Biden surrogates brushed off questions about reining in the court, while emphasizing the gravity of a second Trump term.

On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that American presidents have “absolute immunity” from prosecution for any “official acts” they take while in office. For President Joe Biden, this should be great news. Suddenly a host of previously unthinkable options have opened up to him: He could dispatch Seal Team 6 to Mar-A-Lago with orders to neutralize the “primary threat to freedom and democracy” in the United States. He could issue an edict that all digital or physical evidence of his debate performance last week be destroyed. Or he could just use this chilling partisan decision, the latest 6-3 ruling in a term that was characterized by a staggering number of them, as an opportunity to finally embrace the movement to reform the Supreme Court.

But Biden is not planning to do any of that. Shortly after the Supreme Court delivered its decision in Trump v. The United States, the Biden campaign held a press call with surrogates, including Harry Dunn, a Capitol police officer who was on duty the day Trump supporters stormed the building on Jan. 6; Reps. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) and Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas); and deputy campaign manager Quentin Fulks.

Their message was simple: It’s terrifying to contemplate what Donald Trump might do with these powers if he’s reelected.

“We have to do everything in our power to stop him,” Fulks said.

Everything, that is, except take material action to rein in the increasingly lawless and openly right-wing Supreme Court.

  • BReel
    10·
    6 months ago

    Except that we know for a fact the refs are incredibly biased against specifically one team.

    I wish he would use it, but I understand the hesitance to do so. Why would they do this BEFORE Trump is back in and even give Biden the option to use it? Why risk giving Biden a 4 year larger window to use it if he does win? Feels like a trap to me.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
      18·
      6 months ago

      Mate…

      If you think republicans are waiting for Dems to abuse it before they do…

      I don’t know how much you’ve been paying attention.

      If your point was “why wouldn’t they wait for Biden to be out office”, it seems like they’re confident Biden won’t do anything.

      And considering how Biden immediately and publicly said he wouldn’t, kind of looks like that was a good assumption

      • BReel
        1·
        6 months ago

        I’m not saying they were wrong, but effectively making the first king of the USA doesn’t seem like something one should risk the outcome of, no matter how strong your assumption is.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
          6·
          6 months ago

          You’re surprised far right extremists have poor risk assessment skills?

          That’s honestly one of the things that contribute the most to how precarious the current situation is.

          A smart person with no fear of failure is a very bad thing, and as terrible as most of the SC justices are, they’re not stupid, and the people who put them there definitely aren’t.

          They’re just not afraid of consequences.

    • enkers@sh.itjust.works
      8·
      6 months ago

      Except that we know for a fact the refs are incredibly biased against specifically one team.

      The ref’s just gave either team the power to choose new refs that are biased against the other team.

      • BReel
        1·
        6 months ago

        I know that’s what all our Lemmy lawyers are saying. But I’m pretty confident SCOTUS would find a way for rules to apply to Biden that weirdly wouldn’t apply to Trump.

        Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to see him try. I’m just saying if I was in his spot, I wouldn’t immediately jump in assuming everything will just be “that easy”.

        You should at least sleep on it once or twice before you do something as drastic as everyone wants.

        • enkers@sh.itjust.works
          4·
          6 months ago

          I’m not sure you’re understanding what I’m laying down. If all previously extra-judicial actions are now potentially on the table, that opens new avenues for changing the members of SCOTUS.