Except he has already done it. It doesnt matter if its legal or not, someone will have to sue and the Supreme Court will have to rule... and they will let him do it anyways.
this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2025
199 points (98.5% liked)
News
32631 readers
2928 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Which could end up with the supreme Court reviewing if a presidents broad powers can override the first amendment.
To which, even with a 9-0 ruling, he'll ignore and do what he wants anyway, like we saw before
Abrego Garcia is back from El Salvador. When it came down to it, they hemmed and hawed, but then they backed down before it got to a standoff
And that's the pattern so far...a lot of stuff is getting undone in the background as it works it's way through the courts
They didn't back down at all:
https://courthousenews.com/feds-argue-abrego-garcia-cannot-fight-deportation-in-federal-court/
They said no one comes out of that prison, and he's back in the States
They're still trying to pull endless bullshit to get their way, but they're doing it through the courts
They tactically regrouped, but that's not the same as backing down.
That's going to be an annoying 15 minutes for the court.
We could have voted Hilary, but. We have this now.
Buttery males! Buttery males!! Have you forgotten about the butter males!?
Thank God Trump got rid of Crooked Comey because he was biased investigating Trump! Right before election day he even announced an investigation into.... wait... Hillary?
Buttery males!!!
It takes 15 minutes to serve lunch to 9 people?
And whomever brought the case would subsequently be locked up for being antifa
Not "subsequently;" they'd have to have already been persecuted for being antifa in order to have standing to bring the suit in the first place.
The issue is that there is literally no charge of providing material support to a designated domestic terrorist organization. It isn't clear how any case of supporting "antifa" could be prosecuted. Without just straight up throwing out the rule of law finally and entirely that is.
I understand that, but his justice department will just do what he says. It will end up before the Supreme Court but not until damage is already done, and who knows how the Supreme Court will fuck up the ruling.
I don't necessarily disagree with you, just wanted to clarify what the issue is. Effectively, someone will get charged and arrested but because there isn't actually even the veneer of a crime to point to here, they won't be able to indict, much less prosecute at trial, so I have no idea wtf will end up happening.
Anyone can now be given this nebulous label to disappear them into a death camp.
They will use it on any protesters
expand ice. instruct ice to go after antifa. antifa is anyone you want it to be.
Everyone will keep going to work the next day, watching the new Netflix show that night.
well. not everyone.
So wait, does that mean that from now on, by law, you're expected to support fascism, and if you're against it, you're a terrorist?
Ding ding ding!
What's to know?
He's a fascist and fascists require a boogeyman to scare their gullible supporters.
We’re at/past the point where it’s gonna take some “wrongs” to make all this shit right.
I'm a terrorist simply because I fuck men and that terrifies homophobes.
Cool, so now I can call myself a terrorist? That sounds pretty badass actually.
You could have just joined CPAC!