Beehaw
  • Communities
  • Create Post
  • search
    Search
  • Login
  • Sign Up
Maven (famous) ( Maven@lemmy.zip )  to United States | News & Politics@lemmy.ml · 2 years ago

Supreme Court: Trump Has 'Absolute Immunity' For Core Constitutional Powers

www.huffpost.com

external-link
message-square
17
link
fedilink
63
external-link

Supreme Court: Trump Has 'Absolute Immunity' For Core Constitutional Powers

www.huffpost.com

Maven (famous) ( Maven@lemmy.zip )  to United States | News & Politics@lemmy.ml · 2 years ago
message-square
17
link
fedilink
The court found that Trump is entitled to presumptive immunity from prosecution for presidential acts.
alert-triangle
You must log in or register to comment.
  • YurkshireLad ( YurkshireLad@lemmy.ca ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    2 years ago

    So Biden could lock him up as a threat to democracy and the republic?

    • queermunist she/her ( queermunist@lemmy.ml ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Joe Biden could shoot Donald Trump with a gun.

      • Tiltinyall ( Tiltinyall@beehaw.org ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        Capture the man and exile him to an island. Start a reality show where contestants are gradually moved onto the island with him one by one. He will establish a new form of governance and be given the keys to the next presidency as a reward for a certain benchmark of success in creating a new functional democracy. Lol

      • FartsWithAnAccent ( FartsWithAnAccent@fedia.io ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        How would that be an official presidential act?

    • mke_geek ( mke_geek@lemm.ee ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 years ago

      As a domestic terrorist?

      • Auzy ( Auzy@beehaw.org ) deleted by creator
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        deleted by creator

        • pearsaltchocolatebar ( pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online ) 
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          Money. That’s why.

  • oxjox ( oxjox@lemmy.ml ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    2 years ago

    So, would official acts as president be legal by definition? Would there be such a thing as an official act as president that may otherwise be criminal?

    And how does the ruling protect against treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors (specifically, the past part)? How is this ruling not in direct contrast to the constitution?

    • stewie3128 ( stewie3128@lemmy.ml ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 years ago

      The job of President throughout the 20th century has involved committing crimes. If they gave that away, then all of these ghouls could potentially be prosecuted.

      In the future, the former President could go to jail for the next version of Iran-Contra… and we couldn’t possibly allow that to happen.

      • FartsWithAnAccent ( FartsWithAnAccent@fedia.io ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 years ago

        I wonder what the US would’ve been like if leaders were actually held accountable…

        • stewie3128 ( stewie3128@lemmy.ml ) 
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 years ago

          We wouldn’t exist as the US.

  • Cobrachickenwing ( Cobrachickenwing@lemmy.ca ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Quid quo pro is back on the menu boys!

    If a president threatens you if you don’t invest in his/her company it is not abuse of office, it is an official act.

    If another country wants American weapons but you need to donate to the party of the president it is not bribery, it is an official act.

    The supreme court has made the rule of law meaningless for top government officials. The president now has absolute power and will need to be removed by bloodshed.

    P.S. the supreme court also ruled a kickback after a government decision is NOT bribery as well. #worstsupremecourt.

  • Beaver ( Beaver@lemmy.ca ) deleted by creator
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    deleted by creator

  • CableMonster ( CableMonster@lemmy.ml ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    To explain this from my understanding because most of the comments are silly and incorrect. It doesnt give the president complete immunity from crimes, it prevents the president from being prosecuted by other politicians while in office. So a DA of a state cant directly charge and get a conviction of a president. This actually makes sense so that no branch has control over the other branch directly. Instead the president has to get impeached and then thrown out of office before they are procesuted.

  • oxjox ( oxjox@lemmy.ml ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Deleting my apparently wrong comment. Pft.

  • walden ( walden@sub.wetshaving.social ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Call me silly, but isn’t this sort of good? I think they’re trying to say “you’re immune if you do stuff that presidents do, like be in charge of war, torture, etc, but if you’re a normal criminal, you’re still a criminal”.

    • davel [he/him] ( davel@lemmy.ml ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      It’s sort of good if you believe in a unitary presidency or in the rules-based international order.

  • PowerCrazy ( PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    This has always been the case. There is a specific way that congress can put a check on POTUS. Liberals being told how the government works and has always worked, and suddenly getting upset. I’m sure they will vote harder then they have ever voted before to fix it this time.

    • giacomo ( giacomo@lemm.ee ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      let’s all come together and vote for the candidate they offer! that will surely make things suck less!

United States | News & Politics@lemmy.ml

usa@lemmy.ml

Subscribe from Remote Instance

Create a post
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !usa@lemmy.ml
Visibility: Public
globe

This community can be federated to other instances and be posted/commented in by their users.

  • 3 users / day
  • 97 users / week
  • 458 users / month
  • 2.58K users / 6 months
  • 319 local subscribers
  • 9.52K subscribers
  • 7.65K Posts
  • 15.5K Comments
  • Modlog
  • mods:
  • pangyuehung ( pangyuehung@lemmy.ml ) 
  • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ ( yogthos@lemmy.ml ) 
  • BE: 0.19.21
  • Modlog
  • Legal
  • Instances
  • Docs
  • Code