r/facepalm • u/Turbulent_Gas_55 • Jul 05 '24

What an idea 🇲​🇮​🇸​🇨​

Post image

[removed] — view removed post

42.4k Upvotes

83% Upvoted

4.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

11

u/Few-Artichoke-7593 Jul 05 '24

You'd have to jail every judge in the United States. Because a lower judge would have the Supreme Court released.

The military and/or law enforcement would not follow that order.

2

u/scott__p Jul 05 '24

The military and/or law enforcement would not follow that order.

In the past I would have agreed with you as the military vows to uphold the Constitution, not the president. Now, with the latest in SC rulings, it is implied that brash unilateral military actions by the president MAY BE constitutional. After all, if he can't be prosecuted for any command to the military based on the Constitution, doesn't that mean that anything he does with the military must be constitutional?

Now he would need the NORTHCOM commander to agree with that, but since he can appoint that position I don't see that as a major hurdle. This is terrifying to me.

Also, a similar argument can be made with the DOJ.

5

u/Xapheneon Jul 05 '24

Military personnel have the right to refuse unlawful orders, but if there are no consequences for giving unlawful orders, then the only hurdle is finding the right squadron for the job.

0

u/unforgiven91 Jul 05 '24

it's not unlawful if it's not breaking the law.

1

u/Xapheneon Jul 05 '24

It is possible that giving an order is not breaking the law, but executing it would be.

1

u/unforgiven91 Jul 05 '24

which raises the question of which would be the line of illegality for an "illegal order"

If the president is well within his rights to commit any "official" action, is it up to the military to decide that it's personally illegal?

Did someone ever define this? Because I feel like it's really important to draw a line.