• esc27@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Short term this is disappointing, but long term I think it is for the best. Being unanimous makes it less likely a state will ignore the rulling, and had they ruled against Trump, then we would have seen decades of retaliation from red states removing all democrats for any reason.

    The root of the problem remains that nearly half our voting citizens support electing a violent and hateful criminal.

    • CosmicTurtle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      then we would have seen decades of retaliation from red states removing all democrats for any reason.

      You say this with an optimism that I wish I had.

      I guarantee you that so long as we have a shit judicial bench, red states are going to fuck around. Not because they can. They always could.

      But because no one is going to stop them.

    • SmilingSolaris@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I just got run out of hexbear because I believe voting for Biden, while shitty, is a form of harm reduction. I got called a genocide supporter and a fascist followed by hours of threats and wishes of harm, including my favorite. An emoji of a location where Nazis were executed by partisans in Yugoslavia.

      I’m new to lemmy so just kinda assumed it was a leftist space. I didn’t realize that it’s just red tented Nazis with no actual love for their fellow human beings. Something I consider necessary to being a socialist in any form. That sucked.

      • Chocrates@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I don’t really understand hexbear. They are leftists that are so left they are Nazis?

        I get it, I don’t like voting for Biden, but we live in a two party system where we have to vote for the least evil one.

        And despite myself, Biden has passed some of the most progressive legislation ever (at least my lefty podcasts tell me that) So while he was glacially, immorally, slow to call for a ceasefire in Gaza, he has done it and his policies are inarguably more moral than Trumps were and likely will be, should trump win.

        • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          They are leftists that are so left they are Nazis?

          Tankies are not really leftists. They are conservatives who call themselves leftists. They are engaging in modern propaganda.

          One of the standard tactics of fascists is to sew chaos and confusion among any who may resist. A tankie’s primary goal is to create confusion and demotivate progressives.

          Not everyone falls for it, but some tankies can be pretty convincing that they really believe their nonsense. Do not be fooled. Tankies are absolutely lying. They are pro-level trolls with a deadly serious goal.

          • Kelly Aster 🏳️‍⚧️@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            Tankies are not really leftists. They are conservatives who call themselves leftists. They are engaging in modern propaganda.

            I wish more people realized this. They are bad faith actors who exist solely to disrupt and recruit. What I find particularly reprehensible about the Hexbear playbook is they appeal to the most disenfranchised part of the LGBTQ+ community and take advantage of their rage by giving them a target…not coincidentally, the same way the public face of the right wing panders to rural white men. Hexbear is queer-friendly and does offer a safe space, but they don’t actually discuss, much fight for the rights of the queer community in any way. They give them anti-west talking points, wind them up, and send them out into the world, but they don’t actually give a shit about their recruits’ queer existence; they’re just a tool to be used. It just sucks to see, for a number of reasons.

            • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              Wow. I was completely unaware of Hexbear’s specific flavor of manipulation. Thank you for spelling that out. That is both heart-breaking and frightening.

              It also explains some of the bizarre conversations I’ve had with certain tankies. I’m usually not kind to them, but I think I can be both more sensitive and more persuasive with certain LGBTQ+ tankies now that I know some of them may actually be victims of manipulation. So, again, thank you.

        • Natanael@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Horseshoe theory. The extremes ends on both sides aren’t identical, but they sure do rhyme

        • John_McMurray@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Biden has passed some of the most progressive legislation ever

          No, but he has passed some horribly racist bills back when he was involved in passing bills

          • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            And yet he was overwhelmingly the favorite pick for Black voters in the 2020 primary.

            People change. Context matters – some of those bills were even supported by black community leaders. It obviously didn’t turn out well.

            Plus, it matters to some people that he was happily VP under Obama. I personally don’t get it, but to some people being #2 to a black person at #1 meant something.

            • mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              Those who make it to the top after bloody revolution are far more likely to believe in nothing except their own authority and entitlement.

              • Fedizen@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                Many of the revolutionaries replaced even more brutal governments but realistically its only ever been where people were fully denied rights that revolutions were successful. Example: its well understood that the british empire ended slavery after a series of slave revolts. Cubans also had less rights than vacationing american mobsters under batista.

                Often more developed countries get better mechanisms to resolve disputes: elections, courts, regulations, insurance, strikes, etc.

                Its best to use those before pursuing violence.

      • Letstakealook@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        I always see reports of this behavior from hexbear, but I’ve never been subjected to it, even when disagreeing with the user base there. Though,I am wondering if they just blocked me because I haven’t seen any of their posts in a while, now that I think about it.

        • pelotron@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          I made a snarky comment on a post from a Hexbear Truth-Teller once. The OP replied to me after a few days and thought it was important that I knew they couldn’t see my post from the Hexbear server.

          Uh sorry guy, not my concern really since it seems your server is the one blocking me.

        • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Unfortunately, Lemmy.ml and a few other still-federated instances are currently infected with tankie mods. Some are a bit covert about it, banning people for clever little twists like “minimizing genocide” if the user calls any current military action a genocide.

          Conservatism, including fake progressives like tankies, are a cancer that are long overdue for a cure.

    • whereisk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      This is their classic pincer maneuver employed by the establishment - and it works really well: the left wing candidate is both too left and not left enough.

      You see it in every election.

      It works so well because they own mainstream media so they can run all narratives at the same time as opinion pieces to hamstrung the left. That’s how the ratchet works also.

      • jumjummy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        That’s why it bears repeating that if you don’t vote for Biden in the General Election, YOU ARE HELPING TRUMP. No “genocide Joe” arguments matter at that point no matter how much you twist your logic, no matter how you WISH things worked with the US general election. These are simple FACTS.

      • Xanis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        It also works because, simply put, those of us not on the Right have a tendency to disagree with one another on what to support. Now I’m not saying this doesn’t happen in general. Only that we’ll do it even to the point of detriment as we recognize situations and cases we feel need to be supported, instead of just what needs to be attacked, and those can vary widely.

        My biggest and most consistent concern every election is whether we can come together in consensus long enough to make a difference. My second concern is whether we can hold that energy long enough to continue pushing for positive change.

        • whereisk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          I mean you are right, but hopefully we learnt our lesson when we got the current supreme court because Hillary was not pure like Sanders.

          So long as we keep in mind that their goal is to split the working class in manageable little pieces we can put our differences aside to come together to at least stop the slide and hopefully take a few steps in the right direction.

  • BeautifulMind ♾️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    It’s so wild that the ‘but the people have democratic rights to choose among candidates’ crowd invoke that argument to make the candidate that’s promised to end democracy and rights one of the options they can vote for

    You know, because democracy

    • Wilzax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      And also, he never won on the people’s democratic right to choose among candidates. Hillary did. He won because the president is chosen by the states, not the people. Don’t like it? Abolish the electoral college.

      • upandatom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Abolish electoral college is not the answer to these issues. Unless you have a new idea in mind. Electoral college is better than using popular vote. It helps prevent fraud from any one particular state.

        • Kite_height@eviltoast.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          How so? And does that outweigh the negatives and weaknesses we’ve seen in the electoral college system over the past 2 election cycles?

          • upandatom@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            I was mostly curious those that want to abolish it what their alternative solution is.

            Under popular vote, DeSantis is still running and maybe now he gets 63 billion votes from Florida alone. The impact of this fraud (there are not 63 billion ppl voting in Florida) is bigger with no electoral college.

            Other countries don’t have EC bc other counties don’t have our state and government structure.

            Yall do you. I’m not very political anyway.

            • Kite_height@eviltoast.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              Popular vote works pretty well, that’s how we run every other election.

              If you didn’t know, the electoral college is a holdover from when slave states wanted to keep political control away from the North, where the population was rapidly growing while the South was falling apart.

        • Gabu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Except this assinine system only exists in 'murica, which also happens to be the country where democracy doesn’t work.

  • whoelectroplateuntil@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    I mean, the whole argument hinges on the fact that the procedures around Section 3 are ambiguous, but clearly since states haven’t tried to do it themselves before, that means they obviously don’t have the authority. So, the precedent exists not because it actually exists in some ordinary, mundane, definable way, but because it can be inferred to exist by the fact that it doesn’t exist.

    May as well have signed it in crayon, too.

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      It doesn’t really make any sense, the SCOTUS expects congress to vote on enforcing laws that they passed 150 years ago every time the issue comes up? Why? They already voted.

      • hglman@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Many of there recent ruling use that logic, like the epa one that says the must be hyper specific. Ending the ablity of the government to functio is the core goal of republican party.

        • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          This is a bit more than just that, though, it was a 9-0 ruling. There really is no more faith to be had in the court as a whole.

  • gedaliyah@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    What I don’t understand about the ruling is that congress has already exercised their power. Donald Trump was impeached by congress in 2021 for inciting an insurrection. The states are only enforcing the law based on the ruling a of the House of Representatives and a majority of the Senate.

    • Tinidril@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Removal from office takes a supermajority in the Senate, so maybe disqualification via the 14th does as well. That would presumably depend on Senate rules that currently don’t cover it.

      A simple majority ought to be sufficient, but it also ought to be sufficient for just about everything, but it’s not.

        • Tinidril@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          14th didn’t say it’s up to Congress either. The Supreme Court said that, and now it’s up to Congress to decide what that looks like. The constitution lets the legislative bodies setup their own rules for how a lot of things function.

            • Tinidril@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              I’m not sure I even disagree with the idea that it needs to be done at the Federal level. If individual states can do it, then Republicans will start declaring that everything they don’t like is an insurrection (as their rhetoric already does on many issues) and remove Democrats from ballots.

              Whether that means it has to be the legislature and what that looks like are different questions.

              • FreakinSteve@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                7 months ago

                So we’re just gonna allow a corrupt party to simply decide what words mean on their own?

                Hold up, George Orwell on line three…

                • Tinidril@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  This was actually a 9-0 decision. Being a cynic is definitely justified by the state of our government, but you should have some ideas what your being cynical about.

  • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    The US is a weird place. Why can’t you just ignore your strange council of all powerful wizards that rule for life? Didn’t some other state do that only a few months ago and face no repercussion? Just ignore the geriatric corrupt bastards.

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Hawaii already is. Our government is run by honor system. Once enough stop honoring it, it will all come crumbling down.

  • MushuChupacabra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Tangential to the decision but something for jubilant MAGA types to try out for themselves:

    While feeling this happy, stand in front of a mirror. Now, hold your fists up exactly like Donald Trump is doing in this picture, and do your utmost to physically express joy, without deviating from Donald Trump’s movement patterns.

    If this felt very fucking weird to do, look up ideomotor apraxia.

  • YurkshireLad@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I thought a president can do anything with full immunity. So Biden could make it so, according to Trump’s own rules.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Does this case not also show that they will infact say he has immunity as well unless Congress impeaches him and the Senate agrees/dismissed the person. Aka the president has immunity to do anything they want so long as one of the legislative departments will not act. Aka, they can be run by fear of death as well unless they can pass the impeachment and dismissal faster than the president can hear about it or act to stop it.

      Theoretically wouldn’t it be legal for the president to blow up Congress in session because they couldn’t impeach him for doing so until a new Congress is elected… Which of course cannot happen without them all being scared for their lives. Legal dictatorship. : /

      • TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Biden can’t do that because he didn’t win the election. But Trump still can because he is technically the president. But you might say, then he cant run in 2024, right? Well, he’ll just have to change that as president. You’ve gotta think bigger and dumber.

      • APassenger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Anyone here watched the video of Saddam and how he rose to power? It’s like a scene from Godfather.

        It’s worth a watch.

        Could that happen here? I’d absolutely hope not. But how many committed people do you need in order to make it happen? How many have to die in order for all others to be cowed?

        Giffords didn’t die and it sent an absolute chill.

      • Makeitstop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        This ruling was an inevitability. No matter how strong the case, they weren’t going to kick Trump off the ballot. Even if the Court didn’t have a conservative majority, the Court generally doesn’t like being seen as political. This is a polarizing case that asks them to choose between the election proceeding as usual, or being the ones responsible for disqualifying Trump. They may be willing to dive head first into polarizing issues of their choosing, but this wasn’t something they wanted, it was something that they could reasonably ignore. So, forced into ruling on this case, they voted 9-0 to take the easy way out and make an excuse.

        The question of total presidential immunity to all prosecution doesn’t cause quite the same problem. Hell, they don’t even need to rule on presidential immunity, they can just rule that there’s no immunity for ex-presidents. It’s the obviously correct answer, and it isn’t really changing the status quo. Ruling that current and former presidents have total immunity would put the Court in a much worse position, setting a massive game changing precedent and bailing Trump out in a way that looks corrupt. This seems especially implausible given the way the lower courts have explored this issue. A ruling in favor of Trump has very clearly been established to be a ruling that gives presidents a license to kill. I would honestly be surprised if we don’t get a 9-0 decision against Trump whenever they get around to deciding the case.

  • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I don’t like the guy, but I like even less the government deciding to take candidates off the ballot.

    The opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-719_19m2.pdf

    We conclude that States may disqualify persons holding or attempting to hold state office. But States have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the Presidency.

    • hddsx@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Think of it this way. It’s not that the government is trying take an eligible person off the ballot, but it’s clarifying the ineligibility criterion.

    • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      To be fair, the government has always set criteria for being on the ballot. For example, to be US president you have to be at least 35, a natural citizen, and have live in the states for at least 14 years.

      Not being an insurrectionist is also part of that criteria. We’ve just never had a presidential candidate that has needed us to consider that part of the constitution.