Another reason for Biden to try to pack the court. Possibly before the election.
Golly, I hope the decisions rendered just blows all these fake and manufactured “convictions” of Donald J. Trump right out of the water. And those of his underlings who were caught up in a series of “process crimes” related to the protection of the right of the President, ANY President, to not be held criminally charged with official acts of the office.
Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors, which are not official acts, do not enjoy this protection.
This is a great article by Clarice, but i disagree with this one statement. Yes, the microphones will be shut off, but Trump and Biden are in the same room. Though it will not be heard over the air, brain addled Biden will hear Trump's voice. Trump will be able to kibitz and interrupt Biden, who, in his state of anger driven dementia, will babble incoherently to address Trump's interruptions. The public will hear only Biden's babbles.
They will send it back to the lower court to hear out. You also have Judge Cannon’s decision. I look for her to disqualify Smith to begin with. Why wouldn’t she? Even a non lawyer can see that the guy was illegally assigned the position.
It appears the democrat party may get the crown or get it’s back broke.
Biden and party has proved the risk they are to freedom.
It is only the President who has no protection for their behavior in the elected office?
Is "good behavior" for the Justices limited only to when they are on the bench hearing oral arguments or when they release their rulings?
Is "going to and returning from" Congress an official act of Congress?
So why are enemies of President Trump arguing that the President has no immunities for himself, or that they are so limited in scope to be narrower than even members of Congress and the Supreme Court enjoy?
The problem with trying to determine "core Presidential acts" is that this is often out of the control of the President; events will decide what is "Presidential" or not and will overtake the President's schedule.
For example:
When President Bush was reading a storybook to kindergartners on the morning of 9/11, was that a Presidential or personal act? I'd say it was presidential as the President is out meeting the people. Was it a "core" presidential act? I think many people could debate both sides of this, saying that "core" presidential acts are those that interact with Congress or involve meeting with foreign leaders, or when acting as Commander-in-Chief. You know... things spelled out in the Constitution.
So, if President Bush reading books to children is not a "core" Presidential act, would he not have immunity for doing it? Suppose that a parent didn't like the story Bush was reading and wanted to sue him for exposing their child to content not appropriate to the beliefs of the parents?
And then, when aides interrupted President Bush with the news of the plane crashes into the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, did Bush suddenly "snap" into core Presidential mode? In other words, is there a switch that flips on and off outside of the President's control that categorizes his minute-to-minute existence as core, non-core, and personal, or do we just say the President is in a very fluid, dynamic, and often stressful role as the sole elected official of the Executive branch, and everything he does is core to the role?
Presidential immunity would finally put some backbone into the Senate to convict someone if properly impeached in the House, because impeachment conviction overrules Presidential immunity. We might finally see some impeachment convictions instead of political impeachments if SCOTUS rules that convictions were actually required in order to prosecute a former President.
-PJ