421
submitted 8 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

At a crucial crossroads for American democracy, the Supreme Court slow walks Trump's immunity issue

With the Supreme Court granting certiorari to Donald Trump on his immunity claims regarding the January 6th trial in Washington, we have reached a historic moment. The high court will now review the lower court ruling that a former president isn’t immune from prosecution for crimes he committed in office. but not until April. If the court agrees with Trumphim, it could lead America down a dark road.

Yes, broadly exposing the president to lawsuits or prosecutions for the thousands of judgment calls a president makes in the line of duty would cripple the presidency. But no one prosecuting Trump claims presidents should be broadly exposed to liability for their official decisions. Instead, the issue is framed by the Supreme Court’s 1982 decision in Nixon v. Fitzgerald. It held that the president is immune from damages liability “for acts within ‘the outer perimeter’ of his official responsibility.” The court has never extended that limitation to the president’s responsibility for a crime. Moreover, the court has never suggested that a president who commits a crime unconnected to his official duties enjoys any immunity at all.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] paddirn@lemmy.world 138 points 8 months ago

SCOTUS is so anti-democratic. Why the hell does the fate of our democracy rest on the whims of Nine people holding lifetime appointments? I get that they want these people outside of the transitory world of politics, but that doesn't really seem to have prevented politics from creeping into the Court anyways. If SCOTUS rules that POTUS has immunity while in office, then Biden should just suspend the election, declare martial law, arrest Trump, and lock up all the Russian sympathizers in Congress. Protecting the country from foreign agents seems like it should fall within the scope of the President's powers.

[-] cranakis@reddthat.com 62 points 8 months ago

I'm worried their plan is to wait until after the election. If Trump is elected, they then rule he has absolute power and democracy is basically dead at that point.

[-] LocoOhNo@lemmus.org 46 points 8 months ago

It already is. The rest of us just get to fight for scraps now.

This decision is just the Supreme Court saying "let them eat cake."

It's a shame we didn't even make it to 250 years, but the Christians had to force a theocracy again. They don't feel right unless they get to murder people for being different.

[-] PalmTreeIsBestTree@lemmy.world 18 points 8 months ago

Democracy died when Dubya got elected by the court almost 25 years ago.

[-] CosmicTurtle@lemmy.world 20 points 8 months ago

Trump's own lawyers said that the president could kill his political adversaries and be free from any charges.

[-] rayyy@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

We placed the fate of democracy on some greedy white guys who want nice motor coaches and luxury vacations

[-] Badeendje@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago
[-] DarkNightoftheSoul@mander.xyz 2 points 8 months ago

White?

It kinda seems like the sort of hallucination a bot would make without a working knowledge of race in practice.

[-] Badeendje@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Excellent point

[-] Eldritch@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Especially when anyone who's watched last week tonight recently. Will point out that the only fashy fuck openly wanting a motor coach was Clarence Thomas.

[-] ptz@dubvee.org 10 points 8 months ago

A SCOTUS ruling in Trump's favor would absolutely grant him the power to do that. For better or worse, though, I just don't see that happening as it would set a very dangerous precedent. We may avoid a dictator in the short run, but it would absolutely enable the next.

[-] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 2 points 8 months ago

Half of those 9 we're put there by not democratically elected presidents, also nice detail to add there

[-] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

That'd be a hoot!

this post was submitted on 29 Feb 2024
421 points (97.1% liked)

politics

19107 readers
3211 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS