Read The Supreme Court Ruling On Presidential Immunity

[Procrustes Stretched]

Read the Supreme Court’s Ruling on Immunity​

July 1, 2024

https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/documenttools/58e874be6164060e/df3181b1-full.pdf

Read the Supreme Court’s Ruling on Immunity

The court rules that former presidents have absolute immunity for core constitutional powers, and are also entitled to at least a presumption of immunity for official acts.

www.nytimes.com

As with most of the Trump legal issues, the World Wide Web and sites like USMB have comments and narratives that stray from what is fact, what is truthful. It's human nature to do what people have been doing with these contentious issues. Mr. Trump must love the attention. He will certainly get more than a few paragraphs in future history books.

But let some of us here read the actual ruling, and use that for discussion, conversation, arguments.


June 1, 2024
Dante

 

[Rambunctious]

 

[Rambunctious]

Ding Dong the witch hunt is dead....

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

From the decision: "The parties before us do not dispute that a former President can be subject to criminal prosecution for unofficial acts committed while in office."

USMB comments and narratives that stray from what is fact, must deal with this first.

 

[rampart]

From the decision: "The parties before us do not dispute that a former President can be subject to criminal prosecution for unofficial acts committed while in office."

USMB comments and narratives that stray from what is fact, must deal with this first.

so now we go back and argue over each count. official act or not. sounds like bjden needs to declare a state of emergency, an official act, and order the army to deal with this.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

so now we go back and argue over each count. official act or not. sounds like bjden needs to declare a state of emergency, an official act, and order the army to deal with this.

If he were of a Trump-like mind he would and could.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

From the decision: "The parties before us do not dispute that a former President can be subject to criminal prosecution for unofficial acts committed while in office."

USMB comments and narratives that stray from what is fact, must deal with this first.

I agree with little exception to the ruling, because of the proviso you point out. "The parties before us do not dispute that a former President can be subject to criminal prosecution for unofficial acts committed while in office."

If he is defeated, the three trials will continue.,

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

CJ Roberts' opinion:

[ It is these enduring principles that guide our decision in this case. The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law. But Congress may not criminalize the President's conduct in carrying out the responsibilities of the Executive Branch under the Constitution. And the system of separated powers designed by the Framers has always demanded an energetic, independent Executive. The President therefore may not be prosecuted for exercising his core constitutional powers, and he is entitled, at a minimum, to a presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. That immunity applies equally to all occupants of the Oval Office, regardless of politics, policy, or party. The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the D. C. Circuit is vacated, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

It is so ordered. ]

People should read, and be up on...
"The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the D. C. Circuit."
...in order to debate and think critically about what this ruling is, and is not about.

Then there are the dissents. The dissents.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I agree with little exception to the ruling, because of the proviso you point out. "The parties before us do not dispute that a former President can be subject to criminal prosecution for unofficial acts committed while in office."

If he is defeated, the three trials will continue.,

I am interested in the dissents, because I have long been for a strong Executive branch more than a strong Legislative branch. The powers of the separate branches were designed to butt up against each other and have one or the other(s) be stronger or...

If Mr. Trump were to become President again and pardon himself? Wow!

 

[MarathonMike]

Read the Supreme Court’s Ruling on Immunity​

July 1, 2024

https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/documenttools/58e874be6164060e/df3181b1-full.pdf

Read the Supreme Court’s Ruling on Immunity

The court rules that former presidents have absolute immunity for core constitutional powers, and are also entitled to at least a presumption of immunity for official acts.

www.nytimes.com

As with most of the Trump legal issues, the World Wide Web and sites like USMB have comments and narratives that stray from what is fact, what is truthful. It's human nature to do what people have been doing with these contentious issues. Mr. Trump must love the attention. He will certainly get more than a few paragraphs in future history books.

But let some of us here read the actual ruling, and use that for discussion, conversation, arguments.


June 1, 2024
Dante

OK Dante, should Citizen Biden be tried for manslaughter for the deaths of the 13 Marines killed during the Afghanistan withdrawal? Why or Why not?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The USA: Federalist Republic with Representative Democracy

not really such a difficult concept to grasp: Federalist Republic with Representative Democracy primer: Overview In September of 1787, the delegates to the Convention in Philadelphia presented their work to the American public for ratification. The proposed Constitution marked a clear...

www.usmessageboard.com

*If You Had Chance To Ask On Question Obama What Would It Be?*

Sorry bout that, 1. I'm heading to San Antonio today, and so is Obama, and it came to mind, what if I were to meet him there and he asked me to ask him any question, and if so, what would it be? 2. I thought about it just now, coming out of th shower, and my question would be,...."If...

www.usmessageboard.com

Hamilton & Madison: What little you think you know.

So where in the Constitution is the power of judicial review given to the Court? It may have been implied, accepted, thought about, agreed upon but where is it written? If if is not there and it is not, then the Court created law. Judicial review is not law. So no law was created. The Framers...

www.usmessageboard.com

Day 1 of the Lame Duck Congress

Day 1 of the Lame Duck Congress and the GOP is taking charge. just checked...nothing has changed.

www.usmessageboard.com

Corruption of Government. Who is to blame?

Corruption of Government. Who is to blame? Is it the people? Is it the civil servants? Is it the elected leaders? Is it the lobbyists? Is it private individuals with great wealth (poor people can't buy access or influence). Is it big business? Is it the free market...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

OK Dante, should Citizen Biden be tried for manslaughter for the deaths of the 13 Marines killed during the Afghanistan withdrawal? Why or Why not?

If you can't post serious comments based on reality, please retire back to the conspiracy forum.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

That is crazy! This Court may grant him that power. It won't affect GA or the NY cases though. They can't rule that stealing documents is a core constitutional responsibility of his office, or committing felonies to hide the Stormy Daniels case are official components of his duties.,

 

[rampart]

If he were of a Trump-like mind he would and could.

"with fear for our democracy, i dissent." sotomayor

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

"with fear for our democracy, i dissent." sotomayor

lower case "I"

You insult the Lady LOL

 

[rampart]

That is crazy! This Court may grant him that power. It won't affect GA or the NY cases though. They can't rule that stealing documents is a core constitutional responsibility of his office, or committing felonies to hide the Stormy Daniels case are official components of his duties.,

or sending an angry mob to congress.

the president's duty, in art 2, is to "faithfully carry out the law. "

if he is outside the law it can not be an official act.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

That is crazy! This Court may grant him that power. It won't affect GA or the NY cases though. They can't rule that stealing documents is a core constitutional responsibility of his office, or committing felonies to hide the Stormy Daniels case are official components of his duties.,

The Supreme Court left much open as far as Trump cases are concerned. What they were asked to rule on was...

"The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the D. C. Circuit."

And the majority may have stepped outside of that (the rightwing and conservative ideologues on this court have gone there). That is why it will take time (moi) to digest the dissents.

 

[toobfreak]

Read the Supreme Court’s Ruling on Immunity​

No, YOU read it, Puckered Persimmon!

 

[MarathonMike]

If you can't post serious comments based on reality, please retire back to the conspiracy forum.

I knew you would run for the hills, this is too easy.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I knew you would run for the hills, this is too easy.

Go away trollboi