BREAKING: Supreme Court rules Trump is entitled to some immunity in Jan. 6 case

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Maybe explain the constitutional basis for congressional immunity.

Irrelevant.

So, give it a shot, or troll and tap out? Your call.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Deal! Time to appoint 4 new judges immediately.

And how would you propose to do this?

 

[progressive hunter]

 

[Delldude]

Irrelevant.

So, give it a shot, or troll and tap out? Your call.

Is why the boss should also have similar immunity................

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

So now Biden can take out Trump as an official act?

Absolutely. He should do it immediately and cement his legacy. Gotta wait until the criminal slob gets his passport back, so it can be done overseas.

 

[struth]

Whether it did or not the court had a chance to fix that here. I've already noted this. I hate when I have to repeat myself over and over.

There are no such protections in the Constitution.

Fix what? They had said it exist for hundreds of years.

There doesn’t have to be. All the Constitution does is create the govt and limit it.

The constitution doesn’t outline many legal doctrines, such as the marriage immunity, doesn’t mean they don’t exist

I mean what sort of idiot thought the govt could essentially prosecute itself? Haha

 

[DigitalDrifter]

5 min ago

Justice Thomas questions constitutionality of Jack Smith’s appointment​

From CNN’s Devan Cole

Conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, who joined the court’s majority opinion, wrote separately to raise questions about whether Attorney General Merrick Garland violated the Constitution when he appointed Jack Smith as special counsel.

Pushing fringe legal theory about the legality of Smith’s appointment in 2022 has been part of Donald Trump’s defense strategy in his classified documents criminal case in Florida, which also was brought by the special counsel. Trump’s attorneys have argued that Garland does not have legal authority to appoint someone as special counsel who hasn’t been confirmed by the Senate.

Thomas, too, appears to support that argument.

“And, there are serious questions whether the Attorney General has violated that structure by creating an office of the Special Counsel that has not been established by law. Those questions must be answered before this prosecution can proceed,” Thomas wrote in his concurrence. “The lower courts should thus answer these essential questions concerning the Special Counsel’s appointment before proceeding.”

No other justice joined Thomas’ concurrence.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

And how would you propose to do this?

Simple, nominate 4 judges and have Kamala confirm all 5 with the tiebreaker. Write nice checks to any GOPers on the fence.

 

[ThisIsMe]

No it has not. That's literally why the SCOTUS just had to rule on it.

Maybe someone else will try to answer.

The idea of presidential immunity gained significant media attention in recent years, as former officials from the Trump administration were subpoenaed in investigations by Congress. But, this legal doctrine dates back to the 1860s.

The idea is not new.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Gently disagree. It's a constitutional issue that SCOTUS addressed. The constitution gives the elected representatives of the people the ONLY power to prosecute a President in his official duties. The House indicts; the Senate convicts and removes from office.

This ruling protects Bill Clinton from prosecution for Black Hawk down, protects George W. Bush from prosecution for invading Afghanistan and Iraq, protects Obama from prosecution for sending pallets of cash to Iran, protects Biden from prosecution for allowing an invasion into our country, etc. etc. etc.

It requires the lower courts to adjudicate whether a Presidential act is official or private. If they get it wrong it can still eventually be for the high court to decide but it should at face value stop most of this nonsense going on.

President Trump was quite happy with the ruling by the way.

Gently disagree. It's a constitutional issue that SCOTUS addressed. The constitution gives the elected representatives of the people the ONLY power to prosecute a President in his official duties. The House indicts; the Senate convicts and removes from office.

This ruling protects Bill Clinton from prosecution for Black Hawk down, protects George W. Bush from prosecution for invading Afghanistan and Iraq, protects Obama from prosecution for sending pallets of cash to Iran, protects Biden from prosecution for allowing an invasion into our country, etc. etc. etc.

It requires the lower courts to adjudicate whether a Presidential act is official or private. If they get it wrong it can still eventually be for the high court to decide but it should at face value stop most of this nonsense going on.

President Trump was quite happy with the ruling by the way.

The tenth amendment is at play here

Tenth Amendment​

Tenth Amendment Explained


The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

 

[ColonelAngus]

The CORRUPT SCOTUS just protected all the Dem Presidents who broke the law.

 

[two_iron]

SCOTUS gives three tiers:

- Core constitutional acts (absolute immunity)

- Official acts (presumptive immunity)

- Unofficial acts (no immunity)

The lower courts can muddle through that mess over the course of months and in the meantime Trump becomes POTUS again.

You're schooling the equivalent of diseased livestock.

But good on you for playing along and pretending they matter.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Another horrible day for leftards which means it’s a great day for America.

 

[Mac1958]

I wonder why this was not a big deal until the Unified Reich showed up.

Oh well. If he wins, it'll be interesting to see how much more he gets away with.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Trump will be tried and convicted.

And then the cries of "he is just getting even" will rain down...I can understand folks for wanting to stop trump at any cost but only as long as they don't understand or realize what "any cost" really means, and for the ones who do understand what it means, shame on you!

that said, and with apologies to my friends here on the right, I don't think trump is winning this election.

 

[candycorn]

That's life. The framers of the US Constitution argued about meanings during the drafting, and after the ratification.

One would hope the democrats learn from this and close ranks behind Biden.

I won’t hold my breath on that.

 

[candycorn]

I wonder why this was not a big deal until the Unified Reich showed up.

Oh well. If he wins, it'll be interesting to see how much more he gets away with.

Sky’s the limit

 

[22lcidw]

Neither are the ghost of our founding fathers.

Getting Trump was purely political. And the fact that the Supreme Court had to get involved tells us how corrupted politics is and especially the Progressive Socialists. It's now pure spin, lies and cover stories. The Progs were on a roll in near everything as they kept ratching up the pressure on our nation. All of the stealth destruction they have done that cause pain and suffering for so many with the riots alone is demonic. When they came into the sunlight with Joe and the charges against Trump, we found out that the people doing so or involved are not that good.

 

[progressive hunter]

The CORRUPT SCOTUS just protected all the Dem Presidents who broke the law.

and republicans,,

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The idea that a president has any sort of immunity exists nowhere. The justices just created it out of nothing.

Massive hypocrisy all around.

You brought up abortion now you're moving away. Your surrender is not accepted.