/v/Showerthoughts is a subverse for you to share all those thoughts, ideas, or philosophical questions that race through your head while in the shower.
"Showerthought" is a loose term that applies to any thought you might have while carrying out a routine task like showering, driving, or daydreaming.
Please be respectful of others' submissions. If you disagree, explain why in the comments. Downvoats are reserved for submissions you don't like or comments that do not add to the discussion, not opinions with which you disagree.
RULES
-
Please refrain from shower "observations;" we've heard them all before
-
Ideas for Voat features should be posted in /v/ideasforvoat, even if you think of them while in the shower
The spirit of this subverse's rules is to foster a community where dissent, free thought, and open discussion are tolerated, limited only to trolling, excessive abuse, site-breaking rules, or content that is better suited for another subverse. All moderation activity should operate within this spirit.
Moderation oversight: Deleted posts, Deleted comments, Banned users
Sort: Top
[–] MaxVieuxlieu 1 point 11 points 12 points (+12|-1) ago
Those are state charges, President only has power to pardon for federal crimes.
[–] Mghorning 4 points 1 point 5 points (+5|-4) ago
Acces and possession of firearms is a constitunally protected right and has been supported by numerous supreme court decisions, asshole.
[–] MaxVieuxlieu 1 point 12 points 13 points (+13|-1) ago
Thank you for that well-thought out contribution to the discussion. Not gonna do anything to change the fact that Trump can't pardon someone for state-level charges. The supreme court could certainly vacate the conviction based on second-amendment freedom to travel arguments, but Trump won't be able to pardon them regardless of what profanities you use.
[–] SkinnyMagna 3 points 1 point 4 points (+4|-3) ago
Then bring charges against state agents for enforcing color of law.
[–] MaxVieuxlieu 2 points 3 points 5 points (+5|-2) ago
That's a bunch of words that together don't make any sense.
[–] MaxVieuxlieu 1 point 5 points 6 points (+6|-1) ago (edited ago)
Because u/Vic_V and u/Mghorning think they are so smart that whatever they spout off the top of their head must be correct...
https://www.justice.gov/pardon/frequently-asked-questions-concerning-executive-clemency#0
Does the President have authority to grant clemency for a state conviction?
"No. The President’s clemency power is conferred by Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States, which provides: “The President . . . shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.” Thus, the President’s authority to grant clemency is limited to federal offenses and offenses prosecuted by the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia in the name of the United States in the D.C. Superior Court. An offense that violates a state law is not an offense against the United States. A person who wishes to seek a pardon or a commutation of sentence for a state offense should contact the authorities of the state in which the conviction occurred. Such state authorities are typically the Governor or a state board of pardons and/or paroles, if the state government has created such a board."
[–] 11795088? 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
He needs an open pardon for all gun stuff that is within literal second ammendment.
[–] Mghorning 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
I agree with this 100%.
[–] MaxVieuxlieu 2 points 0 points 2 points (+2|-2) ago
It would be a good way for Trump to give liberals all the ammo they need to show he has no idea what the limits are to the powers of the President. You must be a libtard.
[–] birds_sing 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Why should he do that? They broke the law. - Well yeah they did break the law, but that shouldn't be illegal.
Illegal immigrants are called illegal because they're breaking the law. - Well yeah they did break the law, but that shouldn't be illegal.
Picking and choosing what laws should and shouldn't be enforced is something Democrats do. Trump isn't a Democrat.
[–] HST ago
The difference is whether a law is constitutionally sound. If it's a law that restricts a citizens constitutional rights then it shouldn't be enforced.
But if it's a law that effects a non-citizen's rights? I dont give half a shit as long as we aren't needlessly killing them in their own countries (not making blanket statements about our armed forces but if Obama was involved in the war it was probably poorly planned)
[–] AmazingFlightLizard ago
I agree on principle with what you're saying, however: An illegal is a non-citizen violating federal law. A citizen being jailed for exercising the rights guaranteed them by the US Constitution... not exactly the same thing. In fact, there's a Supremacy clause that I think should cover this, and Trump, if he were to have some input on it.
[–] Subtenko ago
immigrants welcome?
[–] Gigan ago
I don't want Trump wasting his time on that. There's more important stuff he should focus on.
[–] 1moar 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago
Agreed. Signed.