But they’re not openly backing the unitary executive theory because they don’t want a Democratic president to have the same powers.
Replies
Right they’re not even as principled about this shit as Dick Cheney.
jul 15, 2025, 12:21 pm • 17 0 • view
Like, it would not be a *good* system of governance, but if they actually put all this in writing and created a clear rule, we could at least say, "OK, the Roberts Court ushered in an era of strong executives and hollow legislatures." But they're not doing that!
jul 15, 2025, 2:51 pm • 21 1 • view
They're ushering in an era of strong Republican executives and weak Democratic ones.
jul 15, 2025, 2:51 pm • 20 1 • view
I think it's slightly different; they're making John Roberts strong, and everybody else weak.
jul 15, 2025, 2:53 pm • 1 1 • view
I will agree when I have evidence that Roberts is willing to rule against the Trump administration. Right now, it looks like he's avoiding the potential for Trump to ignore him, and that makes him look weak compared to Trump.
jul 15, 2025, 2:55 pm • 15 0 • view
Also possible!
jul 15, 2025, 2:57 pm • 1 0 • view
Yeah, they’re maximizing the chances that when Trump does something Roberts can say “I meant to let him do that.”
jul 15, 2025, 3:04 pm • 15 2 • view
The idea is to preserve the idea that SCOTUS is the ultimate arbiter of constitutionality by avoiding any confrontation with Trump that they might lose, while also vitiating the power of Congress and the lower courts.
jul 15, 2025, 3:07 pm • 8 1 • view
It's incredibly short-sighted, and they're mostly willing to do it because they are in favor of at least some of the illegal shit Trump is doing and don't care much about the rest.
jul 15, 2025, 3:09 pm • 6 0 • view
Right, I think it’s *mostly* that they agree with him and feel let off the chain to do so openly, and maybe to some extent they’re shy of the confrontation that would come from him ignoring a ruling of theirs, but in that sense they’ve completely ceded that fight to him anyway.
jul 15, 2025, 3:11 pm • 5 0 • view
I do think they think they are preserving their authority for future presidents who they think they will agree with less but who they also think will be less willing to simply ignore them.
jul 15, 2025, 3:20 pm • 5 0 • view
I agree with @haydonmp.bsky.social that we might see some of these cases resolved on the merits after the midterms, and not in Trump's favor, but only if there's a blue wave. In other words, SCOTUS will want to say, "See? We rule against Republicans" after the damage has already been done.
jul 15, 2025, 3:07 pm • 11 0 • view
Yes definitely. They’ve been playing extremely obvious games with delays and stays that get them to the result they want for now without having to set any precedent yet.
jul 15, 2025, 3:10 pm • 8 1 • view
He did rule against them recently. www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcn...
jul 15, 2025, 3:07 pm • 0 0 • view
SCOTUS has been castrated already. Maga is confirming to a Federal Judgeship the guy who said Trump can tell the courts to fuck off. We're just whistling past the graveyard at this point... "Fighting back" might take on a whole new meaning by November 26
jul 15, 2025, 4:14 pm • 1 0 • view
I don't think they have plans for any future elections. They openly backed it before SCOTUS a few times already. Besides, they don't need SCOTUS to buck the Constitution, and so far SCOTUS has dodged any constitutional question whenever it's come up.
jul 15, 2025, 4:11 pm • 1 0 • view
OK, well, states will be holding elections anyway.
jul 15, 2025, 4:12 pm • 32 0 • view
Elections have been happening across the country at various levels monthly. It's not up to them to hold elections.
jul 15, 2025, 4:12 pm • 3 0 • view
True. We just had primaries for the town board... Lets see what happens at midterms
jul 15, 2025, 4:15 pm • 0 0 • view
They're clearly going to happen, or Texas wouldn't be trying to gerrymander out a handful of Democrats.
jul 15, 2025, 4:16 pm • 7 0 • view
What the Gov of Texas does and what Trump does aren't necessarily the same thing I don't think you go to all this trouble just to lose it in a few years. I could be and hope I'm wrong, but after all that's happened I'm not putting any credence in hopes that the midterms will save us
jul 15, 2025, 4:20 pm • 0 0 • view
OK, but Trump has no power to cancel elections. States hold elections. That's what I'm saying. The government of Texas, like the government of the other 49 states, will hold elections in 2026 because that's the law.
jul 15, 2025, 4:24 pm • 4 0 • view
And it's not "midterms will save us." It's just acknowledging that there will be midterms.
jul 15, 2025, 4:24 pm • 4 0 • view
Trump has no power to do a lot of what's he's been doing, from Doge to Marines in California. He's violated the law several times and ignored court orders. He has placed people loyal to him in positions of power and congress is in his pocket. I hear what you're saying & you're not wrong Still
jul 15, 2025, 4:34 pm • 0 0 • view
Except the president at least has the authority to command the military. The federal executive branch simply doesn't do anything of importance with elections, which are matters of state law and procedure.
jul 15, 2025, 4:36 pm • 1 0 • view
fundamentally as is our ancient tradition about a hundred million Americans will go to the polls in November 2026, and if anyone tries to shut that door in their faces, they will have to come up with somewhere else they are walking to.
jul 15, 2025, 4:41 pm • 2 0 • view
Think about what this could possibly mean. Trump is overextended trying to quell immigration protests in one (1) city. Even if he tried to do this, by what means would he?
jul 15, 2025, 4:35 pm • 2 0 • view