Spyke
Ex Nummisreply
lemmy.world

Yeah, we now have the groundwork for anyone, regardless of party, to act with complete impunity at the very highest level. There is no way that doesn't backfire spectacularly at some point.

31
bionicjoeyreply
lemmy.ca

There has been precedent for this for a long time. It was just never tested at the supreme court level. If you time travel back 10 years and ask a constitutional law expert whether or not the president has immunity, they would have answered "Probably, but it's never been tested. But we all assume the president has immunity while performing the duties of the office".

All that's happened here is that something people assumed would hold up in court has now held up in court.

The checks and balances here are supposed to be that if you don't like the crimes a president commits while in office, you don't vote for them again.

-15
bionicjoeyreply
lemmy.ca

You're right that another of the checks on presidential immunity is impeachment. But you're wrong that the president is expected to abide by the laws of the land. There has always been an understanding that the office of the president is above those laws (and the checks and balances are there if anyone has a problem with the way the president exercises that privilege). This is where presidential pardons come from. The president can select anyone who is so much as suspected with any crime and grant them blanket immunity, whether or not they actually are guilty of anything. They also have the authority to alter the rules temporarily via executive orders.

-14
bionicjoeyreply
lemmy.ca

I'm aware of the text. I'm also aware of how it's been interpreted by courts. Those are two very different things.

-4
Ex Nummisreply
lemmy.world

The checks and balances here are supposed to be that if you don’t like the crimes a president commits while in office, you don’t vote for them again.

If you're still allowed to vote after that president does what he does.

6

I'm not sure what you're suggesting, but any change to who's allowed to vote would require a constitutional amendment, which invalidates the point I am making.

2
fedia.io

Trump isn't immune, the democrats and their voters are just retarded. Stop backing a walking corpse ffs. Do you really think Trump would be immune if he had some real competition instead of another demented geriatric? Both of them are just old men with potency issues looking to compensate with power over people.

And the "NO TRUMP 2024" people put up a shell of a human as a contender. Of course the less demented opportunist is immune.

OK, maybe I'm being too harsh. Biden is probably a terrifically nice guy, but at his age, he shouldn't be in politics! There's surely younger, fresher, more viable blood around.

-92
lemmy.world

He means ‘legally immune for crimes committed as president thanks to the latest Supreme Court ruling’

54

You reached the end

Trump Is Immune - Legal Eagle | Spyke