Supreme Failureship
FAFO, Johnny-boy
Chief Justice John Roberts is an overeducated shithead.
The term “overeducated shithead” comes from Frank Zappa’s Thing-Fish, a biting critique of race and social class in America. The album is one of his least-approachable pieces, which is saying something, when it comes to Zappa.
The Judiciary is the one branch of government where thorough education in its history is rightfully a job requirement. Scholarly treatment of the law—and Supreme Court Justices should be constitutional scholars—relies not only on a broad comprehension of precedence (and precedents), but also the consideration of hypothetical, future cases where the law would apply.
The original cases establish precedent for all similar cases to follow. The Court also decides which current petitions are both dissimilar enough from precedents, and significant enough to warrant their limited session time. While there are intentions of near-permanence in formulating opinions and rulings, there is also a serendipity to the timing of what cases may ever be heard.
It was just over a calendar year ago, when Donald Trump petitioned the Court (Trump v. United States) to recognize “Presidential Immunity,” with regard to the federal charges against her1 and to the surprise of some, the Roberts Court said they would dedicate scarce resources to entertain the question whether laws apply equally to all people.
Historically, this was a viable question, as the original document establishes slaves as both 3/5ths a person for the sake of census and political weight, yet they were also legal property of other (5/5ths) people, including more than a few who wrote and ratified the document. Some laws applied only to some people.
About eighty years later, the 13th & 14th amendments were supposed to have clarified that people could no longer be enslaved without due process, that everyone born within the nation was a citizen, and all citizens were due equal protection (and thus equal liability) under the law.
Plessy v. Ferguson recognized equal protection in the form of “separate but equal,” which was later stricken down by the Brown v. Board of Education I & II rulings in regard to public services and accommodations. Racial segregation was found to be contradictory to equal protection. Though these rulings are discussed as if they are incompatible, they both reaffirm the 14th amendment’s equal protection clause. The latter accounting for social power in ways unconsidered by the former.
The constitution also specifies that the President must be a “natural-born citizen.” Unlike the 3/5ths clause, this requirement remains unchanged via amendment. Only citizens may be elected President. All citizens are due equal protection.
Due to a Justice Department memo from the Nixon administration, the President will not be prosecuted for crimes while in office.
The existence of the memo shows it was understood that the occupant of the office could hypothetically commit crimes.
Presumably, the impeachment and removal of a criminal President would allow for the prosecution of those same “high crimes and misdemeanors” the constitution specifies as the sole grounds for impeachment.
Ford’s pardon saved Nixon from having to possibly face criminal prosecution on charges of obstruction of justice, after he left office. Ford said he was doing it to lose the job ASAP heal the nation.
Had Bill Clinton’s impeachment resulted in conviction and removal on those same charges, Al Gore would have had two years of incumbency to run on, and the 2000 election would have been decided differently. Bush may have still prevailed, but it was not going to be due to acting like he won when Florida’s vote was a statistical tie.
Trump was not impeached on the ten counts of obstruction of justice Robert Mueller identified in 2019, nor was she prosecuted for them after she left office. Her impeachments, first, for attempting to blackmail Ukraine with Congressional funds, and second, for setting an angry mob upon the Congress, did not result in convictions, nor the ensuing disqualification for public office.
So there we were in spring 2024—the People would see trials for Trump’s crimes committed against the state, because to rule otherwise would be for the Supreme Court to literally sacrifice its check on the Executive Branch, and to do that with this criminal at this time would be to toss away the whole American experiment.
Which they did.
If the President cannot commit crimes when engaged in “official duties,” and cannot be prosecuted for crimes committed outside official duties (always to be determined post facto) while in office, then the sole remedy is impeachment and removal—but the perpetrator remains immune for their “official” criminality.
The Heritage Foundation got their President-King, served to them by their hand-picked, Republican-appointed, Supreme Court majority.
Now Trump is ignoring Court orders. Why should she obey? Even before the Roberts Court made the President forever untouchable by the Justice Department, the Judicial branch lacked any means to enforce their rulings. “Stop doing that, or I’ll say ‘Stop’ again!” is pretty much all the Court has.
Guess who is on the record bragging about not stopping, even when someone else doesn’t want to be kissed or grabbed?
FAFO, Johnny-boy. You thought you were different; that Trump was going to respect you.
Yesterday, Roberts said Trump should not be threatening to impeach judges who rule against her. My read is Trump will not halt her full-frontal assault on habeas corpus when it comes to anyone she can brand “illegal” and deport without a hearing.
A year ago, Roberts failed to hypothesize that a President who is above the law would not need to pay attention to the Judiciary at all. Trump has a party that’s already shown they will never hold her responsible, and that will demonstrate loyalty by conducting any judicial impeachments she chooses. From here on out, it is the Judiciary’s role to rule as they understand the President wants them to; she will let them know if they displease her.
L’etat c’est moi.
Unless and until Donald Trump rescinds her Executive Order declaring sex to be established at conception, the fetal fetishist’s proper, MAGA pronouns are she/her.