Supreme Court Justice John Roberts has been left “shaken” by the unexpected public reaction to his ruling in the Donald Trumppresidential immunity case, a columnist wrote Friday.
Slate’s judicial writer Dahlia Lithwick wrote that Roberts was left shocked that Americans didn’t buy his attempt to persuade them that his ruling was not about Trump, but instead focused on the office of the presidency. The court ruled that a president was largely immune from criminal prosecution for official actions.
Lithwick referenced a report by CNN’s Joan Biskupic. He “was shaken by the adverse public reaction to his decision affording [Donald] Trump substantial immunity from criminal prosecution," she wrote.
"His protestations that the case concerned the presidency, not Trump, held little currency.”
I really want someone to press one of these people on camera.
“Donald Trump has promised at multiple rallies to end the democratic process by eliminating the need to vote, and this is extremely dangerous to our democracy, therefore it is an official act of the office e of the president to order a hit on DJT, Seal teams 3 and 5 are en-route now. Such an act is official, and necessary for the country to survive therefore Joe Biden is completely immune from any prosecution.”
I just want to know for sure what the reaction would be. I’m sure pearl clutching indignation (because someone thought of their idea but flipped the victims around)
That is the correct interpretation of the law. We could punish the Seal Team and their chain if command for following the order. But punishment of Biden himself would require him to be impeached.
And frankly that’s how it should be.
Obama killed that 16 year old in Yemen. He isn’t liable for that. Bush spied on Millions of Americans without warrants he isn’t liable for that. You can argue they should be; but that’s not how our system is designed.
It’s really a situation that ought to resolve itself. If the justices vote anything as an official act is perfectly legal, then threaten those justices that voted that way with violence, assassination, nothing is off the table apparently as long as it’s an official act, and reverse that decision with the remaining justices, done and dusted.
I really don’t see the problem here. It’s all been declared perfectly legal, nothing is off the table, it sends a strong message that this democracy will be maintained by whatever means necessary, and that as long as the president is Democrat at least, then any attempt at an all powerful king or Führer will automatically undo itself. An abrogation of power done through wielding that very power itself would be a beautiful thing to behold.
In fact, the Supreme Court justices would make a better target than Trump himself even. Trump is a political rival and it could be argued that it’s Biden supporting the election of a candidate from his own party. Meanwhile targetting the Supreme Court justices would be defending basic democracy, fighting for the freedom from a despotic tyrant - the very supposed foundation of the country we’re talking about, changing the composition of the Supreme Court and weakening the powers of the presidency itself, which definitely sounds like official acts rather than those of a candidate or private individual.
About the only silver lining to Trump’s inevitable re-attempt to steal the election is that he won’t be President during the election. If he wins he won’t make the same mistake of appointing people with even a shred of ethics. He’ll rig it to give himself a 3rd term or be kingmaker for the next gen of American dictators.
