5 ms·

So to put it bluntly, sweet talking a president-elect can overturn a Supreme Court decision? Interesting political culture.

by fatfox 2y ago

airstrike 2y ago
Hardly. A delay on the ban isn't tantamount to undoing the Supreme Court's decision. It's good to be precise with terminology and facts, especially in legal matters.
- nickthegreek 2y ago
  explain how he (a private citizen) can give a 90 day extension on a deadline that is passed with criteria that can not be certified and had to have been already given to congress? Please be precise with terminology and facts in these legal matters.
  - sadeshmukh 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - nickthegreek 2y ago
      The bill does not give the private citizen the authority to do this.
      - sadeshmukh 2y ago
        The president can, and he promises he will take said action.
  - airstrike 2y ago
    He's not just any private citizen, he's the president elect who will be inaugurated in a day. I'm sure his word carries way more weight than mine. I'm not privy to the specific words that were exchanged, so it's hard to be precise. But I imagine it was some form of Trump saying "by tomorrow, I will give you a 90-day extension. I have a gentleman's agreement with the current government that if you do not stop your services in the 24 hours between now and my inauguration, you won't face any issues, so please carry on and we will clean this mess up later". If you want a private citizen analogy, it's similar to someone saying they won't press charges despite a third-party being in flagrant illegal behavior. In this case, it's the US government saying they won't press charges. Both Biden and Trump have said as much, if my understanding of the case is correct, and one can assume they have discussed this with the appropriate branches of government.
    - nickthegreek 2y ago
      Trump does not have the authority to give a 90 day extension by the language in the law from my understanding. There was a provision for a single use 90 day extension that would require the president to certify 3 things (which currently has not been met and can not be met within days) and have that delivered to congress prior to the ban taking affect. The law gives no mechanism to provide an extension after the ban according to republican legislators.
      - airstrike 2y ago
        He must simply _claim_ that the 3 requirements have been met according to his own interpretation of the facts on the ground. It doesn't mean that his interpretation must be correct; He has the discretion to provide the extension per the law. If someone challenges his interpretation of the 3 requirements in court, then presumably he'd have to explain why he believed that to be the case[1], but he does not have to prove this certainty ex ante in order for the 90-day extension to be valid. -------- [1]: IANAL but whether he can successfully prove it or not is also ultimately irrelevant given the SCOTUS recent interpretation of presidential power. If he's found "guilty" of making a bad interpretation of the certainty of the 3 requirements, what is really going to be his punishment? There's really nothing you can do against a sitting president with regards to the exercise of their executive power...
        nickthegreek 2y ago
        He does not need to simply _claim_, he must certify. And one of those is: “there are in place the relevant binding legal agreements to enable execution of such qualified divestiture during the period of such extension." This is a binary thing. No such legal agreement seems to exist. You also ignored the other parts of my comment about him missing the deadline in the law to apply the extension. Johnson himself said they will enforce the law. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/speaker-johnson-2-gop-senators-break-trump-tiktok-extension-rcna188307 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/speaker-johnson-2-...
        2y ago

So to put it bluntly, sweet talking a president-elect can overturn a Supreme Court decision? Interesting political culture.

by fatfox 2y ago

So to put it bluntly, sweet talking a president-elect can overturn a Supreme Court decision? Interesting political culture.

airstrike 2y ago

Hardly. A delay on the ban isn't tantamount to undoing the Supreme Court's decision. It's good to be precise with terminology and facts, especially in legal matters.

nickthegreek 2y ago
explain how he (a private citizen) can give a 90 day extension on a deadline that is passed with criteria that can not be certified and had to have been already given to congress? Please be precise with terminology and facts in these legal matters.
- sadeshmukh 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - nickthegreek 2y ago
    The bill does not give the private citizen the authority to do this.
    - sadeshmukh 2y ago
      The president can, and he promises he will take said action.
- airstrike 2y ago
  He's not just any private citizen, he's the president elect who will be inaugurated in a day. I'm sure his word carries way more weight than mine. I'm not privy to the specific words that were exchanged, so it's hard to be precise. But I imagine it was some form of Trump saying "by tomorrow, I will give you a 90-day extension. I have a gentleman's agreement with the current government that if you do not stop your services in the 24 hours between now and my inauguration, you won't face any issues, so please carry on and we will clean this mess up later". If you want a private citizen analogy, it's similar to someone saying they won't press charges despite a third-party being in flagrant illegal behavior. In this case, it's the US government saying they won't press charges. Both Biden and Trump have said as much, if my understanding of the case is correct, and one can assume they have discussed this with the appropriate branches of government.
  - nickthegreek 2y ago
    Trump does not have the authority to give a 90 day extension by the language in the law from my understanding. There was a provision for a single use 90 day extension that would require the president to certify 3 things (which currently has not been met and can not be met within days) and have that delivered to congress prior to the ban taking affect. The law gives no mechanism to provide an extension after the ban according to republican legislators.
    - airstrike 2y ago
      He must simply _claim_ that the 3 requirements have been met according to his own interpretation of the facts on the ground. It doesn't mean that his interpretation must be correct; He has the discretion to provide the extension per the law. If someone challenges his interpretation of the 3 requirements in court, then presumably he'd have to explain why he believed that to be the case[1], but he does not have to prove this certainty ex ante in order for the 90-day extension to be valid. -------- [1]: IANAL but whether he can successfully prove it or not is also ultimately irrelevant given the SCOTUS recent interpretation of presidential power. If he's found "guilty" of making a bad interpretation of the certainty of the 3 requirements, what is really going to be his punishment? There's really nothing you can do against a sitting president with regards to the exercise of their executive power...
      - nickthegreek 2y ago
        He does not need to simply _claim_, he must certify. And one of those is: “there are in place the relevant binding legal agreements to enable execution of such qualified divestiture during the period of such extension." This is a binary thing. No such legal agreement seems to exist. You also ignored the other parts of my comment about him missing the deadline in the law to apply the extension. Johnson himself said they will enforce the law. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/speaker-johnson-2-gop-senators-break-trump-tiktok-extension-rcna188307 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/speaker-johnson-2-...
        2y ago