DC - Former President Donald Trump indicted, 4 federal counts in 2020 election interference, 1 Aug 2023, Trial 4 Mar 2024 #2

[BeginnerSleuther]

It's a presumptive immunity for official acts of the Eecutive Branch of government. For example, former president Obama would not be able to be criminally charged for the decision to kill an American citizen overseas. Acting in his official role, he is giving presumptive immunity. Also, motive is irrelevant according to this Supreme Court opinion, in cases of presidential immunity.

It's a good ruling, clarifies immunity for the executive branch of government under the U.S. Constitution. Now the case will be returned to the lower court and they will have to review charges based on the Supreme Court's ruling. I imagine there will be lots of motions, appeals, etc by both sides and some charges will be dropped and/or added and it will continue to be reviewed by the higher courts.

Constiutional legal experts are still reviewing the 96-page Supreme Court Opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts.

I actually think it's a devastating ruling for America and totally unConstitutional. JMO. No person should be above the law. No one. Had this ruling been in place in 2020, Trump would still be in office and there wouldn't be anything anyone could do about it. It's a travesty. MOO.

 

[MamaSleuth5]

In my opinion, what Trump wants is to be made a king, a king with all the powers to do whatever he wants, no matter what, and to answer to no one.

I'm afraid that if he gets back in, he'll try to find a way to stay President for life, and then hand it on to his children.

This is my fear too JMO, MOO

 

[Lilibet]

I actually think it's a devastating ruling for America and totally unConstitutional. JMO. No person should be above the law. No one. Had this ruling been in place in 2020, Trump would still be in office and there wouldn't be anything anyone could do about it. It's a travesty. MOO.

Yes, there is much more to this ruling than people first thought when it was released this morning.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/01/politics/presidents-immunity-supreme-court-what-matters/index.html

 

[Lilibet]

If they do rule in favor of immunity, aren't there some [reasonable but impactful and otherwise legal/ethical] things the current President could do with this new power which must logically apply to him as well?

You were rather prophetic, @Auntie Cipation, in saying that the immunity ruling would apply to President Biden too, and essentially empower him to do any number of things. There are ideas galore in the comments section at WaPo, mostly illegal wishful thinking actions that Biden would never take. But I can imagine that Biden and his aides are considering the “reasonable but impactful and otherwise legal/ethical things” he could do, as you mentioned. “Official acts” of course.

From the Washington Post…(gift article)

Supreme Court’s Trump immunity ruling poses risk for democracy, experts say​

https://wapo.st/3W6klak