this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2024
273 points (96.9% liked)

News

37121 readers
1654 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 76 points 2 years ago (4 children)

a literal case of stealing state secrets and refusing to return them

I can't imagine how anyone could make a serious argument that is an "official act".

I know they'll try, but it's cartoon villain levels of ridiculous.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 50 points 2 years ago

The layers of protection provided in the Supreme Court ruling makes it very easy to justify either immunity or simply excluding all evidence of a non-official crime. It's much broader than just "official vs. non-official". The LegalEagle YouTube channel has a good run through of all the ways in which immunity or effective immunity could be achieved and it's bad. "Top 5 worst Supreme Court rulings ever."

[–] Kolrami@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It may not matter at all. Imagine it's deemed unofficial and he wins the election, he will almost definitely pardon himself. Pardon powers were never given reasonable limits.

People have undervalued that the real check on a president's powers is in the hands of the voters. The next strongest checks seem to be the lifespan of the executive and the two term limit.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago

Oh, I know he's going to try any and all bullshit tactics to cover his ass, just like he always has.

I'm just hoping there are still a couple of checks and balances left un-shredded to not let him fully get away with it.

[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 7 points 2 years ago

Here’s how it’s gonna work:

  1. Claim immunity in this case? “Well why? You weren’t the president”
  2. Claim that the 2020 election was “stolen” and that he rightfully was President when 1 occured
  3. Claim 1/6 was “official” too due to a stolen election

Because, sadly, some of those others are still in limbo, Canon will be more than happy to put things on hold “while preceding matters are sorted out”

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 years ago

Because the ruling quite literally says that anything the president does as the president is presumed to have immunity unless the prosecution can argue that applying criminal law couldn't possibly impact on the core work of the office of the president, and that their motivation for doing what they do can't be considered when making that determination.

"As the president" Trump asked the justice department to falsely claim it had discovered election fraud as part of a plot to steal the election.
The supreme Court ruled that this is protected because if you ignore his motivation, punishing the president for consulting with the justice department about election fraud would clearly impede the core functions of the office.

Without considering motivation, would punishing the president for transporting documents he has legal access to to a place he's allowed to take them impact impact the function of the office?

It's a very bad ruling.