The president already had immunity before this ruling. You or I cannot send a missle to Iran to kill people. The president can. It’s been like this for 200 years. It was like this when Trump was president. The president didn’t gain any magic law dodging powers. They aren’t suddenly a genie that can do whatever they want.
The Constitution bestows the power upon the presidential office onto the president. Not SCOTUS.
Incorrect. Breaking the law is never an official act of the office, and therefore, cannot be protected.
I wonder, what do you think the ruling changed? What can the president do now that the president wasn’t able to do before?
Yes, because it doesn’t fall within the powers granted to the president via the constitution. He cannot sexually harass her. He cannot kill her. He cannot take bribes from her. So on and so forth.
No. The president could not personally kill their maid.
Falsifying business records is not election fraud is the eyes of the law.
None of the judges on either side are making this absurd claim because it’s in the constitution article 2 section 3 and has been settled for 200 years. The president has to follow the law.
Trump was president for four years, enjoyed all of this immunity already, and not one politician was murdered. Pretty sure we’ll be alright.
Says right in the ruling it’s up to the trails court to determine what is official.
A president can’t claim immunity. The president has always had immunity for acts that the constitution provides the office.
The president has inferred immunity for powers shared with Congress.
The president enjoys no immunity for acts as a private citizen.
These are important distinctions.
You or I cannot bomb another country. The president can.
You or I cannot kill a maid. The president cannot.
Only acts used with the power of the office are immune. You can’t use presidential authority to sexually harass your staff. That’s against the law.
The ruling didn’t change anything, nor was anything given. SCOTUS doesn’t create the law. We don’t have a magical genie godking president all of a sudden.
The law applies to the president always.
Here is what this ruling is for -
First - if I order an enemy of the US dead I can be prosecuted.
The president orders an enemy dead. That enemy is killed. The president cannot be prosecuted for that act.
What this ruling does - the president may also not be prosecuted for that act after they leave office.
That’s all this does. That’s it. If the president kills a maid in the White House he or she will go to prison because that is against the law and not within the duties of the office.
The discretion of official duty is left up to the trails court, not the supreme court. It’s literally in the ruling.
The president has always had immunity. This changes nothing.
If I order someone to be murdered in another country I can be prosecuted. If the president does it they cannot be prosecuted (if, obviously, it was for the protection of the United States). There is your example. SCOTUS didn’t give the president anything. The president already had it. Because SCOTUS doesn’t make law.
Have a nice day / night.
Absolutely not. You’re insane, you wouldn’t consider anything I’d say.
That’s because your fantastical scenario is exactly that, fantasy. You do not understand whatsoever the implications of the ruling because you cannot grasp the duty of the president, checks and balances, and the rule of law. Did they stop teaching civics in school?7
Because they are protecting our republic. A president shouldn’t fear being prosecuted by someone for their official acts when they are out of office, such as a political rival.
And no, something illegal cannot be official.
The president can’t kill anyone who opposes him. The president is subject to the laws just like anyone else. Breaking the law is not part of his official duty. Assassinating someone the president doesn’t like is against the law.
Assassinating an enemy of the United States is a different story. The president cannot claim a citizen of the United States with no criminal activity or record against the United States is an enemy. Furthermore, the military cannot use force on citizens of the United States. The FBI can, and the president doesn’t control the FBI the judicial branch does.
Aren’t checks and balances fun?!
The best example is first responders. They have immunity doing their duty. They cannot hesitate to perform their duty - such as giving life saving services - if they fear they are unsuccessful and are sued / thrown in prison. If they break the law though on duty it was never their duty to break the law and are therefore not immune. Take CPR. They might perform CPR and injure the person they are working over, or they might not save them. The family of that person cannot sue them, nor can a court convict them if they accidentally make things worse.
Same thing with the president. The president can’t break the law and say, “whoops, just doing my official duty”. It doesn’t work like that.
Is Saddam Hussein in the room with us now?
In 1982 SCOTUS made a decision on this:
“We hold that the petitioner, as a former President of the United States, is entitled to absolute immunity from damages liability predicated on his official acts.”
The media, the Democrats, but I repeat myself, have all been lying to you. This has always been the case. Nothing has changed.