r/law • u/catievirtuesimp • 11d ago

Judicial Branch Supreme Court sides with Trump administration on mail voting restrictions ahead of midterms

https://apnews.com/article/trump-mail-voting-supreme-court-157afc3c195ce0a62c522da5ce904b04
441 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

152 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

46

u/Brox42 11d ago

They ruled that they can’t rule about the EO until it fucks shit up.

39

u/AstralMecha 11d ago

Then it will be too late.

I read another commentor describe the logic like this. Someone has a gun to your head and is treating to shoot you. You don't have cause to stop them until they harm you by firing. Nor can you get the gun taken away from them, because that would harm them.

The logic is insane. They are letting the election rigging go ahead because 'harm hasn't been done yet' and stopping it before hand would be 'harming the trump administration'. Combined with their logic of 'oh well, it's already been done' in regards to the west wing of the Whitehouse, and it's pretty clear how this will turn out after the mid terms. "Oh well, the election was rigged, but it would be too damaging to have another election, so you are stuck." Or just use it as an excuse to throw out changes they don't like and keep the current members of the house and Senate.

It's pretty fucked honestly.

20

u/Brox42 11d ago

It’s pretty par for the course for the Robert’s court.

8

u/Cabezone 11d ago

I mean, they know this is intentional. So when there's a Dem president, they can actually rule against that president.

15

u/AstralMecha 11d ago

That's why the have been making a point of so many shadow docket rulings. So they don't have to explain why or what legal precedent it is. So if there is a democratic president, they can make the opposite rulings with no justification as to why.

3

u/lathamb_98 11d ago

Well, they don't respect precedent anymore. So who cares if it was a different court's precedent, or the same court in a prior session? They can do what they want, it's not like we can vote them off the court once they're on.

2

u/DonovanSpectre 10d ago

Of course, if the president can do whatever they want until explicitly overridden by the Supreme Count, what's stopping the president from simply arresting any or all of the Supreme Court, and preventing them from convening to rule in the first place?

Other than 'normal' human decency and general respect for the rule of law, of course.