[flagged]
Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for official acts
11–20 of 1001 posts
Re: Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for official acts
#12Would this ruling make Nixon’s actions in Watergate legal too?
> Roberts explained in his 43-page ruling, presidents have absolute immunity for their official acts when those acts relate to the core powers granted to them by the Constitution – for example, the power to issue pardons, veto legislation, recognize ambassadors, and make appointments.
Most likely not. Watergate was a result of an election campaign, not official acts as President.
Re: Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for official acts
#13[flagged]
So since 1886?
Re: Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for official acts
#14Would this ruling make Nixon’s actions in Watergate legal too?
It would make it illegal to use the tapes as evidence against him. So it doesn't matter if it makes it legal or not, because it makes the illegality impossible to prove in a court of law by denying evidence to the prosecution.
Re: Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for official acts
#15Immunity for things they do as part of their official duties. I suppose it’s reasonable but the question will now turn to what is actually an official duty. The opposite holding, where they are liable for everything, would be untenable. Could Obama be prosecuted for ordering drone strikes that unintentionally killed two Americans? It seems like that world would hamstring the president far too much. I don’t know if th…
>I suppose it’s reasonable but the question will now turn to what is actually an official duty.
I'm fairly sure there's a full and complete list of these is explicitly in the Constitution.
Re: Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for official acts
#16Now we know that US presidents are above the law. I always assumed that was the case so this is just confirmation for everyone else who had any doubts.
[flagged]
Re: Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for official acts
#17I’m not an expert in this area by any means but it feels like there should be a “motive” angle to this rather just than blanket immunity.
The same actions committed by two different presidents could vary hugely in their motive - one might be legitimately concerned about voter fraud and the other trying to interfere maliciously with election results.
Admittedly the bar would be high to prove malicious intent (eg. acting out of self interest rather than in the interests of the office/country) but that still seems better than just saying that a given action, regardless of motive, is covered by immunity.
Re: Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for official acts
#18I'm dismayed by this ruling but I'm curious: can someone defend it? I'm able to understand the counter-perspectives to my own on many hot-button issues (2nd amendment, abortion bans) but this one seems very nakedly bad. But maybe I'm just not seeing the counterpoint?
If presidents could be prosecuted for their official acts then the next time the other party takes over they will just immediately find various crimes their predecessor “committed” (there are probably 10s of 1000s of them).
Re: Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for official acts
#19Immunity for things they do as part of their official duties. I suppose it’s reasonable but the question will now turn to what is actually an official duty. The opposite holding, where they are liable for everything, would be untenable. Could Obama be prosecuted for ordering drone strikes that unintentionally killed two Americans? It seems like that world would hamstring the president far too much. I don’t know if th…
> the question will now turn to what is actually an official duty
Fortunately, the past rulings of this court have made the jurisprudence abundantly clear:
If Biden orders Trump to be assassinated, that's unofficial, and he can be prosecuted.
If Trump orders Biden to be assassinated, that's official, and he has complete immunity.
Easy, right?
Re: Supreme Court rules ex-presidents have immunity for official acts
#20[flagged]