3 ms·

Is doing something that the Supreme Court may later overturn--and bear in mind it was a close decision--actually "illegal"? I could certainly see the argument

Is doing something that the Supreme Court may later overturn--and bear in mind it was a close decision--actually "illegal"? I could certainly see the argument that it's ill-advised, and indeed, it was struck down a few weeks later. However, I don't think concurring opinions are binding and you could imagine certain fact patterns that might have changed Kavanaugh's mind: Congress agrees on a similar extension, but there's a short gap before it comes into effect, the situation worsens dramatically, the extension is much more narrowly tailored, etc.

chmod775 5y ago
> Is doing something that the Supreme Court may later overturn--and bear in mind it was a close decision--actually "illegal"? It's not illegal at all. Making it illegal would never work in practice. It is however supposed to be politically embarrassing and should in theory hurt your party. However right now, in practice, due to the polarized two-party shit show that is US politics at the top level, it doesn't matter. The constituents haven proven to lack both will and tools to hold their elected representatives accountable, who in turn have learned they can get away with pretty much anything. What could they have done to avoid a president who would behave that way? Elect Trump? Hah.