Definitely a lost battle under this admin, but if we do eventually return to normalcy, would really appreciate a hard requirement that every announced use of force by the state be accompanied by stating the authority under which it occured
Replies
If I ran a boat tourism service in the Caribbean right now I'd be fucking terrified that one of my boats might get blown up for having brown people on it.
sep 2, 2025, 11:13 pm • 11 0 • view
The only way out is through. Build a new normal.
sep 2, 2025, 10:44 pm • 7 0 • view
Isn't there a Congressional briefing requirement that normally includes such information?
sep 4, 2025, 12:20 am • 0 0 • view
We cannot "return to normal" we must try and arrive at a better place than what used to be normal, so that this will never happen again
sep 2, 2025, 10:41 pm • 4 0 • view
Return to rule of law based government, writ broadly then
sep 2, 2025, 10:42 pm • 20 0 • view
That's fair, we're going to have to have a major overhaul of the constitution and we really need to find a way to get a broad majority on board.
sep 2, 2025, 10:44 pm • 1 0 • view
That’s already the law.
sep 3, 2025, 1:47 pm • 0 0 • view
Google: “The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) governs this process, which ensures transparency and allows for public participation. “
sep 3, 2025, 1:48 pm • 0 0 • view
the public school curriculum requires teachers to justify their lesson plans to match the state standards, seems reasonable that the federal government would adhere to similar justifications.
sep 3, 2025, 12:22 am • 0 0 • view
When was the last time there was "normalcy" in the USA? Also how are you going to remove fascists from power?
sep 2, 2025, 11:13 pm • 0 0 • view
It would generally be good for the law to not be a tool of opacity in this disaster country.
sep 2, 2025, 11:20 pm • 1 0 • view
This administration definitely think saying Article II justifies them doing whatever they want and the institutions created by Article I and Article III seem to be incapable of correcting them. The institutions protected by 1A is also failing in this task.
sep 2, 2025, 11:07 pm • 6 0 • view
Society should insist they say it out loud each time
sep 2, 2025, 11:08 pm • 12 0 • view
Most leaders don't brag about this stuff and it's not necessary. This guy isn't going to follow anything
sep 3, 2025, 10:31 pm • 0 0 • view
The buck stops nowhere. It's a conundrum like figuring out black holes.
sep 3, 2025, 1:59 am • 1 0 • view
We believe we have a specific and narrow reading of the law that will likely hold up in court to cover our asses
sep 2, 2025, 11:37 pm • 0 0 • view
lol Rubio gonna get snatched and hanged for piracy the next time he travels to Europe
sep 2, 2025, 11:14 pm • 13 0 • view
Fascinating. Imagine, if you can, Rubio actually standing up for State Dept prerogatives. But, nah. These sycophants expose as virtue the petty, turf-hoarding infighting as defense of our institutions. Getting in line to caress the taint collapses this ugly but effective “norm”.
sep 2, 2025, 11:25 pm • 1 0 • view
📌
sep 2, 2025, 11:05 pm • 0 0 • view
No follow up Q? Cool cool
sep 3, 2025, 2:03 am • 2 0 • view
“They used whatever powers those dudes in Sicario had”
sep 2, 2025, 11:03 pm • 43 0 • view
They just do what they want
sep 2, 2025, 11:11 pm • 7 0 • view
Is the White House counsel even the right person to be deciding such things?
sep 2, 2025, 11:14 pm • 15 0 • view
No
sep 2, 2025, 11:15 pm • 36 0 • view
Well, the question should be posed to POTUS or whoever in his Cabinet is directly responsible for coordinating the invasions.
sep 2, 2025, 11:40 pm • 1 0 • view
something something article 2, something something ‘Muricuh fuck-yeah, cut, print
sep 2, 2025, 11:58 pm • 1 0 • view
Variable this is Knife, over.
sep 2, 2025, 11:26 pm • 4 0 • view
Clark this is Ritter, lol, git fuckt
sep 2, 2025, 11:36 pm • 0 0 • view
So you have a problem with extrajudicial murder?
sep 3, 2025, 1:13 am • 1 1 • view
He is the freaking Secretary of State! "Oh, I don't know how it works, that's the lawyer's job"? What a sad, pathetic man, even for useless minion standards.
sep 3, 2025, 12:06 am • 9 2 • view
This is also not a legal basis (and part of why this needs to be a hard requirement to ensure someone who understands what one looks like writes it down and publishes it) bsky.app/profile/atru...
sep 3, 2025, 10:25 pm • 148 19 • view
The legal authority is "because we felt like doing it."
sep 4, 2025, 1:04 am • 3 1 • view
He's like an anti-advertisement for Yale Law School.
sep 3, 2025, 10:30 pm • 6 0 • view
Turns out it’s not *always* funny when the authorizing statute is BOFA.
sep 3, 2025, 10:27 pm • 1 0 • view
Seems like this would fall under US law (18 U.S. Code § 2280). We should have a list of the chain of command from Trump to the person ho pulled the trigger.
sep 3, 2025, 10:31 pm • 1 0 • view
They're going to handle this like they are Kilmar Garcia. Keep repeating over and over, "Trust us you guys, they TOTALLY deserved it!" while offering no evidence whatsoever.
sep 3, 2025, 10:29 pm • 4 0 • view
Maybe they did totally deserve it, but "they totally deserved it" is not a legal basis
sep 3, 2025, 10:30 pm • 11 0 • view
No, it's not even close, but I'll be surprised if we ever get anything else.
sep 3, 2025, 10:32 pm • 1 0 • view
When the republicans lose control of the white house we need to prosecute every single person in that chain of command from Trump to the person that pulled the trigger.
sep 3, 2025, 10:31 pm • 3 0 • view
Reckless idiots. War criminals.
sep 3, 2025, 10:27 pm • 1 0 • view
Does anyone find it weird that the only sources on this at all are Rubio and Trump? No Pentagon briefing with operational details? No facts at all? A video with 100% blurred timestamp? What the hell is this? Wag the Dog?
sep 3, 2025, 10:52 pm • 4 2 • view
Pretty sure this is video of White House counsel
sep 3, 2025, 12:21 am • 9 0 • view
Oh all the steps? Ok then
sep 2, 2025, 11:27 pm • 129 1 • view
Part of why I want it as a hard requirement too is that the statement should address both the domestic and international law bases, and also it is absurd to expect scholars, pundits, or journalists to try and guess-at-a-distance any of those on their behalf. It's an armed attack. State a basis.
sep 2, 2025, 11:29 pm • 130 5 • view
Such "hard requirements" often exist in statute, but plainly it's not enough. What you need is legislation that says, "this is presumptively illegal without the public justification under domestic and international law and here are the consequences for illegal war activity."
sep 2, 2025, 11:33 pm • 6 0 • view
Especially when a lot of what has been done has simply been crammed into 10 USC YOLO.
sep 2, 2025, 11:37 pm • 2 0 • view
"maybe it's done as self defense or under 2001 AUMF or maybe it's asserting an a2 foreign affairs" ... ok ok but stop this is backwards and insane to need to conjure up and steelman hypothetical justifications; instead we should default to assuming it is presumptively illegal unless they state it
sep 2, 2025, 11:35 pm • 87 4 • view
It'd be important to require precision, or any admin would just cite Art. II and an AUMF. The amended Case-Zablocki Act, which requires reporting legal authorities for int'l agreements, tries (in that area) to get particular ... but even that would exempt agreements relating to military operations.
sep 3, 2025, 2:21 am • 5 0 • view
“we are clean on all the steps”
sep 3, 2025, 1:03 am • 3 0 • view
Yeah they filed all the paperwork with the marshal of the Supreme Court. No problem.
sep 2, 2025, 11:38 pm • 1 0 • view
Step 1: Target Step 2: Fire!
sep 3, 2025, 11:47 am • 0 0 • view
“All the steps have been taken” sure is a hell of a legal defense
sep 2, 2025, 11:28 pm • 7 0 • view
"All the steps have been taken." "What steps are those again?" "All of them..." jfc
sep 2, 2025, 11:37 pm • 3 0 • view
But your honor we took all the steps
sep 2, 2025, 11:38 pm • 4 0 • view
Can’t wait to hear Russel Crowe say “We took all the steps” in the upcoming Nuremberg movie
sep 2, 2025, 11:44 pm • 4 1 • view
He's the Secretary of State, knowing this is his job! Was he totally out of the loop on this whole operation?
sep 2, 2025, 11:38 pm • 3 0 • view
If I were a USN commanding officer, I'd want to know what my JAG corps says, not White House counsel.
sep 2, 2025, 11:15 pm • 49 0 • view
in the moments before his brain finally shorts out for good, Trump will definitely pardon everyone who committed illegal acts under his administration, with all the t's crossed and all the i's dotted he's just that kind of thoughtful, loyal boss, always thinking about the little people
sep 2, 2025, 11:34 pm • 2 0 • view
Is there still a JAG corps? Weren't they removed a few months ago? Who is still there?
sep 2, 2025, 11:17 pm • 16 0 • view
www.military.com/daily-news/2...
sep 2, 2025, 11:19 pm • 19 3 • view
Heard on NPR today they’re reassigning 600 JAG to act as immigration judges. I bet they will follow orders, too. www.npr.org/2025/09/02/g...
sep 3, 2025, 1:17 am • 0 0 • view
he said "suffice it to say" right there. you can't beat that, debate over.
sep 2, 2025, 11:32 pm • 4 0 • view
Dude has like four jobs that are pretty connected to the White House.
sep 2, 2025, 11:32 pm • 8 0 • view
The "source: trust me, bro" defense.
sep 2, 2025, 11:26 pm • 10 0 • view
"Have you ever taken all the steps? Then STFU." 🫠
sep 2, 2025, 11:42 pm • 3 0 • view
These guys think they are in a Hollywood movie.
sep 2, 2025, 11:08 pm • 18 0 • view
Last time we did this shit a missionary family got shot all to hell in a Cessna over Peru
sep 3, 2025, 1:07 am • 4 0 • view
Absolutely insulting to Congress and the Constitution. And the State Dept. Legal Advisor should quit in disgust. (Not that the hack they've put in would ever do that.)
sep 2, 2025, 11:01 pm • 15 0 • view
it absolutely does not suffice it to say
sep 2, 2025, 11:16 pm • 301 3 • view
rubio is such a bad liar too
sep 2, 2025, 11:17 pm • 9 0 • view
“the steps? uhhh, yeah we did them. legally, everything was very cool.”
sep 2, 2025, 11:22 pm • 5 0 • view
he gets paid a whole ass paycheck for doing and saying fuck all
sep 2, 2025, 11:24 pm • 0 0 • view
Evergreen skeet for at least the next ~3.33 years.
sep 2, 2025, 11:19 pm • 44 0 • view
putin loves this kind of pretext for invading sovereign nations. rubio is a spineless swine.
sep 2, 2025, 11:14 pm • 9 0 • view
I've suspected Rubio is kept less informed than Kayleigh.
sep 2, 2025, 11:41 pm • 1 0 • view
Still waiting on details of his last bullshit story that he won't even tell a court. He talks like he's done something more than sign a piece of paper backed by a briefing memo prepared by a Miller acolyte.
sep 2, 2025, 11:13 pm • 7 0 • view
I’ll allow the strike on Mar-a-lago to be off the books, but that’s it
sep 2, 2025, 11:45 pm • 0 0 • view
Concur.
sep 3, 2025, 12:04 am • 1 1 • view
Like…Congress? Did I read the Constitution wrong?
sep 3, 2025, 12:52 am • 1 0 • view
That's what we have Congress for. Unfortunately the current Congress has no interest in demanding that the president obey laws or the constitution. Laws and the Constitution are for limiting the power of Democratic presidents, not Republican ones.
sep 2, 2025, 10:53 pm • 1 0 • view
Acts of war require a declaration or authorization of some kind. IMO it’s built in but .
sep 2, 2025, 10:51 pm • 0 0 • view
I’ve been trying to think of a way to enforce the important concept of “hey you can’t just declare an emergency”
sep 2, 2025, 10:43 pm • 11 0 • view
One small idea - emergency powers could offset reduced constraints with increased oversight. Gang of 8 in exec briefings. Special Prosecutor appointed. Info automatically to House, Senate, and to involved State govts. (in Australia, could trigger Caretaker govt). bsky.app/profile/myrt...
sep 2, 2025, 11:51 pm • 4 0 • view
Every law that allow the president to claim a thing to use a power needs to be changed to require proof. And a limitation on how that power can be claimed and how long it can be used with out congressional approval.
sep 2, 2025, 10:37 pm • 21 0 • view
The problem is none of that matters if Congress (and SCOTUS) doesn't care. Our whole system relies on checks and balances and when all three branches agree there aren't any checks or balances. Ultimately the President can do whatever Congress lets him do no matter what the law is.
sep 2, 2025, 11:02 pm • 11 0 • view
It matters even if they don't care
sep 2, 2025, 11:03 pm • 19 0 • view
Does it though? Trump has people from all over the world handing him gifts and not only does he not hide it, he often makes sure it's done in front of reporters and televised. What does it matter that the Constitution forbids Presidents from accepting emoluments if Congress lets it happen?
sep 3, 2025, 12:02 am • 0 0 • view
Either you believe rules and laws matter or you don't. Don't ask us to cure your nihilism.
sep 3, 2025, 12:49 am • 0 0 • view
It's not nihilism to recognize that if a law is unenforced it doesn't matter.
sep 3, 2025, 2:55 am • 1 0 • view
They're not doing that because they don't have the authority 🫠🫠
sep 2, 2025, 11:11 pm • 1 0 • view
Not the argument his lawyers will make, but in Trump's mind it's just "Article II"
sep 2, 2025, 11:31 pm • 0 0 • view
I want the degree of authority available to be so narrow that there's no possible confusion about what the authority is. 1) "They were shooting at us" 2) "Congress gave authority to POTUS do X-type missions in Y region for Z months"
sep 2, 2025, 11:46 pm • 0 0 • view
Each Member of Congress, when introducing a bill, is required to submit a statement explaining what constitutional authority the bill invokes. So it's logical for them to ask the same of the President, right?
sep 2, 2025, 10:38 pm • 2 0 • view
Authority: “The pwesident’s feefees are hurt.”
sep 2, 2025, 11:05 pm • 2 0 • view
in the ideal future "check out our new snuff flick!!1!" should not constitute legitimate authority.
sep 3, 2025, 5:38 am • 0 0 • view
If things go back to normal, we need a hard Nuremberg style roundup! You ignore the law, you go to jail. Make that perfectly clear to the separatists.
sep 2, 2025, 10:49 pm • 2 0 • view
Ok but that's a very different conversation
sep 2, 2025, 10:50 pm • 4 0 • view