this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2026
666 points (98.1% liked)
Political Memes
10217 readers
3234 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Oh?
https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/supreme-court-grants-trump-future-presidents-a-blank-check-to-break-the-law
I'm pretty sure the exact ruling allows forgiveness for all "official acts" which brings up the question of whether going to war without congressional approval counts as an official act. The president does not have the authority to do this.
"Official acts" was defined as any that were connected to his holding office. His brushing his teeth is not an official act as the president. We all brush our teeth. Only one individual orders the US military to ambush foreign states. He is president and everyone else is not.
I am simply noting the plain fact, that the reason for the invasion occurring is its being ordered by the president. Hence, the order is an "official act" as defined. Why are you shouting, instead of reading and thinking?
An official act outside of his office's authority or capacity is not official, or else the term applies to everything, including brushing his teeth.
You are free to insist on your own definition, but yours will not take precedence, in any future proceedings, over the one from the ruling.
Why are you not understanding?
I simply will repeat that your representation of the ruling is not accurate.
Urgh, they are not "defending donald trump". They are just commenting that due to the us supreme court the united states is no longer a nation under the rule of law and the constitution is more or less a dead document now. Sorry you had to find out on Lemmy about that.
Saying Donald Trump cannot / should not be held responsible is defending him.
No it would be defending him if they said trump should not be held responsible, good thing that was not said. As far as "cannot" goes they are (correctly) pointing out that at this moment there is not a court in the us of a that will hold trump responsible.
Donald Trump was seeing trial until 77 Million assholes put him back in, and 9 Million assholes who voted for Biden stayed home for Harris.
They can and should see trial. We need to be demanding this, now. We need to be putting our efforts towards that outcome. We cannot just sit around, resigned to our fates, and see how it plays out.
You need to do more, yes. We are not all american and at this point I don't think your nation has the ability to hold a trial much less stick to a punishment.
International criminal proceedings exist, actually, I would say this now involves all of us whether you like it or not.
Has a single american ever faced an international criminal court? And have any been punished?
If not then let's make this the first.
That is a great attitude.
Wasn't the case this ruling was tied to about election obstruction? Not sure how that's more of an official act?
Technically he was still seeing trial over his election obstruction, he just didn't make it to sentencing before his reelection.