this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2025
186 points (99.5% liked)

politics

24106 readers
2826 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Pentagon was scrambling Monday to establish rules to guide U.S. Marines who could be faced with the rare and difficult prospect of using force against citizens on American soil, now that the Trump administration is deploying active duty troops to the immigration raid protests in Los Angeles.

U.S. Northern Command said it is sending 700 Marines into the Los Angeles area to protect federal property and personnel, including federal immigration agents. The 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines are coming from Twentynine Palms, California, and will augment about 4,100 National Guard members already in LA or authorized to be deployed there to respond to the protests.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GoobyMcMooby@lemmy.zip 34 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

“Difficult” prospect? This administration has wanted to kill Americans for years. They finally have a drunk, stuffed shirt who will have no qualms satisfying his Daddy once given the order to do so. The days of Mattis and Esper are over.

[–] flandish@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago (3 children)

don’t forget the supreme court has ruled anything trump does in office is not illegal. anything “official.” he’s full on “shoot now let got sort them out.”

[–] Initiateofthevoid@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Posse Comitatus supersedes that. It is specifically a restriction of the powers of officials and a law against an abuse of office. It has nothing to do with the personal shield that the Supreme Court gave him. It's one of the few cases where he would be officially liable for the crime, rather than personally.

Not that any of it matters right now, since these laws aren't being enforced anyway.

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Purely to keep the inaccuracy from spiraling: "not personally liable" is not the same as "legal".

They ruled that the person holding the office isn't personally liable for official acts unless certain extremely high bars are passed.
The act can still be illegal, you just sue the office of the president, rather than the individual who is president.

To him it's the same, but since it's not default legal, there's still lines for others to stop at. It's much easier to disobey an illegal order than a legal one.

[–] flandish@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

fair point! thanks for the reply.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

Good Job Roberts Court

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

He'll give the blitzed out of his mind on a 24-pack of piss water