this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2024
193 points (95.7% liked)

Asklemmy

43849 readers
941 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

For reference: Article 48 Wikipedia I’m trying to understand how anyone with any knowledge of the history of dictators could possibly justify granting a president unchecked “official” power so if anyone has any actual theories I am ALL ears.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BmeBenji@lemm.ee 13 points 4 months ago (2 children)

There is absolutely precedent for these exact events. Pick the name of a famous dictator from history out of a hat and they most likely have acquired absolute power through “legal” means.

[–] Icalasari@fedia.io 3 points 4 months ago

Yeah, so many arguing that this isn't a big deal are arguing based on good faith actors. The GoP and the majority of the SC are not good faith actors, so it would be easy to twist things and have the SC go, "Well if you squint, turn your head, and cross your eyes, it fits as an official act"

[–] Bitrot@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

What legal precedent is there in US courts for deciding if something is official or personal?