19 Comments
User's avatar
Joe From the Bronx's avatar

A constitutionally unqualified President Elect continues to taint our law and constitutional system thanks in significant part to the justices he appointed along with CJ Roberts (and Alito/Thomas).

Russ Wiecking's avatar

Not being a constitutional scholar, I have to wonder where in the constitutional documents or history there are protections for a president elect. I expect that there are none but I expect that the Supreme Court will make something up, as usual. It will come from the same orifice from which they pulled the presidential immunity doctrine. It should be easier now, as that orifice is well exercised.

Kathy Hughes's avatar

Trump’s unconstitutional protection from prosecution comes from the equally unconstitutional doctrine of the unitary executive, which John Yoo formulated and proposed. The whole concept violates the constitutional separation of powers and sets the president above the law when it was very clear the founders expected the president to be subject to the law.

Judith Schwartz's avatar

Joe do something - you have immunity - use the constitutional bar

Release those docs - fire Aileen cannon

Sam.'s avatar

That would require the Democrats to be anti-Trump, which they've repeatedly shown themselves not to be.

David J. Sharp's avatar

Because Trump already owns the legislative branch … now on to the judicial!

Lance Khrome's avatar

"...encroaches on the Executive authority of the incoming Administration of President tRump..."

Where in Art. II, or ANYWHERE in the Constitution does it. say ANYTHING about a president-ELECT'S "executive authority"? Whenever tRump takes an appeal to SCOTUS, each one even more fanciful than the preceding one, one thinks, "That's it, the proverbial 'bridge too far', the Court will dismiss THIS one out of hand". But, NO, at least five Justices will somehow see merit in the no-bloody-chance appeal, and grant relief, even temporary.

So, yeah, we have likely another tRump win and justice loss coming right up for your delectation...oy vey.

David J. Sharp's avatar

Hmm, it will be interesting to see whether the Supreme Court bows before Trump ahead of time … or whether it will assert its “sovereignty.”

Austin Alwood's avatar

Since Chief Injustice Roberts has already demonstrated that he and his 5 right-hand hench-persons have already been bought and paid for by #45, there is little doubt that they will bow to him.

David J. Sharp's avatar

Or, in the alternative, show Trump that he has to go through SCOTUS first.

Michael's avatar

cj roberts is the feckless wart that inexorably delayed and then gave us the immunity decision, gutted the Voting Rights Act, voted to deny women critical health care during pregnancy, endorsed and supported the Citizens United case - permitting bribery from big business to government hacks and now bemoans the lack of respect for the bench (not all judges, just the corrupt members of SCOTUS, the loose cannon in Florida, and the likes of Matt Kacsmaryk). What an arrogant ass. The f-word is too polite to be applied to him and his recent report on the state of the judiciary. Go to Hell john.

David J. Sharp's avatar

And because Trump expects the law to wholly obey his wishes.

Joeff's avatar

Gotta keep that powder dry!

Spencer Dawkins's avatar

The Jan 6 report is about whether a president can be a dictator, but the documents report is only(!?) about whether a president can be a criminal.

Reginald's avatar

Yet another disgrace, before he even takes office. I can't stand 4 years of this, can I just ignore it til it's over?

Gladwyn d'Souza's avatar

Wouldn’t it be cool to have the Oval Office conducted out of Rikers? The multi billion dollars cabinet in adjacent cells with the likes of Miller and Hegseth.

Victoria Brown's avatar

Thank you Chris. Concise as

always.

CeeJo's avatar

And already has himself titled as “President”! What a pompous ass!!