They aren't any better.

I'm kind of surprised that they seem to have found their spines.

and that means that the SCOTUS would eventually become irrelevant, since they declared that 45 is "immune", and can pardon anyone he wants, for any egregious crime, and there is nothing that anyone will do about it.

That they expanded Executive Power while -- now -- preserving power of the People's Branch and their own branch's relevance?

If this is what's happening, at the very least it means that liberty is prioritized over kingly powers they granted with their immunity ruling. Cleaning up the maga mess they made isn't much of a legacy.
(just thinking out loud here)

Last edited Wed Nov 5, 2025, 07:07 PM - Edit history (1)

I don't want to get my hopes up. But since this tariffs thing is the first "major" disputed Constitutional divide with respect to the "Unitary Executive" (as they still haven't dealt with the "Birthright Citizenship" thing) then just based on the types of questions, some of the vapid 6 are starting to "see" the attempt to eliminate the powers of the Executive Branch Legislative Branch (fixed) and that means they may be next.

The Appellate Courts have all said this but the SCOTUS "stays" have been helping to fuel that drive towards usurping the intentions of Congress (and it's not just with those 2 issues but now with the financial stuff - basically ignoring the "Budget Control and Impoundment Act" as well, by picking and choosing what to fund and not to fund, regardless of what Congress intended).

I posted an OP about the "questions" on Tuesday, and am interested to see whether other rulings you note show a shift in their thinking, whether it's more about where their judicial allegiance (yes, fear and favor) lies, or more about preserving liberty through clearly defined branch sovereignty.
Looks like their dealing with bs funding "issues" and how trump's buddy acts as head of the OMB.
https://democraticunderground.com/1016416949

If they're motivated by future relevancy and the Roberts court's legacy, it's because the maga 6's immunity ruling brought all this on themselves.

Just took a look at your link and yeah - there are a bunch of other little "doctrines" that are suddenly bubbling up in their questioning.

I know that John Yoo was one of the biggest pushers of the "Unitary Executive" (and there are others). There was a recent interview with Yoo, who has risen from the dead, and has found new life in what is happening - 'Unitary executive theory' argues to restore the president's authority

And agree that although Roberts claimed that the "immunity" applied to "carrying out the President's 'official' duties", 45 has acted as if it applies to EVERYTHING that he has done, and EVERYTHING is "official" - whether before he was President, during a term, or after. Basically for all time (and underscored by the fact that he can pardon himself).

And nothing has been done to smack that down and put some guardrails around that nonsense.

but it still exists (although he ditched the "state mandate" ).

Question time isn't the ruling.

I'm trying to be optimistic.

presidential immunity, they asked the hard questions to later give him the win. I suppose trump will call them, privately, at some point to remind them of the dirt he has on them so they can capitulate.

Last edited Thu Nov 6, 2025, 04:12 PM - Edit history (1)

Perhaps a few of the six black-robed traitors may be feeling the political winds. The Senate Tariff vote going into these hearings has got to be front of mind.

It may be dawning on Roberts, Coney Barrett, and even Gorsuch, that if they don't actually defend the constitution on a few of these decisions that they will most certainly go down in history as the majority of a SCOTUS so corrupt that it enabled the the most destructive, lawless, corrupt, and fundamentally Un-American executive branch in our history.

They may think they can somehow redeem themselves with a few slap-downs.

The thing is, they can't. They will ultimately be denounced as the traitors to the constitution and the law that they are.

well said........Gorsuch is such an entitled snobbish ugh..........just hearing him speak makes my hackles go up.

I get my news in writing -- and that is bad enough. I just can't bear seeing or hearing any of them.

I wish more of the "good guy" podcasters would do what Mary Trump does and alter their voices or just read what was said.

His absurdly broad and unprecedented use of IEEPA looks like it is unlikely to stand up. Unfortunately for us, the regime will just come up with some "work around" and keep the tariffs in place, with each new play being subject of legal action.

Here's an Alert from Covington summarizing things the felon will try:

https://www.cov.com/en/news-and-insights/insights/2025/11/dont-count-on-immediate-ieepa-refunds-what-president-trump-might-do-if-scotus-throws-out-ieepa-tariffs

The Republicans in the U.S. Senate, The Republicans in the U.S. House, and the Republicans in the U.S. Supreme Court have all been in lockstep giving 2025, Putin, and Trump anything they want for years.............

If it weren't for them, Trump wouldn't have lasted one day in the White House, especially after J6th........

Justice

That Justice is a blind goddess
Is a thing to which we black are wise:
Her bandage hides two festering sores
That once perhaps were eyes

by design

"If that’s true, what would prohibit Congress from just abdicating all responsibility to regulate foreign commerce, or for that matter, declare war to the President?”

Neil, that is exactly what Republicans have been working toward for decades. The "Unitary Executive" or what non-cultists call it, Autocracy.

That's what you are up against. Do you really want America to become an Autocracy? Is that what our Constitution wants? Do America a favor and make Congress do its job.

don't realize that they actually oppose a "Unitary Executive."

But that only applies when a Democrat is in office.

-- that they find themselves up against the fallout across America of their previous unjust and stupid immunity ruling.

or whether an "action" fell under the umbrella of immunity granted by their decision if needed. I was always under the impression that they were actually empowering themselves above Congress as a check on the President. I'm probably wrong lol.

You make a great point that they were empowering themselves above Congress as a check on the president. And now they have to do that.

But they also know this: they will also benefit themselves and their legacy if they stand up for Congress as The People's first branch -- not as the current branch bought partisan reps of the rich, but as the first branch that must not be weakened so that future reps can work for the future liberty of those who vote back those who care about doing their jobs for the 99%, not the 1%.

No, you're not at all wrong. It's just that there are so many ways the maga 6 might continue their past self serving stupidity. Let's hope they wake up enough to clean up the 3 branch mess they've made.

No one who has chosen the arrogance to willfully dance with the devil should expect the option to pick the tune.

I'm sure there are other forms of the quote that go back further, but it seems Sherrilyn Kenyon, Infinity (Chronicles of Nick, #1) is the source.

From urban/paranormal/dark fantasy comes a metaphor for our times.

SCrOTUS has shit on the lower courts 'perfect' rulings so many times that the corrupt political appointees at the top are finally feeling the heat. Perhaps threats about 'private' emails and conversations being made public?

That's because lower court judges - both at the district and Appellate levels - have finally started "publicly" calling them out - and primarily due to this sudden massive use of the "shadow docket" to essentially torpedo all the work they did for justifications of a stay, and allow the violations to continue.

In the meantime, the lower courts are now forced to struggle with how to even proceed with this sudden "doubt" about what they are even doing based on what is being implied by use of those "shadow reversals" of their stays, time and time and time again.

When they issue rulings with no opinion, those rulings are literally meaningless (beyond the effect on the state of affairs at the time).

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that shadow docket rulings that offer no logic or argument on which subsequent lawsuits on similar matters and motions can be judged or argued have limited lasting effect beyond the immediate controversy.

and by the time the lower courts finish their review and final decision, making them now available for a final SCOTUS appeal ruling (if they even accept an appeal), there's nothing left.

USAID is an example.

Sauer talks really fast to try to prevent the Justices from asking questions.

Justice(?) Thomas kept trying to throw Sauer a lifeline but Sauer kept swatting it aside. The other Justices that asked questions seemed skeptical of Sauer's argument.