PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
Supreme court decision issued......
immunity for official acts.......
- Thread starter PostmodernProphet
- Start date
The court holds that a former president has absolute immunity for his core constitutional powers.
Former presidents are also entitled to at least a presumption of immunity for their official acts.
There is no immunity, the court holds, for unofficial acts.
The core constitutional powers are things like appointing ambassadors and foreign governments.
The court explains that it does not need to decide in this case whether immunity for official acts is presumptive or absolute.
The court in Part III of its opinion indicates that in this case "no court has thus far considered how" to distinguish between official and unofficial acts.
Moreover, Roberts continues, "the lower courts rendered their decisions on a highly expedited basis" and "did not analyze the conduct alleged in the indictment to decide which of it should be categorized as official and which unofficial" -- and it wasn't briefed before the Supreme Court.
So the Supreme Court isn't going to make that determination now. Instead, it will send the case back to the lower courts for further proceedings, although it does offer some guidance.
Roberts reporting:
It was 6-3.
Former presidents are also entitled to at least a presumption of immunity for their official acts.
There is no immunity, the court holds, for unofficial acts.
The core constitutional powers are things like appointing ambassadors and foreign governments.
The court explains that it does not need to decide in this case whether immunity for official acts is presumptive or absolute.
The court in Part III of its opinion indicates that in this case "no court has thus far considered how" to distinguish between official and unofficial acts.
Moreover, Roberts continues, "the lower courts rendered their decisions on a highly expedited basis" and "did not analyze the conduct alleged in the indictment to decide which of it should be categorized as official and which unofficial" -- and it wasn't briefed before the Supreme Court.
So the Supreme Court isn't going to make that determination now. Instead, it will send the case back to the lower courts for further proceedings, although it does offer some guidance.
Roberts reporting:
It was 6-3.
Link?
Blackwater Lunchbreak
Verified User
"There have to be consequences for participating in an attempted violent overthrow of the government, beyond sitting at home," Chutkan said
'PRESIDENTS ARE NOT KINGS'
Chutkan
Chutkan
The high court’s 6-3 ruling vacated an earlier decision by a DC federal judge and cleared the way for more appeals by Trump’s legal team that could set the trial schedule in the 2020 election case against him back months or years — if it ever happens.
“The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority. “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.”
“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,” Roberts added. “That immunity applies equally to all occupants of the Oval Office, regardless of politics, policy, or party.”
nypost.com
“The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority. “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.”
“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,” Roberts added. “That immunity applies equally to all occupants of the Oval Office, regardless of politics, policy, or party.”
Supreme Court affirms ‘absolute immunity’ for official acts in Trump case
The US Supreme Court ruled Monday that former President Donald Trump enjoys “absolute” immunity from prosecution for “official acts” during his presidency, although it left the exact ex…
nypost.com
Due to this decision, I do not believe that this case against Trump will be continued.The high court’s 6-3 ruling vacated an earlier decision by a DC federal judge and cleared the way for more appeals by Trump’s legal team that could set the trial schedule in the 2020 election case against him back months or years — if it ever happens.
“The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority. “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.”
“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,” Roberts added. “That immunity applies equally to all occupants of the Oval Office, regardless of politics, policy, or party.”
Supreme Court affirms ‘absolute immunity’ for official acts in Trump case
The US Supreme Court ruled Monday that former President Donald Trump enjoys “absolute” immunity from prosecution for “official acts” during his presidency, although it left the exact ex…
He has immunity.
You are overreaching, it will go forward. No way a trial will happen before the election.
I guess in some ways we do elect a king when we elect a president.
Last edited:
Let's hope so. One thing is certain, the trial won't happen until after his election victory in November.
WTF does that word salad even mean? Anyone?
NakedHunterBiden
Judge clarifies: Yes, Trump raped E. Jean Carroll
Oh Biden is immune! Let's go Joe!
SmarterthanYou
rebel
you can blame that squarely upon your fellow democrat voters and those who ranted for more power to be handed to THEIR particular president. Yes, I know you will deny being a Democrat voter or one of those who wanted THEIR president to have more power, but you are aligned with them, so you're partly to blame
He's not immune from impeachment. So, were you born a moron, or just work hard to act like one?
Blackwater Lunchbreak
Verified User
it's done.
the Dems regime is deeply unpopular, partially because of their weaponization of the legal system.
I think the Dem adults are stepping back into the mix.
It seems the other way around to me. Trump snatched a lot of power.
Really? Specifically, how did he do that?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
ignorance of reality doesn't help you. for DECADES, idiot voters from both sides have demanded more power be given to their chosen president. It's one of the main reasons that the chevron case existed. Thankfully, that's been remedied.
It's always satisfying to see the faces of those who have clamored for their chosen to have more power drop in abject horror when they realize that their opponents president now has those very powers.