I don’t have a link for it, but so far the only source for the nuke rumors I’ve seen is a 4chan post claiming that Israel is going to use tac nukes to disable missile bases and possibly get a leadership bunker in Tehran. The post is worded to suggest that the poster is someone inside some aspect of the operation or military buildup which I suppose is getting people to take it more seriously, but it’s an anonymous source on 4chan, so not something credible.
- Posts
- 0
- Comments
- 131
- Joined
- 6 yr. ago
- Posts
- 0
- Comments
- 131
- Joined
- 6 yr. ago
Yeah this is literally the highest form of court in the US, and its job is to determine what is lawful and lawless based on their “superior” knowledge of the constitution and judgment. So by definition, they cannot act lawlessly since they’re the last word on it. They could be morally bankrupt, or logically incorrect, but not lawless—at least in terms of their official options/decisions.
If they decide that the constitution really says that they should personally be free to kill pedestrians with cars, technically, that is now the law. It would be wrong and hopefully the institution would be destroyed or reformed by force, and or countermanded immediately by a new law, but it would be lawful for Thomas to drive his RV down a sidewalk in the interim.
That’s my understanding, but I acknowledge I might be missing something. Also they don’t make laws, they rule on one side or another of a law or action that is in dispute, so for my example above to be true I suppose someone would have to appeal a case up to the Supreme Court that justices should be free to murder with cars, and then they could rule on that side…