698
submitted 5 months ago by skhayfa@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Sotomayor: If the president decides that his rival is a corrupt person and he orders the military to assasinate him, is that within his official acts to which he has immunity?

"That could well be an official act," Trump lawyer John Sauer says

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] foggy@lemmy.world 210 points 5 months ago

If I'm Biden, as soon as this is okayed, Trump is dead. Right? I mean, fuck.

[-] CaptDust@sh.itjust.works 153 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Obviously, why wouldn't he? This is potentially the dumbest argument ever heard in a court room and we're all supposed to sit here and entertain its plausibility. What a joke.

[-] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 88 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

we’re all supposed to sit here and entertain its plausibility.

We're all here because more than one of these judges is entertaining its plausibility. Listening to some of the questions coming from a couple of these judges, there is a very real possibility that they actually declare Trump at least partially immune, leading to the lower courts having to re-litigate the issues again (which would delay Trump's trials by years), or outright giving him enough immunity to make his current cases go away.

It's important to note that this would include the state cases. If Trump were to return to office, he could in theory pardon himself and make the federal cases go away but can't do anything about the state ones. If the SC were to rule he's immune, the state courts can't touch him either.

Honestly, I think the judges are just trying to figure out how they can rule narrowly enough to make sure Trump walks away scot-free while also ensuring that Biden and other future presidents don't get the same treatment.

[-] eric5949@lemmy.world 28 points 5 months ago

Trump was not president for the crimes in NY or the retention of documents AFTER he was president. Of course it'll be delayed and litigated, but "president is immune" does not make trumps problems go away unless they go "president is immune for the rest of their lives" which is even more insane.

[-] nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 5 months ago

unless they go "president is immune for the rest of their lives" which is even more insane.

Alito pretty much did argue that.

He said presidents won’t leave office peacefully if they aren’t able to retire to security without threats of prosecution.

[-] Bipta@kbin.social 12 points 5 months ago

4 justices have to vote to hear a case at the Supreme Court. I don't understand why they'd ever choose to.

[-] b3an@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Why not have Biden just assassinate Trump then? He likely wouldn’t have to deal with a long drawn out court decision. He can be done with it and move on. It’s horrible to consider, but I’m so so so so so so so so so sick of Trump. Everyday I’m bombarded with orange pulp. 😆

[-] Serinus@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago

Just put them in a jail. And put enough Republican congresspeople in jail to have the majority. And then declare they can leave as soon as a bill is passed making the stupid "immunity" shit illegal.

You can demonstrate the issues without killing anyone.

[-] youngGoku@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago

The kicker for the immunity is that he can be impeached and convicted by congress...

So you're only immune if you're a republican and you have enough votes in the senate... Lord knows Democrats would convict each other but republicans will toe the line.

[-] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 5 months ago

But you can just remove the members that don’t support you. No impeachment after that.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_Ba'ath_Party_Purge

[-] ripcord@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

So he orders him killed just before leaving office

[-] Theprogressivist@lemmy.world 40 points 5 months ago

I'm sure they'll frame it in a way where this only applies to Trump, and no former or future presidents will have that ability.

[-] teft@lemmy.world 41 points 5 months ago

Same as Bush v Gore

Our consideration is limited to the present circumstances

They'll stick that in their opinion and say that this case isn't binding on future cases therefore it doesn't set precedent.

[-] MrVilliam@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago

That's a paradox. The only precedent it set was that a decision could withhold setting a precedent.

[-] VaultBoyNewVegas@lemmy.world 21 points 5 months ago

I know that's what I would do.

[-] Bipta@kbin.social 16 points 5 months ago

If the Supreme Court were to greenlight this, it becomes the only logical choice in terms of preservation of the self and the state..

My opponent will use this power for great evil, so I must use it first to circumvent that.

[-] VaultBoyNewVegas@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

I'm not even American so I can't be president, I just want to the fucking Cheeto dead and his family.

[-] Chainweasel@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago

Trump? He's just the start. I'm cleaning House, and Senate!

[-] Jaysyn@kbin.social 12 points 5 months ago
[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 10 points 5 months ago

You know as well as I do that we'll sit on that high horse of morality, sniffing our own farts, while we get sniped right the fuck off that horse by a Republican who has no issues whatsoever with abusing that power.

[-] thr0w4w4y2@sh.itjust.works 5 points 5 months ago

If this is okayed then the next government will presumably be the last. So if that’s not Biden then he is comfortable handing over the torch to whomever wins. That doesn’t seem like a particularly nice choice to have to make.

[-] KidnappedByKitties@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

The bad part is that a normal person wouldn't order that, and Biden is quite normal. Only the radical MAGAts or worse would.

[-] chakan2@lemmy.world -5 points 5 months ago

Biden doesn't have the balls for that...Trump, unfortunetely does (or he's just too fucking stupid to realize the ramifications of it).

this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2024
698 points (98.6% liked)

politics

18956 readers
3484 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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