• ryper@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    44 minutes ago

    That might not even be the weirdest hypothetical DOJ has argued this year.

    Trump DOJ Refuses to Rule Out Second Amendment Right to Nuclear Weapons

    Now, to be clear, DOJ lawyers do not argue that nuclear weapons are currently protected by the Second Amendment. But that is based on the view that nukes could not become popular enough to be protected, not because of the unmistakable threat to public safety that civilian access to nuclear warheads would create. Under this dangerous logic, if nuclear weapons become more common, all bets are off: Civilians might then be constitutionally entitled to acquire and possess them. And though the Trump DOJ’s discussion of nuclear weapons may seem farfetched, the same logic would apply to a grenade launcher or bazooka.

  • Gerudo@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 hour ago

    This is so stupid. Do you even know how big that bulldozer would have to be?

    • tal@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I doubt that this is political theater. The judge — who is a neutral party here, and introduced the question — is asking a pretty straightforward question, testing the argument that the lawyer is making. “If your argument that Trump can rebuilt the wing of the White House holds, it seems that it’d entail X (where X is something that it seems like we wouldn’t want). Is that true?”

      If you read court transcripts, this isn’t an uncommon thing for a judge to do.

  • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 hours ago

    The headline is super misleading considering this has to do with construction of that stupid ballroom at the white house.

    • Ludicrous0251@piefed.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 hours ago

      In order to demonstrate Trump’s supposedly far-reaching power to destroy and alter national monuments at whim, the DOJ lawyers claimed that if the president wanted to bulldoze the Statue of Liberty in New York, there would be no one with the standing to challenge him.

      “If the government decides very quickly to bulldoze the Statue of Liberty, the people whose ancestors—that was the first thing they saw coming to this country, but the government moved too fast—nothing can be done?” Judge Patricia Millett asked, according to Politico’s Kyle Cheney.

      “I think that’s right, yes,” the government responded.

      Not sure what is misleading about the headline. DOJ is arguing on the President’s behalf that he has the unilateral authority to demolish or modify any national or historic monuments he chooses (at minimum, any managed by the Parks Service).

    • CaptDust@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      63
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      They’ll file a lawsuit after it’s demolished and find out in 4-6 years the statue shouldn’t have been demolished.

      The admin will say it was a matter of national interest to be demolished, supreme court will give them a double thumbs up, and well - what could have been done.

      • lectricleopard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Im surprised we didn’t just wake up to the news it was scrapped for the copper overnight and the money is going to a hotel he plans to build in its place.

        • cannedtuna@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          5 hours ago

          It’s obvious the money would go to cover a gold plated statue of himself giving a double thumbs up.

          The plaque will be replaced with:

          “Give me your whites, your rich, your business class looking to exploit the poor”

          This of course assumes there’d be anything so poetic inscribed. More likely it would read:

          “Poor? Desperate? Foreign? Turn back now or be shot on sight”

      • No1@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        You forgot that Trump will pre-emptively pardon himself and everyone involved, and so nobody will ever be held accountable or face any consequences.

    • azimir@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Sternly worded letter and some social media posts to fundraise for the next campaign cycle.

  • Sanctus@anarchist.nexus
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Honestly the New Colussus is the only thing that was ever cool about America, even if it was a lie.