Next Democratic president should give Republicans 'a taste of their own medicine'! (AlterNet)

[Jack Valentino]

The first year of President Donald Trump's second term has been rife with examples of the president doing something previously believed to be illegal until it was eventually upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). Now, two legal experts are arguing that the next Democratic president should take advantage of the new vastly expanded presidential powers sanctioned by the nation's highest court.

In a Friday article for Slate, legal journalists Mark Joseph Stern and Dahlia Lithwick laid out how the next Democrat to be elected president of the United States should govern in their first 24 hours, under the new legal boundaries SCOTUS granted the White House under the Trump administration. Stern argued that because SCOTUS has blessed the "unitary executive" theory that all powers delegated to the executive branch and federal agencies can be unilaterally exercised by the president, the next president — he named Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) as a stand-in example — should take after Trump's example and "wield those powers aggressively."

"How does that cash out? First, let’s remember that the Supreme Court has now effectively granted the president authority to impound federal funds duly appropriated by Congress and to abolish federal agencies established and funded by Congress," Stern wrote. "I think that is terrible and anti-constitutional. But thanks to the Supreme Court, that is now the law. So let’s talk about what President AOC can do with those powers in 2029."

"On Day 1, she needs to impound ICE’s budget. She needs to refuse to spend the billions of dollars that Congress has appropriated to the agency and fire tens of thousands of immigration agents immediately, starting with those who committed acts of violence and discrimination — which, by that point, may be almost all of them," he continued. "Close as many immigrant detention facilities as possible and free the detainees."

Read more:
https://www.alternet.org/next-democratic-president-agenda/



What I'd personally like to see is the next Democratic president, via his authority over the agricultural department,
summarily cancel the changes made to 'work requirements' for SNAP in the 'big ugly bill',
particularly those raising the age from 54 to 64, and the exemptions for veterans and the homeless, among others...
(and hopefully a Democratic congress will reverse all those provisions through reconciliation,
as well as the medicaid work requirements for older people at the least!)

Trump and the silence of Republicans and the Supreme Court, have 'opened the floodgates'
to what it may be presumed legal for a president to do---
We should take full advantage of that fact for OUR OWN priorities!!

[Dan]

1. Why not add this

Have the DOJ legally investigate and charge all Enablers of this administration.
Have the Congress investigate and render to the DOJ for charges all those that benefited financially.
Have the appropriate authorities provide public hearing on all the Cabinet Officials decisions that impacted the American people.
Now, if Trump grants pardons - everyone that receives a pardon has to testify without benefit of the 5th Amendment to questions asked.

[Jack Valentino]

2. Indeed, 'why not'? "FLOOD THE ZONE!"

[stopdiggin]

4. could go down that list one by one ... but it probably isn't worth the effort ... - - -(nt)-

[unblock]

3. Sadly, it won't really work.

First, this Supreme Court isn't going to value consistency over partisanship. They will reverse themselves, most likely finding some tiny difference between whatever Donnie did vs. whatever aoc does.

Second, the right wing will howl, as they always do, only this time they'll actually have a point. The media will run with it and. It would play horribly. The left simply isn't as solid enough a bloc to pull this one off. We won't just ignore the rest of the country the way the right does.

Which is sad. I do think "tit-for-tat with forgiveness" is a pretty good strategy. I'm just not sure how to accomplish that, especially the way the media is, and would still be even after an aoc win.

[Jack Valentino]

7. We CAN ignore the Trump and far-right wing, if we are delivering REAL BENEFITS

to the MAJORITY of the country!

It worked for Franklin Roosevelt, who was elected to four terms!

LET the maggots howl, however many are left---
I WANT to hear them howl---- it will only emphasize their 'situational political ethics'!


At this point, I don't care to hear 'we can't' or 'it won't really work'
before we have even tried to do it!

As for the Supreme Court, well, they can say whatever they like,
but the President of the United States is in command of more troops than they are.

[gab13by13]

5. I could not agree more,

Nominating a non-politician, someone like Malcolm Nance, will blow the Magat party out of the water.

Someone former military like Nance.

Who gives a shit what unwashed Magats think or what the MSM thinks or what the Supreme Court thinks? Add 4 more justices.

Our next nominee should be a tough as nails old fashioned Democrat.

[Seeking Serenity]

6. Add 30 more justices

Our rights would be secure, and even expanded, for two generations at least.

[chicoescuela]

11. Yep. Supreme Court needs to be corrected somehow, someway.

[ABC123Easy]

8. Hell yes!

Many, many more tasks for the next Dem POTUS as well.

[EdmondDantes_]

9. This would be just continuing down the same path just with our dictator

I would definitely not be in favor of that because it just leads to ever more unitary executive and divisiveness.

[Jack Valentino]

13. so we should continue to attempt to be 'better than the Republicans',

which seems to have NEVER won any elections,
while the base of our party considers us 'weak'
for standing by while the GQP does anything it wants to do.

Ok. Got that. I disagree.

Almost all of the progressive policy proposals of the Democratic party
are supported by polling of the majority of voters---
in many cases, even a majority of Republican voters, particularly
'making the rich pay their fair share of taxes'.....


I reject 'defeatism' and 'unilateral political disarmament'
as does the vast majority of our party base---

(and we LOST the last election BECAUSE the party base became demoralized...)

[J_William_Ryan]

10. "'opened the floodgates' to what it may be presumed legal for a president to do"

And that’s the problem – the next Republican president will undo what the Democratic president accomplished, reinstating much of what Trump did.

This an example of the considerable damage the Supreme Court has done – short-term policy by partisan politics, not long-term established, institutional sound, responsible governance.

[Jack Valentino]

12. So we should ignore the needs of our party members, in fear of 'what the next GQP president may do'?

FUCK that.

The Republicans don't hold back 'in fear of what the next Democratic president may do',
while they screw over OUR constituents and many of their own,
and likely will cause the future deaths of many of BOTH....

THIS is EXACTLY the sort of attitude which has led MANY "grass-roots Democrats"
to conclude that the Democratic party is
"WEAK"!
(meaning the officeholders, not the party base!)


If we can provide comfort to our party members when we actually HAVE power,
that makes it LESS LIKELY that they NAZIS will be able to UNDO it very soon!

FDR learned that lesson. Why can't we?

[jfz9580m]

14. Turnabout is fair play

Similarly, after all these attacks on the public sector, I plan to be draconian about parasitic private sector encroachment (especially these parasitic software companies-AI or data mining). Why is this or that pos bloatware in my space/why was it ever?