Summary
JD Vance faced backlash for claiming judges cannot limit executive power after a federal court blocked Elon Musk’s DOGE from accessing Treasury payment systems.
Critics, including Rep. Daniel Goldman and DNC Vice Chair David Hogg, reminded Vance of the constitutional separation of powers.
Musk called for the judge’s impeachment, labeling him “corrupt.”
Legal experts warned Vance’s stance suggests the administration may ignore unfavorable court rulings, raising concerns about respect for judicial oversight and the rule of law.
Don’t you remember? The supreme court decreed that any “official” presidential action is immune from prosecution. Anything trump does as president is “official,” therefore anything he does is legal.
That’s… Not how that decision was worded. Although that was the conclusion that was drawn by certain pundits. The president has absolute immunity for official acts in areas that Congress has no authority over, e.g., commanding the military, issuing pardons, etc. So if the President committed a crime in an area that Congress has direct control over–such as criminal actions related to trying to shut down the Dept. of Education–he would explicitly not have immunity from criminal prosecution.
And yet he’s already locked federal employees out of four departments. If there’s no enforcement there’s no law. Lawsuits don’t mean shit to him and theyll get tied up until they hit the Supreme Court, who will likely side with him, and in the meantime he’ll keep doing the same thing.
Yeah, now THAT is a problem. The executive branch is in charge of enforcement of laws and court rulings; if Trump’s administration flatly refuses to enforce court orders, then no, nothing is going to happen. At that point, Congress gets to make a choice as to whether or not they wish to exercise their authority to impeach and remove a president. If Congress fails to act, then it’s time for the people to exercise their second amendment rights, or hope that there will actually be elections again. But such a hope seems vain, if Trump’s administration refuses to follow court rulings, wouldn’t you say?
Yes, but do you remember who gets to interpret what an official act is?
Other than courts?
The president doesn’t get to determine what’s an official act and what isn’t, any more than Michael Scott saying, “I declare bankruptcy!” makes it so.
The corrupt as hell supreme court is who would make the determination.
I think that you might find that SCOTUS has conflicting interests here. Yes, the conservatives (Thomas, Alito, Goresuch, Kavanaugh, Barret, and mostly Roberts) are generally supportive of Trump. But we’re now seeing Trump flout judicial rulings, and that cuts into SCOTUS’ power; the justices are likely going to want to preserve that in the rulings that they make.
I don’t hold a lot of hope though.