I have little faith in the judicial to stand up to anything, but maybe just maybe their own preservation instincts will finally kick in.
this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2025
319 points (98.8% liked)
News
36043 readers
3059 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The fact that he was too scared to call out Trump by name in this "rebuke" suggests against that happening with Roberts
It's probably because Roberts knows that "won't someone rid me of troublesome Justice John Roberts" is a few paragraphs down this Trumpy road.
Roberts and the rest of SCOTUS can't do anything about impeaching a federal judge even if they wanted to. Congress holds the power of impeachment. If all of the GOP grovellers in the House follow Trump's orders like lap dogs, then the judge will be impeached. They need two thirds majority in the Senate to convict and remove the judge though, which is unlikely (though apparently not impossible with Schumer and his lackeys apparently willing to appease every stupid whim of Trump's and the GOP's while they "bide their time"). SCOTUS has no say in the matter.
Roberts and the rest of SCOTUS can’t do anything about impeaching a federal judge even if they wanted to.
No, that's true. However, as the "top judge" in the country, his word does bear some weight.
To whom? The GOP House Reps? I'm not holding my breath.
They would have their say in the matter once it ends up in court though. Roberts is letting them know ahead of time what the result could be. This is good.
Aw, is Roberts furrowing his brows really intensely?
lmao, no, not even, he's looking ashamed and doing less than the bare minimum, just like at the impeachment proceedings.
"Chief Justice John Roberts furrows his brow and shakes his head while consistently ruling in favor of Donald Trump's agenda."
Graduated from Susan Collin’s School of Pearl Clutching.
Roberts is gonna find himself impeached by Trump with that talk.
Oh shit. I didn't actually think he'd try to usurp the entire judiciary and render it obsolete when I gave him unlimited presidential immunity. I gave the leopard water. Why would it try to eat my face?
Thus far Trumps White House has proven that the judiciary can "object" all they want, but unless they are prepared to force them to not do something some how, then the objection is meaningless.
That and impeachment doesn't involve the Supreme Court. It's an operation of the House and Senate.
Wow Roberts still does have a little bit of his spine left and managed to find it? Or is this just a platitude and he'll continue to enable the fascist?
This whole fucking power struggle boils down to
"no u"