Immunity decision dropped!
- Thread starter dbmhoosier
- Start date
As predicted, it will now go to lower courts to determine what is a private action.
However 'presumptive immunity' implies that it would favor the President if there's a question.
Read the holding I just posted. Trump got what he wanted.
I don't really care about the ruling - I just like to hear Alina Habba's take on it.
Hear . . . . . .or see?
From the opinion: "Trump asserts a far broader immunity than the limited one we have recognized."
Jack Smith likely needs a bottle of Xanax right now.
This decision is obvious and was easily predictable. The trial court, appellate court, and the Supreme Court dissents obviously focused on Trump, not on the straightforward immunity question. The dissent is nonsense . She either doesn’t understand immunity or feels compelled to oppose Trump no matter what. Even money on which.
Gender gap at play? All the judges who found no immunity at all are women.
Gender gap at play? All the judges who found no immunity at all are women.
That’s routine stuff. Examining a public official’s motives when taking discretionary actions is off limits except in very rare circumstances. The test must be only objective.
They never expected to get the impeachment before the Senate requirement in a million years but you always aim high.
Then why is motive always discussed in cases like the documents case?
All I've heard here from the libs is how it's his motive that matters. Conversely, they claim Biden didn't really mean to keep the docs.
Cripes. With this kind of stupidity, we have no hope.
I’m not reading anything hard now. So let me guess and tell me where wrong
Official acts immunity. Private acts no immunity. Sent down to try which won’t happen before election. If it gets tried judge will decide what acts have immunity and it will go back up again for the s.Ct. to decide on those acts
?????
Official acts immunity. Private acts no immunity. Sent down to try which won’t happen before election. If it gets tried judge will decide what acts have immunity and it will go back up again for the s.Ct. to decide on those acts
?????
Sure sounds like the NY case is dead too as Merchan never did the factual analysis for what is and what isn't a Presidential act before going to trial which this decision requires.
So is this the trigger that we need to tape all of the windows shut above the 2nd floor? Put a bunch of pillows around all high rise buildings?
I only read the syllabus, but you are right except for one thing: the court distinguished between two types of official acts: core constitutional responsibilities, which get absolute immunity, and other official acts, which get "at least" presumptive immunity.
So may help in dc (subject to interpretation /rebuttable blah blah). no help to docs case
I imagine if Trump wins he’ll test the immunity ruling over and over. Thanks SCOTUS for making it easier for a conman to con.
The DC cases are garbage and should be dead without immunity. SCOTUS knocked out the Sarbanes Oxley charge. The KKK voter fraud charge hasn’t been litigated yet, but that also makes no sense. The documents case is interesting. It’s criminal, not civil. The DOJ could have gone the civil route for document recovery, but no. It went criminal. Trump has defenses that Biden and Hillary did not have. Immunity will be an issue.
Should SCOTUS have made a special Trump rule? It took the high road and wrote about immunity for any office holder.
Nothing like a 34 yr old bartender opining on s.Ct. rulings
And it will only cost ya one house and half (90%) your retirement.
Nope but they aren’t in congress
One things for sure, this ruling will accelerate the already vicious attacks on the legitimacy of the court.
A lot of the tweets that make it here make it from a Russian computer center. I don't know if that is better or worse than a bartender.
I can't possibly imagine how this would help him in the docs case, but I'm sure they will try.
