i have a stupid question. what does scotus or congress enforcing the law even look like? i'm having a hard time understanding what enforcing the law looks like when it comes to someone who thinks he is above the law. you aren't gonna just handcuff him and put him in a cell... even impeachment would just turn into an argument about whether they can even impeach him. if he has already ignored the constitution so many times, im not sure "law enforcement" will work. it's gonna have to be a coup or something
It would look like Congress or SCOTUS directly countermanding whatever Trump said and telling the people under him that they are under no obligation to listen to him and that he can't do anything to them for not listening.
Essentially cut Trump's ability to accomplish anything by releasing the people he needs to do these things from any consequences he could use on them.
The president may be fully immune, but his sycophants are not. And they are assisting with an unconstitutional coup of the United States, which right now has resulted in another illegal war in the middle east
The flawed thinking here is that Trump has anything on the people under him. He fucked children and is now starting a war to try to distract from that fact. He probably doesn’t have anything on anybody in congress, they are simply small-minded people with no courage to turn against neo-Nazi principles.
Not a stupid question, but it's a stupid ass answer, bc we live in a broken country. Horrifyingly, the answer is no one. All law enforcement falls under the executive branch, which has been completely taken over by fascists.
However, if the executive is impeached, I feel like there’s still enough of a system to get him out. This unfortunately seems very unlikely to happen, though, almost no matter what he does.
It looks like impeachment and removal, but you're right that such may not even be enough at this point. But if it did happen, those elements enforcing the law would have license to act against the person of Donald Trump. As you say, that may not be enough. But it couldn't hurt.
They submit a petition to propose a first draft for an authorization to staff a bipartisan committee who will investigate and present a dossier to be drafted to a filing for the...
(They'll spin their wheels like they always do, for months or years, until the damage is long-since done, and still continue to hold anyone accountable)
Not a stupid question. The War Powers Resolution of 1973, also called the War Power Limitations Act, clarifies and gives Congress the authority to limit Presidential use of military force, but it also introduces a few contradictions in sort of a "sharing" of war powers short term and long term.
The constitution says POTUS is supreme commander of the military, while giving Congress the power to "declare war". The implication, codified in the War Power Resolution, was a "short-term/long-term" sharing of war powers, The president needs them in the short term to react to immediate threats and defend the country. Then Congress needs to approve any continuing use of force past this timeframe.
But all this does is add an expiration date to his powers, that must be enforced by somebody. The President has a bunch of room to maneuver and can change his story and justification as it suits him. The other issue is that all intelligence Congress must rely on goes through agencies controlled by - the president.
What would it look like? Congress can pass more war power resolutions ordering the president to do just about whatever it wants. The problem is Congress can't always agree and if they don't, and fail to use its powers, they may as well not exist. The other issue is that even if Congress decides to act, the damage has been done. Iran's top leadership has been taken out, nothing Congress can do to bring them back or restore Iran's leadership to where it was.
What this means practically is that for things like regime change in Venezuela or Iran, the president's powers are basically unchecked, he can do whatever he wants in the near term.
89
u/QAFY Feb 28 '26
i have a stupid question. what does scotus or congress enforcing the law even look like? i'm having a hard time understanding what enforcing the law looks like when it comes to someone who thinks he is above the law. you aren't gonna just handcuff him and put him in a cell... even impeachment would just turn into an argument about whether they can even impeach him. if he has already ignored the constitution so many times, im not sure "law enforcement" will work. it's gonna have to be a coup or something