust an official of the United States of Amerikkka.
“Signals”, “might”.
Next up is the wagging finger, furrowed brow, and tersely worded letter.
Dont forget the interpretive dance!
They forfeited their power by making the President basically immune to prosecution, then they get all offended that he will ignore their orders.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
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.
We're now going to spend the next decade plus arguing over what exactly entails 'official acts'.
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.
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?
You'd think that, but rationality has long since given way to something sinister.
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.
Technically they made themselves the arbiters of what constituents official duties of the president.
This is a very relevant point
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.
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.
load more comments
(1 replies)
"I swear if you blatantly disregard like 12 or 13 more rulings and we're totally gonna get super duper serious!"
-SCOTUS I guess?
Are ya gonna bark all day little doggie, or are you gonna bite?
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.
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.
“Keep this up, and I swear we’re gonna leave a very harsh voice-mail on your phone!”
I’m sure the fascists will respect the courts. This time.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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)
are you fucking high??
trump literally reneged on sending this dude to a concentration camp by mistake and then bragged about it
I’ll believe it when I see it
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.
SCOTUS: ...or else...?
Is that a real official communication from the White House?
The USA has always been far from perfect, but it was better when grown-ups were in charge.
I'm in my fifties and can't remember a time when that was the case. It's been greedy arseholes the whole time.
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.
Never too late, guys.
Well, it's not too late yet, anyway - but we're damned close.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Call again once they have him in court, wearing a nice orange jump suit and heavy duty handcuffs.
Eighty more earnings and they're going to issue a strongly worded letter.
Edit: I meant warnings, but... This is actually better.
Legit question: what would you want the Supreme Court to do which is more extreme than a strongly-worded letter? Correct me if I'm wrong, but everything they do ultimately boils down to a letter which is more or less strongly worded.
load more comments
(1 replies)
tRUMP: "lol"
Someone might be getting a strongly worded letter soon.
Don’t forget the clutching pearls.
load more comments
(1 replies)
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!
load more comments
(1 replies)
If they keep clutching those pearls any harder, they're going to get carpel tunnel.
Time to arrest him
view more: next ›