As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No man is above the law! This is the United States!.
*except the president who shall not be questioned!
What an absurd rulling. You can now stage a coup with the help of government officials and there is nothing anyone can do about it. It's actually better to stage a coup with government officials because that would be official acts which cannot be questioned.
Oh you’re Trump, you accepted $2 mill for a pardon. Cool. That official you’re good.
Oh you’re Biden, you pardoned your son. That’s not official you can be impeached.
That’s a bribe. That’s illegal.
Then the emalumence clause that would also violate which prohibits any person holding any office in the Federal Government from accepting any gift or money…. But there’s the DC Waldorf Astoria hotel so no one cares about that.
So even if you don’t call it a bribe he’d be excepting the gift of money in exchange for the pardon. So that’s a crime. But if the courts are on your side even if it’s a crime he’d be immune, because, it’s official.
Depends, does he get the 2mil AFTER he gives the pardon because that's not a bribe it's a tip and that isn't illegal according to the supreme court already.
But is it *officially* illegal…?
Anyway, I imagine that’s somewhat similar to the 14th amendment, where rebels and insurrectionists can’t hold any office either.
Wasn’t the argument that the President does not hold office? I’m sure if there was any risk that it might apply to Trump, SCOTUS would sort that shit out real quick.
No it’s illegal. Like straight up illegal.
But immunity kicks in where even if it’s illegal, you are above the law because it is an official act done by the president of the United States. He would be untouchable because he is the president….. as long as the court system agree that it is an official act then the president can do literally anything.
If the court system says it’s unofficial, then the president can be prosecuted.
So really if you have more judges on your side in the Supreme Court who will side with all of your actions being official, the. You can do anything. Anything. Any thing.
Want to impeach him? Well why don’t we let the courts decide if it was an official act. They agree with us you can’t.
Again he can do anything
Don't forget, if the court says its unofficial, you still can't use the evidence that directly implicates the president against them in the court of law.
According to the majority opinion, Presidents enjoy absolute immunity for core responsibilities of their office, presumptive immunity for official actions taken not within the core responsibilities, and no immunity for personal acts.
Presumptive immunity in this instance means that prosecutors can put up the question of immunity in court. And naturally if a lower court finds immunity does not apply, the president’s legal team will continue to appeal until it’s in the hands of the Supreme Court.
It doesn’t entirely enable the president to enjoy absolute immunity. In fact, in a fair & just world, it severely limits the capacity of his office as any action taken—official or not, within the core responsibilities or not—is up to the judicial branch. But in the real world, the SCOTUS will not be issuing sober, unbiased rulings against all presidents, and will instead give their guy broader capacity and protections than others.
It should be noted as well, any evidence or testimony of a president “probing” criminal conduct while in office cannot be considered as evidence. And when they say probing, they don’t mean “asking lawyers if it’s legal”, it means any recordings, public statements, memos, emails, text messages, phone calls, etc. where the president orders or demands something that is otherwise legal cannot be considered as evidence. This means prosecutors cannot produce evidence to suggest that the president intended act criminally, leaving the act and only the act up to the biased, stacked courts.
It’s a weird trade-off. Everyone around the president goes to jail. If Trump succeeded, then he’d probably go to jail under treason. But fail, and you get immunity.
But there’s something gained as well.
Section 371—which has been charged in this case—is a broadly worded criminal statute that can cover “‘any conspiracy for the purpose of impairing, obstructing or defeating the lawful function of any department of Government.’” United States v. Johnson, 383 U. S. 169, 172 (1966) (quoting Haas v. Henkel, 216 U. S. 462, 479 (1910)). Virtually every President is criticized for insufficiently enforcing some aspect of federal law (such as drug, gun, immigration, or environmental laws). An enterprising prosecutor in a new administration may assert that a previous President violated that broad statute. Without immunity, such types of prosecutions of ex-Presidents could quickly become routine.
As per my understanding only the president would be immune, the officials and whoever is executing unlawful orders would be prosecuted. Of course, the king can pardons his minions.
Three generations of my family have served in the military for this nation. My FIL in WWII followed by reserves for a total of 20+ years, my husband served for 24 years, and our son served in Iraq and was active military for 7 years. This gutting of the Constitution is not why they served.
I found out that I am, albeit, very very distantly related to 32 US presidents and I have a direct many times great grandfather who was on the Mayflower. So my family history goes back to the early founding of this nation. And my Dad was an attorney at law who was admitted to the Bar of SCOTUS. I know my Dad is spinning in his grave right now. I am quite sure my Dad would be ashamed and disappointed by the recent ruling by the Robert's court. The Robert's court will go into history as the court that destroyed the American Democratic Republic. What an embarrassment the Robert's court has become.
Like you I am ashamed of my fellow citizens who are so blinded by the lies being told by a conman who is now a convicted felon.
America died July 1, 2024. donald fucking trump did this with his corrupt appointments and Russian pandering and treasonous sharing/selling of classified information.
I won’t be celebrating. I’m grieving
I told my husband, even before the Supreme Court ruling, that I didn’t feel like being patriotic and celebrating the 4th because of the political situation in this country. The ruling just makes it worse!
Biden should use the military to arrest the Supreme Court justices and try them for traitorous acts against the country. It would be an official act to defend the constitution. Yes, I am being extreme but no more than them.
Very true. I felt a sadness last night at our local 4th celebration. I wondered how many of these people who appeared to love this country so much, will be voting for a man hell bent on destroying it, simply because they believe the lies from Trump and Fox.
I mean to be fair they could write volumes on things America has done that make a mockery of the Fourth of July so really they're just doing their American duty to add to that list.
They won't because they're spineless old idealists with no sense of urgency. They spent 50 years refusing to codify Roe, they spent 4 years letting Republicans fillibuster them into the Earth's crust on supreme court nominations, and i have no hope that they have the spine to do the work to ratify the constitution.
Might be the last Independence Day we have. 250 years almost, we had a good run. Guess I’ll see you guys at the state mandated prayer meeting next year. Under his eye.
I’m not American. After I learned that the president can simply call a state of emergency and get absolute control, I thought the US to be a dictatorship. This ruling seems to confirm my belief.
Can an American please explain to me how the US isn’t an elective dictatorship?
Seems like the SC made themselves king
Not the president. They can basically dictate what someone can get away wiith or not.
They could just as easily strip trump of his rights as anyone else. Once trump runs his usefulness, we will see that.
The SC is a board of kings now. Just as they always wanted.
I'm not sure why liberals are upset. Don't supreme Court rulings take effect immediately???
Wouldn't it be considered official duty to capture and kill someone who has engaged and continues to engage in treason.
Problem, meet solution.
I know there’s nothing to celebrate much today folks, let’s use this day to remember what it is that America and we as Americans stand for and find the resolve to defend our rights. Today is a day of mourning
A founding principle of our country is; That no person be above the law and that we are not a land of kings.
By defying that they have broken not just a tradition or norm, but the 14th amendment of the constitution which codified it into the document of our nation.
They are violating the constitution and Title 18 of the U.S. Code -
18 U.S.C. § 241 - Conspiracy Against Rights: This statute makes it a crime for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to them by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
18 U.S.C. § 242 - Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law: This statute makes it a crime for anyone acting under color of law (such as a government official) to willfully deprive a person of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States
This submission source is likely to have a soft paywall. If this article is not behind a paywall please report this for “breaks r/politics rules -> custom -> "incorrect flair"". [More information can be found here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/index/#wiki_paywalls)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well at least someone's considering doing something. Hell, if I worked there I would have went over to the court house and slapped the shit out of them
Fuck the fourth. What freedom. King presidents and homeless vets. there’s a homeless vet who lives out of his car I see on my walk home everyday, the only thing I wanted to do today was give him some fuckin cash and bring him dinner, I have nothing else positive to say or do for this country. Fuck it.
The Supreme Court has set us back hundreds of years. Independence Day means nothing now. Dictatorship for America. Our forefathers are rolling in their graves.
The Dems and lib media have an interest in trying to scare voters about Trump. But the immunity decision is not looney. The opinion is thoughtful, complex, and follows the precedent of Marbury v Madison. It gives a three point standard for applying immunity. Doesn't make Trump a king. Doesn't give him a license to kill, like 007. Here's a clear explanation [https://interpretat.blogspot.com/2024/07/executive-immunity-beyond-hype.html](https://interpretat.blogspot.com/2024/07/executive-immunity-beyond-hype.html) The dissenters had a bad day, like Biden has often had.
Why would you agree that the founding fathers had any intention for the president to have unilateral kingly power above the law when they fought a rebellion specifically to combat that
I don't think that, but that fits in nicely with the stated aims and plans of the Supreme Court, the Heritage Society and others. It's only a 'mistake' if it's "Ooops, I shouldn't have done that." If it's "We meant to do that, because we want to take over the country", then it's all according to plan.
The president has always had immunity for official acts, they are laid out in article 2. Reddit is way overreacting. No one’s coming to kick your door in because you’re not Christian. The country still rules when you get off the internet and go outside.
No, but it makes it so you can't even consider motives when deciding if it's an official act. That is the real kicker. This implies that as long as it is under the official acts but not limited to powers explicitly laid out in Article 2 you can't question why it's immune just that it is a full stop.
Say involving the army. You can give direct orders to murder your political rival but it's under commanding the army which is one of your official duties so you are immune.
Or presidents may remove cabinet members from office. It doesn't allow questioning methods or motive so you could say get rid of the cabinet member through poisoning.
These are both situations from the dissenting opinion of the Supreme Court justices on the official document. (I cannot say if they are or are not Redditors however)
Lastly, it also says that if anything that was an unofficial act (which it does not list or give guidelines on what that means) interferes with ANY authority or operations of the executive branch then that would be unusable in any criminal production.
You can keep off the internet save for this one site even on one page to see how bad this is. The official document on the government website.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf
It's more the bit where SCOTUS has set themselves up at the arbiters of what constitutes an official act and what doesn't that is the problem.
And this is a five alarm fire. Anyone telling you otherwise is selling something you probably don't wanna buy.
The appellate process has not changed, correct.
What the Supreme Court has given itself the power to decide *has* changed. But hey, maybe head in the sand is a good look for you, I dunno.
Uh, no, the president has not always had criminal immunity. What the fuck are you talking about space cadet? 250 years and 46 presidents all assumed they were bound by the law, but apparently this supreme court thinks suddenly 46 president's later it would be impossible for the president to do their job if they were held responsible for their criminal acts.
You have no idea what this can lead to, and your stupid glib dismissal of the very justified concerns surrounding it is just dumbass wishful thinking.
The fear mongering here is impressive. Constitutional amendments protect American citizens from being killed via poisoning because the president doesn’t like them. This Supreme Court ruling doesn’t suddenly make the rest of the constitution invalid.
I’m not fearmongering im just transmitting the opinion of the dissenting Judges.
Feel free to read the Opinion as I said they are sourced directly from the dissenting Justices.
If there is an amendment against poisoning as you say i’m sure they just must have forgotten it.
The majority of the court disagreed that the president can now murder people. That’s why it’s in the dissent. So why would you take the losing side of the argument?
The majority opinion does not answer these questions. The dissenting Judges are questioning the wording and interpretation of the majority opinion directly not making their claim to the interpretation of immunity.
The dissenting opinion points out that determining the legality of the action based solely on the duties of an official act, opens up questions of the bounds of the executive branch and whether the president textually can.
It raises questions that have not been answered and cannot be truthfully answered save for someone attempting it. The dissent is that it is needlessly ambiguous at best and factually incorrect at worst.
no he's possessed SATAN 👹 there was a war in heaven.. Satan got kicked out of heaven because he's too arrogant .. he's not humble.. he's the king of lies chaos and murder.. yeah Trump is receptive to an evil supernatural force that has taken him over and the only one that can save him from that is God and it's not gonna happen ⚖️🔥⚖️
✝️
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No man is above the law! This is the United States!. *except the president who shall not be questioned! What an absurd rulling. You can now stage a coup with the help of government officials and there is nothing anyone can do about it. It's actually better to stage a coup with government officials because that would be official acts which cannot be questioned.
The King can do no wrong
Kings have found themselves in situations reserved just for them ;)
So the backwards thinking here is that it can’t be questioned. The truth is any president without the support of the SCOTUS would be questioned.
What does questioned mean?
Oh you’re Trump, you accepted $2 mill for a pardon. Cool. That official you’re good. Oh you’re Biden, you pardoned your son. That’s not official you can be impeached.
What if he accepts $2mil for it?
That’s a bribe. That’s illegal. Then the emalumence clause that would also violate which prohibits any person holding any office in the Federal Government from accepting any gift or money…. But there’s the DC Waldorf Astoria hotel so no one cares about that. So even if you don’t call it a bribe he’d be excepting the gift of money in exchange for the pardon. So that’s a crime. But if the courts are on your side even if it’s a crime he’d be immune, because, it’s official.
Depends, does he get the 2mil AFTER he gives the pardon because that's not a bribe it's a tip and that isn't illegal according to the supreme court already.
But is it *officially* illegal…? Anyway, I imagine that’s somewhat similar to the 14th amendment, where rebels and insurrectionists can’t hold any office either. Wasn’t the argument that the President does not hold office? I’m sure if there was any risk that it might apply to Trump, SCOTUS would sort that shit out real quick.
No it’s illegal. Like straight up illegal. But immunity kicks in where even if it’s illegal, you are above the law because it is an official act done by the president of the United States. He would be untouchable because he is the president….. as long as the court system agree that it is an official act then the president can do literally anything. If the court system says it’s unofficial, then the president can be prosecuted. So really if you have more judges on your side in the Supreme Court who will side with all of your actions being official, the. You can do anything. Anything. Any thing. Want to impeach him? Well why don’t we let the courts decide if it was an official act. They agree with us you can’t. Again he can do anything
>You can do anything. Anything. Grab ‘em by the pussy?
If it’s official, you can rape a 13 year old.
Don't forget, if the court says its unofficial, you still can't use the evidence that directly implicates the president against them in the court of law.
According to the majority opinion, Presidents enjoy absolute immunity for core responsibilities of their office, presumptive immunity for official actions taken not within the core responsibilities, and no immunity for personal acts. Presumptive immunity in this instance means that prosecutors can put up the question of immunity in court. And naturally if a lower court finds immunity does not apply, the president’s legal team will continue to appeal until it’s in the hands of the Supreme Court. It doesn’t entirely enable the president to enjoy absolute immunity. In fact, in a fair & just world, it severely limits the capacity of his office as any action taken—official or not, within the core responsibilities or not—is up to the judicial branch. But in the real world, the SCOTUS will not be issuing sober, unbiased rulings against all presidents, and will instead give their guy broader capacity and protections than others. It should be noted as well, any evidence or testimony of a president “probing” criminal conduct while in office cannot be considered as evidence. And when they say probing, they don’t mean “asking lawyers if it’s legal”, it means any recordings, public statements, memos, emails, text messages, phone calls, etc. where the president orders or demands something that is otherwise legal cannot be considered as evidence. This means prosecutors cannot produce evidence to suggest that the president intended act criminally, leaving the act and only the act up to the biased, stacked courts.
It’s a weird trade-off. Everyone around the president goes to jail. If Trump succeeded, then he’d probably go to jail under treason. But fail, and you get immunity. But there’s something gained as well. Section 371—which has been charged in this case—is a broadly worded criminal statute that can cover “‘any conspiracy for the purpose of impairing, obstructing or defeating the lawful function of any department of Government.’” United States v. Johnson, 383 U. S. 169, 172 (1966) (quoting Haas v. Henkel, 216 U. S. 462, 479 (1910)). Virtually every President is criticized for insufficiently enforcing some aspect of federal law (such as drug, gun, immigration, or environmental laws). An enterprising prosecutor in a new administration may assert that a previous President violated that broad statute. Without immunity, such types of prosecutions of ex-Presidents could quickly become routine.
If this isn't reversed, it would be the end of America's democracy. We're done for as a country. If Trump gets elected, we're the new Russia.
As per my understanding only the president would be immune, the officials and whoever is executing unlawful orders would be prosecuted. Of course, the king can pardons his minions.
Try following the rule of the constitution and not your FEELINGS
Yes, Amen!!! Fuck these SHEEP!
The irony of celebrating our independence while an authoritarian dictator awaits the country....
A lot of people is sad. This is the first year that I see so few fireworks. I heard more firearms than fireworks.
[удалено]
Apologist fool.
Are you really that ignorant?
Check out their other comment. First time I’ve seen or heard this take!
July 4th was a a day to celebrate our independence. Next year it becomes a day to memorialize our losing it.
I'll probably never celebrate this "holiday" again.
There's no reason to.
You probably won’t be able to next year.
My gay brown ass in a prison camp
Definitely not celebrating it and this is why
I feel pretty dumb going out to celebrate it now to be honest, but the kids like fireworks and I don’t want to burden them with this at their age.
Same here. I grew up idolizing my paw paws that were in WWII. I'm ashamed of my fellow citizens.
Three generations of my family have served in the military for this nation. My FIL in WWII followed by reserves for a total of 20+ years, my husband served for 24 years, and our son served in Iraq and was active military for 7 years. This gutting of the Constitution is not why they served. I found out that I am, albeit, very very distantly related to 32 US presidents and I have a direct many times great grandfather who was on the Mayflower. So my family history goes back to the early founding of this nation. And my Dad was an attorney at law who was admitted to the Bar of SCOTUS. I know my Dad is spinning in his grave right now. I am quite sure my Dad would be ashamed and disappointed by the recent ruling by the Robert's court. The Robert's court will go into history as the court that destroyed the American Democratic Republic. What an embarrassment the Robert's court has become. Like you I am ashamed of my fellow citizens who are so blinded by the lies being told by a conman who is now a convicted felon.
same. internalizing this existential threat while giving the kiddos a few more years of blissful ignorance.
There is nothing to celebrate.
Just waiting for the supercut of Trump with his shit eating grin set to "It's Good to be King" from the Lion King.
I think right now it would be "I just can't wait to be king"
America died July 1, 2024. donald fucking trump did this with his corrupt appointments and Russian pandering and treasonous sharing/selling of classified information. I won’t be celebrating. I’m grieving
true that
IMPEACH THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE(s)!
I told my husband, even before the Supreme Court ruling, that I didn’t feel like being patriotic and celebrating the 4th because of the political situation in this country. The ruling just makes it worse!
I went to see the parade in a local town, and there was big truck with Trump flags. I had ISIS vibe.
Biden should use the military to arrest the Supreme Court justices and try them for traitorous acts against the country. It would be an official act to defend the constitution. Yes, I am being extreme but no more than them.
Or assassin*te them. To really prove a point.
I literally just told my wife 30 seconds before coming across this article that after what the SC did, the entire day feels like a bad fucking joke.
Very true. I felt a sadness last night at our local 4th celebration. I wondered how many of these people who appeared to love this country so much, will be voting for a man hell bent on destroying it, simply because they believe the lies from Trump and Fox.
[удалено]
If we actually believe this, why are we writing reddit replies instead of doing something?
[удалено]
Seems pretty cowardly. I thought this was the land of the brave.
It’s really ruined the “vibe” for independence celebrations when our president is a king, now.
I mean to be fair they could write volumes on things America has done that make a mockery of the Fourth of July so really they're just doing their American duty to add to that list.
Am I the only one wondering what and when the hell Democrats are planning to take advantage of this ruling? Or am I crazy?
They won't because they're spineless old idealists with no sense of urgency. They spent 50 years refusing to codify Roe, they spent 4 years letting Republicans fillibuster them into the Earth's crust on supreme court nominations, and i have no hope that they have the spine to do the work to ratify the constitution.
God damn it’s infuriating
at this point it seems like both parties are just in cahoots to screw the public over
Ignorance and stupidity can go pretty far on their own. No need for all that cahootin'
Might be the last Independence Day we have. 250 years almost, we had a good run. Guess I’ll see you guys at the state mandated prayer meeting next year. Under his eye.
Dred Scott 2.0
Biden needs to officially executive order Donnie’s permanent disappearance!ASAP!
I’m not American. After I learned that the president can simply call a state of emergency and get absolute control, I thought the US to be a dictatorship. This ruling seems to confirm my belief. Can an American please explain to me how the US isn’t an elective dictatorship?
That’s why we had tacos instead of a cookout today. Viva La Mexico.
It really is a slap in the face of everything the 4th means. The timings is truly strange.
Turns out we have royalists on the supreme Court of a country that's, uhh, literally founded upon giving the finger to royalty Irony is fucking dead
I thought we were getting away from King's.
That may be true. But they dont care and there is nothing you can do about it.
Yep we should all celebrate the freedom of the few and the oppression of the many.
Seems like the SC made themselves king Not the president. They can basically dictate what someone can get away wiith or not. They could just as easily strip trump of his rights as anyone else. Once trump runs his usefulness, we will see that. The SC is a board of kings now. Just as they always wanted.
I'm not sure why liberals are upset. Don't supreme Court rulings take effect immediately??? Wouldn't it be considered official duty to capture and kill someone who has engaged and continues to engage in treason. Problem, meet solution.
Democrats are too timid
I know there’s nothing to celebrate much today folks, let’s use this day to remember what it is that America and we as Americans stand for and find the resolve to defend our rights. Today is a day of mourning
Dick Nixon is the Patron Saint of Independence Day 2024. No way around it. Today we celebrate Watergate not being a crime 🤷♂️
It’s fuck kings day now
that is how i feel about what they have done
The rule of law is dead! Bring on the Trump torture chambers!
More likely reeducation camps for anybody who doesn't look right.
A founding principle of our country is; That no person be above the law and that we are not a land of kings. By defying that they have broken not just a tradition or norm, but the 14th amendment of the constitution which codified it into the document of our nation. They are violating the constitution and Title 18 of the U.S. Code - 18 U.S.C. § 241 - Conspiracy Against Rights: This statute makes it a crime for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to them by the Constitution or laws of the United States. 18 U.S.C. § 242 - Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law: This statute makes it a crime for anyone acting under color of law (such as a government official) to willfully deprive a person of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States
This submission source is likely to have a soft paywall. If this article is not behind a paywall please report this for “breaks r/politics rules -> custom -> "incorrect flair"". [More information can be found here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/index/#wiki_paywalls) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well at least someone's considering doing something. Hell, if I worked there I would have went over to the court house and slapped the shit out of them
Fuck those fuckers
The only solution is to expand the Court
It's time for a national strike. And if that doesn't work, it's time for stronger coffee.
He should get paid after the fact, to make sure it's not bribery! lol
I haven’t celebrated the Fourth of July since the GOP destroyed America. Nothing really to celebrate.
Just enjoy it while you can.
Next the Supreme Court will claim we need to worship the President as God incarnate when Trump becomes president
Fuck the fourth. What freedom. King presidents and homeless vets. there’s a homeless vet who lives out of his car I see on my walk home everyday, the only thing I wanted to do today was give him some fuckin cash and bring him dinner, I have nothing else positive to say or do for this country. Fuck it.
To top it off, thanks to another SC ruling, your city can now criminalize homelessness!
I was blown away when I read that headline. Like, that seemed excessively cruel for no reason at all.
The 4th of July is a holiday that died for me quite a while ago already.....
The Supreme Court only did that because all the people who would have stopped them are already in Arlington unfortunately.
I think everyone needs a refresher on Anne Frank diaries at this point
I love how we came up with command responsibility, and now there is none.
The Supreme Court has set us back hundreds of years. Independence Day means nothing now. Dictatorship for America. Our forefathers are rolling in their graves.
The Dems and lib media have an interest in trying to scare voters about Trump. But the immunity decision is not looney. The opinion is thoughtful, complex, and follows the precedent of Marbury v Madison. It gives a three point standard for applying immunity. Doesn't make Trump a king. Doesn't give him a license to kill, like 007. Here's a clear explanation [https://interpretat.blogspot.com/2024/07/executive-immunity-beyond-hype.html](https://interpretat.blogspot.com/2024/07/executive-immunity-beyond-hype.html) The dissenters had a bad day, like Biden has often had.
Prepare to bend the knee Americans. A God now walks among you.
Yeah but we’re supporting genocide so let’s just destroy the country /s
This taught me that Nixon resigned for nothing, and he was right about "when the president does it."
It's only a mockery if you disagree with it.
Why would you agree that the founding fathers had any intention for the president to have unilateral kingly power above the law when they fought a rebellion specifically to combat that
I don't think that, but that fits in nicely with the stated aims and plans of the Supreme Court, the Heritage Society and others. It's only a 'mistake' if it's "Ooops, I shouldn't have done that." If it's "We meant to do that, because we want to take over the country", then it's all according to plan.
The president has always had immunity for official acts, they are laid out in article 2. Reddit is way overreacting. No one’s coming to kick your door in because you’re not Christian. The country still rules when you get off the internet and go outside.
No, but it makes it so you can't even consider motives when deciding if it's an official act. That is the real kicker. This implies that as long as it is under the official acts but not limited to powers explicitly laid out in Article 2 you can't question why it's immune just that it is a full stop. Say involving the army. You can give direct orders to murder your political rival but it's under commanding the army which is one of your official duties so you are immune. Or presidents may remove cabinet members from office. It doesn't allow questioning methods or motive so you could say get rid of the cabinet member through poisoning. These are both situations from the dissenting opinion of the Supreme Court justices on the official document. (I cannot say if they are or are not Redditors however) Lastly, it also says that if anything that was an unofficial act (which it does not list or give guidelines on what that means) interferes with ANY authority or operations of the executive branch then that would be unusable in any criminal production. You can keep off the internet save for this one site even on one page to see how bad this is. The official document on the government website. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf
It's more the bit where SCOTUS has set themselves up at the arbiters of what constitutes an official act and what doesn't that is the problem. And this is a five alarm fire. Anyone telling you otherwise is selling something you probably don't wanna buy.
They didn’t do that though. They’ve set it up for the lower courts to determine.
And when lower court decisions are appealed?
By whom?
Uh what? By a litigant who is unsatisfied with the lower court's decision on something, the way all cases make it to the Supreme Court?
So, like it is now. AKA, nothing has changed.
The appellate process has not changed, correct. What the Supreme Court has given itself the power to decide *has* changed. But hey, maybe head in the sand is a good look for you, I dunno.
No, it hasn’t. But keep on regurgitating headlines without diving into the actual source material, king!
It's funny you think I haven't read the decision, right along with every legal analyst in the country.
Uh, no, the president has not always had criminal immunity. What the fuck are you talking about space cadet? 250 years and 46 presidents all assumed they were bound by the law, but apparently this supreme court thinks suddenly 46 president's later it would be impossible for the president to do their job if they were held responsible for their criminal acts. You have no idea what this can lead to, and your stupid glib dismissal of the very justified concerns surrounding it is just dumbass wishful thinking.
It wasn't till under Nixon that the president was made immune to CIVIL cases, not criminal ones. You are correct.
The fear mongering here is impressive. Constitutional amendments protect American citizens from being killed via poisoning because the president doesn’t like them. This Supreme Court ruling doesn’t suddenly make the rest of the constitution invalid.
I’m not fearmongering im just transmitting the opinion of the dissenting Judges. Feel free to read the Opinion as I said they are sourced directly from the dissenting Justices. If there is an amendment against poisoning as you say i’m sure they just must have forgotten it.
The majority of the court disagreed that the president can now murder people. That’s why it’s in the dissent. So why would you take the losing side of the argument?
The majority opinion does not answer these questions. The dissenting Judges are questioning the wording and interpretation of the majority opinion directly not making their claim to the interpretation of immunity. The dissenting opinion points out that determining the legality of the action based solely on the duties of an official act, opens up questions of the bounds of the executive branch and whether the president textually can. It raises questions that have not been answered and cannot be truthfully answered save for someone attempting it. The dissent is that it is needlessly ambiguous at best and factually incorrect at worst.
If the majority agreed that the President can now murder people they would’ve concurred with Sotomayor’s opinion, or included it in their own.
[удалено]
[удалено]
no he's possessed SATAN 👹 there was a war in heaven.. Satan got kicked out of heaven because he's too arrogant .. he's not humble.. he's the king of lies chaos and murder.. yeah Trump is receptive to an evil supernatural force that has taken him over and the only one that can save him from that is God and it's not gonna happen ⚖️🔥⚖️ ✝️
Completely not true. The supreme court made the right decision. About time!
Care to explain?
Haha. Dont hold your breath for that.