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.

    • mlg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Can’t wait for him to flip the table on Israel

      any second now…

      aaaaaaaaannny second now…

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Why would he do that before the election? It’s still the same party, and him doing that would do nothing but hurt Kamala at this point. The smart move is to walk the tightrope for a few more months.

        Yeah I get it, it sucks that American politicians can’t just say certain things without tanking their career and destroying their political future. It’s fucked up and gross, but it’s real.

        A lot of people are talking like this is a done deal, but I’ve seen enough elections at this point to know that a million impossible to predict things can (and likely will) happen between now and November.

        As much as you might want the Democratic party to shout support for Palestinians from the rooftops, the current reality is that we need to continue to be very careful. If you actually care about Palestinian lives beyond using them as political pawns, then unfortunately we need to play the game until November.

        Because the alternative is an unacceptable outcome for the Palestinian people.

        I’ll probably get downvoted for saying it, but it doesn’t make it less true: Harris could behave exactly the same toward Israel as Biden, after being elected, and she would still be the only choice this election.

        I know there are plenty of genuine people here, but so much of the “genocide Joe” rhetoric was such obvious astroturfing. Or at least began that way…

        But we live in a world of cause and effect. Regardless of what happens between now and then there are a few possible outcomes for Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. But objectively, by a long shot, the worst is if Donald Trump and the GOP (with the hands of the Federalist Society, Heritage Foundation, John Birch Society, probably several lame clubs named after Ayn Rand bullshit, firmly up its keister like a goddam Muppet) take the presidency and immediately give Netanyahu carte blanche to “do what needs to be done” there. Which is what he/they will do.

        If you think things are bad now, a Trump win would be signing the death warrant for the Palestinian people in the Levant. And every so-called “progressive” that stayed home because of Biden’s stances on Israel will have the blood of millions of dead Palestinians on their hands.

        I consider myself to be a progressive, but the complete lack of pragmatism I’ve seen from other so-called progressives lately has been atrocious. So I hope it was mostly astroturf.

    • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      He is also expected to seek a constitutional amendment

      Arguably, this is still pussyfooting since there’s no fucking way he has anything near the number of votes needed for this.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Whenever I see a politician mention anything about a constitutional amendment, I immediately stop reading.

        Shit ain’t happening… We wouldn’t be able to pass an amendment saying “Pizza is yummy” because Republicans would refuse to agree with Democrats. They would actually stop eating pizza altogether because of it. There would be a movement to outlaw pizza because it’s grooming our kids (stupid sexy pizza).

        I was trying to think of something silly and outlandish, and as I was typing this, I realized… This isn’t even that far out of the realm of possibility at this point. It’s like legitimately difficult to think of something too far-fetched for this reality. It wouldn’t be the first pizza-related issue on the right (ahem, Pizzagate?). Or the second (I just remembered the stupid “pizza is a vegetable” bullshit).

        The looking glass ain’t shit, we went through it years ago. We’re at the end of “2001: A Space Odyssey” with Pink Floyd’s Echoes playing in sync with it. If we’re lucky, we’ll soon make it through the psychedelic spaghettification, and we will get to watch ourselves as a boring old man before becoming a giant space fetus…

        Sorry, got kind of sidetracked there what were we talking about again?

        Oh yeah, Jupiter and beyond the infinite…

        (Spoiler alert? Lol I couldn’t spoil the end of that film if I tried).

    • 4lan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      What if we just made the limit 1 term? Then no presidents would be doing actions purely to get reelected?

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Mexico is in a very different situation regarding the size and complexity of their administrative state. They’re also facing an entirely different type of corruption and political violence than we have up here…

      • _bcron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I think the problem with that would be that every 4-12 years we’d have a lame duck supreme court playing tug of war with the last supreme court over a handful of issues.

        What we really need is to be able to easily oust justices for ethics violations and conflicts of interest, like what the hell is Thomas still doing there??

        • BigMacHole@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Thomas is still there because taking Bribes and Gifts from Billionaires who have Cases before you is FINE! The REAL Corruption is Judge MERCHAN’S DAUGHTER who DONATED some Money once to DEMOCRATS!

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Would be so much worse… Think about any type of project or policy that takes more than 4 years to complete (and longer to see tangible benefits from).

        It’s already bad enough having a GOP president come in every 8 years to undo most of the good things their Democratic predecessor accomplished (with Reagan removing Carter’s solar panels from the White House roof being the archetype).

        Imagine having that pendulum swing every 4 years. Literally nothing that takes longer than 4 years would ever get done.