this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2024
521 points (99.4% liked)

politics

18789 readers
2662 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

US president also to seek constitutional amendment to limit immunity for presidents and various officeholders

Joe Biden will announce plans to reform the US supreme court on Monday, Politico reported, citing two people familiar with the matter, adding that the US president was likely to back term limits for justices and an enforceable code of ethics.

Biden said earlier this week during an Oval Office address that he would call for reform of the court.

He is also expected to seek a constitutional amendment to limit immunity for presidents and some other officeholders, Politico reported, in the aftermath of a July supreme court ruling that presidents have broad immunity from prosecution.

Biden will make the announcement in Texas on Monday and the specific proposals could change, the report added.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 84 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Seems to me he’s using his last months in office to highlight issues that will damage the republican traitor filth as his VP campaigns to save the Republic.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

Meanwhile Trump's VP is busy convincing people that it's ok for him to fuck couches or jack off to dolphin porn because he has a kid

Edit: clarifying

[–] gravitas_deficiency 8 points 1 month ago

I think I know what you meant to say, but I’m pretty sure the downvotes are due to how confusingly and ambiguously you worded your comment

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

You might need to reread the comment you replied to.

[–] xmunk 6 points 1 month ago

But... it's got dat cushion for a pushin'

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

Bro took the dolphin copypasta literally

[–] [email protected] 68 points 1 month ago (11 children)

Need a new amendment enforcing federal retirement age on elected and appointed people. If you hit it during your term, you can’t run again. If you position is appointed, you have a year to step down.

Also need a federal law correcting the recent bribery ruling, and applying it to ALL federal employees, political and non-political. Call it the Thomas Act.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Wouldn't that be funny? Biden, in his last months in office, sets term limits on Congress that would have also booted him! That would be the most epic walking away while something explodes behind you kind of moment.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It would be great but the President has no such power. Congress, a group of geriatric kleptocrats, aren't going to legislate against themselves continuing to steal millions with insider trading.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Congress, a group of geriatric kleptocrats

Well, they aren't as geriatric and kleptocratic as United Russia.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Presidential immunity is already unconstitutional. This Court would just ignore the new amendment like they do the current constitution.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] blackstampede 18 points 1 month ago

I have near-zero hope this happens, but I hope it does. At least someone is worried about presidents with immunity- even leftist commentators seem to be just shrugging it off.

load more comments
view more: next ›