completely disingenuous. The only thing he is really bothered by is that the ruling wont allow time to convict Trump before the election.
Because everything else in the ruling is pretty stand operating crap.
He surely wouldn’t argue that a president should be liable for deaths he causes during a war right? That would be official duties the Supreme Court just said were absolutely protected by immunity.
He surely wouldn’t argue that a president shouldn’t be able to talk with his attorney general about official matters of state without worries that the conversations might be gone over later with a fine tooth comb by a political rival afterwards trying to find a crime, and decern their motives? that would be outer perimeter that might have an expectation of immunity.
And I think everyone would agree that if a president gets mad at his wife and murders her on the front lawn of the white house, that would be private behavior not given any immunity.
The problem for democrats is in every Trump case, all actions need to be gone over to determine which “might” fall into which of the above categories, and it is not the SC job to make those determinations. So back all the cases go, to do so.
After all the cases are gone over piece by piece who knows eventually some things Trump did may be determined to be completely private and not immune. But that will have to be litigated and it will take time, maybe years. Sorry libs that is just the way our system works.
Liberals have no problem with the slow working of justice as long as it’s a murderer on death row for 40 years.
They have all gone to town with the Seal team 6 hypothetical in the dissent, even if it was refuted by Roberts.