For reference: Article 48 Wikipedia I’m trying to understand how anyone with any knowledge of the history of dictators could possibly justify granting a president unchecked “official” power so if anyone has any actual theories I am ALL ears.

  • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.socialEnglish
    3·
    3 months ago

    This is from snippets of Justice Sotomayer’s disent I found here.

    Sotomayor said that the majority opinion, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, invents “an atextual, ahistorical, and unjustifiable immunity that puts the President above the law.” Their ruling, she went on, makes three moves that she said “completely insulate Presidents from criminal liability.” Sotomayor said the court creates absolute immunity for the president’s exercise of “core constitutional powers,” creates “expansive immunity for all ‘official acts,’” and “declares that evidence concerning acts for which the President is immune can play no role in any criminal prosecution against him.”

    • oxjox@lemmy.mlEnglish
      2·
      3 months ago

      the court creates absolute immunity for the president’s exercise of “core constitutional powers

      Right here is where she’s losing me. It’s The Constitution. It is very much The Law above all laws. By definition, these acts, as defined in Article II, are immune from prosecution.

      Roberts was very clear that the charges against Trump need to be reviewed to determine if they’re “core” official acts or “perimeter” official acts. As I interpreted what Roberts said, there’s no way Trump is getting away with everything.

      • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.socialEnglish
        1·
        3 months ago

        My understanding is that a President from founding until now has been afforded immunity from civil lawsuits for official duties, but it was never intended to shield a President against criminal prosecution. That is why Nixon stepped down, because he had crossed that line and was going to be criminally charged/prosecuted.

        The court has now taken and re-written the law for Trump, knowing that Biden (or any Dem) President will not abuse this new King power that the Court put themselves in charge of determining what applies and what doesn’t. They have opened Pandora’s box thinking they can control this new power, but if a dictator wants to be a dictator, they will find a way around the Court. This is going to have long term major repercussions for generations.

    • johant@lemmy.ml
      1·
      3 months ago

      “declares that evidence concerning acts for which the President is immune can play no role in any criminal prosecution against him.”

      To me (as a non-US citizen and outside observer) this seems to be the real problem. Seems to present a catch-22 to me. What am I missing?

      • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.socialEnglish
        1·
        3 months ago

        You aren’t missing anything. Our Supreme Court is supposed to look at each case and make sure that the law was applied correctly according to the constitution and case law, but has now become an extension of Trump’s legal counsel doing backflips to bend (and inow seems also rewrite) the law to his benefit.