With fear for our democracy, I dissent too

The Founders never intended the US President to be above the law, yet recent Supreme Court decisions suggest otherwise. With the upcoming election offering a binary choice between Joe Biden and Donald Trump, voters must rely on evidence, not conspiracy theories, to determine their decision.

With fear for our democracy, I dissent too

I t may make sense to some people that the Founders, who wrote our Constitution before AR-15’s existed and before anyone thought a former President was a messiah, put our President above the law – but it makes no sense to me.

I know, I know, “yeah, that’s not true.” But, well, common sense!

Besides, let’s just say ex-President Trump is elected again. Here is a chap who thought he could order assassinations of his enemies, who wanted a military parade in his honor, who admires and snuggles up to dictators and murderers – and that was before anyone thought the Supreme Court would open the door for that kind of behavior.

But open it, the court did.

Unfortunately, now the country is facing an election where one candidate is believed too old and lacking the capacity to be president, and the other candidate is Donald Trump, who hasn’t met a Constitutional requirement he didn’t think he could ignore.

I mean, as soon as the court issued this opinion, his lawyers were asking the New York justice who oversaw the trial where he was convicted of 34 felonies – by a jury of his (whether he agrees or not) peers – to throw out the verdict. Please tell me how, when he was not even President, that makes sense? And now, though the District Attorney who prosecuted him still thinks he is a legitimate conviction, he’s agreed to delay sentencing while the Constitutional issue is looked at.

And I think (hope) that even this Supreme Court would agree if he made the payoff when he was President, he is not immune.

This is a man who, before the ruling, said he’d be a dictator only on day one (as if the President has that power) … now, it appears he may have that power?

(By the way, has anyone had as great a week in his life as Donald Trump is having?)

My friends who support Trump, I’m sorry. This ruling is crazy. No one is above the law in this country – but now maybe someone is?? How can that happen?

Put aside that it most directly will affect Trump if he’s elected. But all future presidents? Oh, by the way, it means it affects the current President right now. Let’s see how Joe Biden handles his new powers.

It looks like we truly are facing a binary choice in November. And, neither is my favorite either.

But given someone who will (still) follow the Constitution and not think he’s above the law and someone itching to have the backing of the Supreme Court so he can be a dictator for more than Day One, I know who I’m voting for.

I have a friend who saw me comment after the court’s ruling, “Does this mean Biden can call Justice and have Trump indicted?” He responded, “He’s already done that.”

People, wake up. If you have any evidence that Biden ordered anyone to indict Donald J. Trump, please show it to me – hell, I’ll vote for Trump if that’s the case! Just, show me the receipts as they say now.

Can we stop putting forward conspiracy theories – on both sides – and deal with, what did we used to call them? Oh yeah. FACTS.

Millions of voters already look at Trump as the Messiah, sent by God to save the country. Please. Wake up. If the Lord was going to send a messiah would He choose a man with the morals of a mongoose (no offense to mongooses).

The only redeeming value of the SCOTUS decision is that the lower court can hold a hearing where the evidence can be laid out against Trump so a determination can be made as to what is protected activity and what isn’t. Even there, Trump recorded a win as that hearing is delayed for 32 days because the court did not send its decision “forthwith,” which means the decision isn't an order until it gets to the lower court for 32 (now 31) days.

The judge overseeing the Jan. 6 case has, at every step, tried to expedite the case. So maybe – maybe – that hearing can be held before the election so voters can make their own determination on the evidence.

Evidence – not conspiracy theories.

As Kate Shaw in an op-ed in the New York Times said, the decision “jettisons the long-settled principle that presidents, like all others, are subject to the operation of law... It has removed a major check on the office of the presidency at the very moment when Mr. Trump is running for office on a promise to weaponize the government against those he views as enemies.”

Now, is even the Supreme Court a check on the presidency?

And no, my Trump-supporting friends, Joe Biden didn’t order Trump’s prosecutions – show me the evidence. Please! Otherwise, STFU about that. I’m really tired of it.

As Justice Sonia Sotomayor said of the aptly named case, “Trump vs the United States”: “With fear for our democracy, I dissent.”




▪ This piece was first published in The Screaming Moderate and re-published in PUBLIC SQUARE UK on 2 July 2024 under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. | The author writes in a personal capacity.
Cover: Flickr/Gage Skidmore. (Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.)
Creative Commons License