The Supreme Court on Thursday appeared skeptical of a ruling by a federal appeals court that rejected former President Donald Trump’s claim that he has absolute immunity from criminal charges based on his official acts as president. During more than two-and-a-half hours of oral argument, some of the
I dunno, the way I see it we put people in power with our vote. The President is our employee in a way, and while they are privy to classified details and can’t be completely transparent about everything, the idea that a President has immunity from crimes is a very dangerous road.
If the President has to take action to safeguard the nation, that’s one thing. If they’re just using the office to enrich themselves and their buddies or rig an election in their favor, we shouldn’t be ok with that.
From the hearing yesterday it sounds like Trump’s own attorneys concede that the immunity is not absolute. So where is the line drawn? Can Biden put a hit out on Trump and be immune from facing consequences? Can an outgoing president preemptively pardon themselves from all wrongdoing? Can a sitting President give themselves an extra term in office, or attempt to fix an election in their favor? If so, then how do we hold them accountable to do their job and not just benefit themselves while they’re there? How do we know future candidates aren’t just running for office for the immunity?
These concerns were also raised in the hearings yesterday but I did not hear any satisfactory answer.
If the immunity is not absolute then what is the limit?
and the answer won’t come from this decision. This will be a narrow decision I suspect. The court will keep it very focused for the reasons you listed above
I mean obvi we won’t know until we know but it’s not like they’ve been difficult to read at any stage of this hearing and other past cases they’ve taken.
Well it is rare to hear such a legal expert weight that he can read the minds of the courts. Based on the prior cases, they have been all over the place. The court isn’t evenly divided on each case.
I dunno, the way I see it we put people in power with our vote. The President is our employee in a way, and while they are privy to classified details and can’t be completely transparent about everything, the idea that a President has immunity from crimes is a very dangerous road.
If the President has to take action to safeguard the nation, that’s one thing. If they’re just using the office to enrich themselves and their buddies or rig an election in their favor, we shouldn’t be ok with that.
From the hearing yesterday it sounds like Trump’s own attorneys concede that the immunity is not absolute. So where is the line drawn? Can Biden put a hit out on Trump and be immune from facing consequences? Can an outgoing president preemptively pardon themselves from all wrongdoing? Can a sitting President give themselves an extra term in office, or attempt to fix an election in their favor? If so, then how do we hold them accountable to do their job and not just benefit themselves while they’re there? How do we know future candidates aren’t just running for office for the immunity?
These concerns were also raised in the hearings yesterday but I did not hear any satisfactory answer.
If the immunity is not absolute then what is the limit?
and the answer won’t come from this decision. This will be a narrow decision I suspect. The court will keep it very focused for the reasons you listed above
It’s not really surprising how each justice will vote. They’re not good at masking their stance based on the questions they ask.
You won’t know until they vote and give their written opinion. The devil is in the details.
I mean obvi we won’t know until we know but it’s not like they’ve been difficult to read at any stage of this hearing and other past cases they’ve taken.
Well it is rare to hear such a legal expert weight that he can read the minds of the courts. Based on the prior cases, they have been all over the place. The court isn’t evenly divided on each case.
Clearly you didn’t read the first line of the comment you’re replying to. I would expect better from a mod.
I would expect someone to read what they actually say before making snide remarks.
deleted by creator