politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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.
- 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
It wouldn't matter in this case. If someone violates courts enough, they can be actually indicted and charged with crimes for that. If someone was convicted on a charge of obstruction of justice, then the president could pardon them of that conviction.
But I'm not talking about charging people with obstruction of justice. Judges can't even indict people on their own without the cooperation of the executive. What I'm talking about is the enforcement powers courts have outside of convictions, the powers of contempt of court.
For example, let's say you come in for a traffic ticket in your local county courthouse. When your case comes up, you don't even try to engage with the judge. You just start calling the judge every name and curse word in the book, and you threaten to kill him and his family. The judge at that point can simply throw you in the court's jail cell. He doesn't need to convict you of anything. He can just say, "you know what, I'm going to hold you until you respect this court and agree to engage with the process." That kind of holding can't be pardoned. You can't be pardoned for that, because you haven't been charged or convicted of anything. This kind of hold is constitutional because you hold the keys to your own cell. All you have to do to get out is to stop being a jackass to the judge. A judge holding you in contempt of court can't be pardoned by the governor or president.
That is what I'm suggesting the courts do on a large scale. You don't try and convict Musk and his goons of anything. If they continue to violate court orders, you just round them all up and lock them up on contempt of court until they agree to abide by court orders. And again, this is constitutional because they can get out at any time, as long as they follow the orders of the court.
You might need to hold a large number of people this way, but so be it. Be creative. I'm sure the judges can work something out. Maybe the governors of Maryland or Virginia would be willing to offer spaces in their state jails to hold prisoners being held by federal judges on contempt of court charges.
Wait, why not? If words gets to Trump that Musk will be charged with a crime, Trump can give him a preemptive pardon - something that has yet to be challenged as unconstitutional.
At that point, the point is moot. The process is bypassed, is it not? Musk can start participating but there would be no other consequences
Preemptive pardons have been upheld, if by "preemptive" you mean "pardoning charges have not yet been brought for an act that has occurred in the past." If you mean pardons for future acts, that's a whole different kettle of fish, and even the bought-and-paid-for Supreme Court might not buy that line of bullshit.
There is nothing to pardon, it's just contempt of court.
Elon gets put in jail for contempt of court. Trump pardons him for crimes. Elon starts to cooperate and gets out of jail. The case is over because Trump pardoned him.
There is no case, the case already happened. The court issued a decision, they ignored, so then they are in contempt. There's no crime to litigate, they can leave jail whenever they decide to comply. If they reneg, haul their asses back.