Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court says Trump has absolute immunity for official acts only
NPR ^ | July 1, 2024 | Nina Totenberg

Posted on 07/01/2024 7:52:52 AM PDT by Dr. Franklin

The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision along ideological lines, ruled that a former president has absolutely immunity for his core constitutional powers– and is entitled to a presumption of immunity for his official acts, but lack immunity for unofficial acts. . But at the same time, the court sent the case back to the trial judge to determine which, if any of Trump actions, were part of his official duties and thus were protected from prosecution.

That part of the court’s decision likely ensures that the case against Trump won’t be tried before the election, and then only if he is not re-elected. If he is re-elected, Trump could order the Justice Department to drop the charges against him, or he might try to pardon himself in the two pending federal cases.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the court’s decision, joined by his fellow conservatives. Dissenting were the three liberals, Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

....

Monday's decision to send the case back to trial Judge Tanya Chutkan all but guarantees that there will be no Trump trial on the election interference charges for months. Even before the immunity case, Judge Chutkan indicated that trial preparations would likely take three months. Now, she will also have to decide which of the charges in the Trump indictment should remain and which involve official acts that under the Supreme Court ruling are protected from prosecution.

Even after Judge Chutkan separates the constitutional wheat from the chaff, Trump could seek further delays, as immunity questions are among the very few that may be appealed prior to trial.

(Excerpt) Read more at npr.org ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: ninatotenberg; nlz; trump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-131 last
To: Labyrinthos

“This saves Biden’s ass for any lawsuits resulting from American’s deaths caused by illegal aliens.”

Motivation should matter.

The immunity should only apply if the official acts are done in good faith. Biden swore to faithfully execute federal law. Judges only hold office under the Constitution while on good behavior.

If Officer White smacks misbehaving Black Burgler too hard for a racist motive, Officer White should not have immunity for excessive force.


121 posted on 07/01/2024 11:42:55 AM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Harmless Teddy Bear

“That means we can not try Clinton for Waco, Carter for Verona or Obama for Benghazi.”

January 22, 2025

All Border Patrol officers:

You are to shoot all invaders.

President Trump


122 posted on 07/01/2024 11:47:04 AM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Brian Griffin
Not enforceable and not a lawful order.
123 posted on 07/01/2024 11:55:19 AM PDT by Harmless Teddy Bear ( Roses are red, Violets are blue, I love being on the government watch list, along with all of you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Franklin

Is taking bribes from China to change US policy an offcial act or an unofficial act of office?


124 posted on 07/01/2024 12:03:49 PM PDT by oil_dude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Harmless Teddy Bear
Clinton for Waco - too distant to have legal responsibility, as I understand things

Obama for Benghazi - ditto, as I understand things (diplomatic people made their own choice and it was fatal)

Carter for Verona - do inform me (and fill me in if I am wrong on Clinton and/or Obama)

125 posted on 07/01/2024 12:08:55 PM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Harmless Teddy Bear

“not a lawful order”

October 7th, 2023

Bibi:

We’ve got swarms of unarmed Arabs climbing over the fence....


126 posted on 07/01/2024 12:16:17 PM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: Harmless Teddy Bear

“lawful”

“U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision”

I suspect at least three people might have made an error.


127 posted on 07/01/2024 12:33:45 PM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: Brian Griffin

Blackhawk in Iraq? Are you referring to the USG security contractors that provided protective services for our diplomatic missions and staff? Blackwater? They were just contractors. No relation to Smith’s position or duties. Garland appointed him as SC without Senate approval. Rest assured, Smith won’t have to repay any money back to Uncle Sam.

The removal of Smith is more than just refilling paperwork. The Special Cousel must be approved by the Senate. You have the begin the whole process again, including grand juries. It will take years to resurrect these cases. And Cannon can just dismiss the case in favor of Trump.

The whole objective was to have a trial before the election. The only one that was completed was the Bragg bookkeeping case that involved talking misdemeanors that were beyond the statute of limitations and attaching them to a federal election violation, which isn’t under NY State purview. Dershowitz called it the worst case he has ever seen in over 60 years as a law professor and lawyer. It is a joke.


128 posted on 07/01/2024 2:13:19 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Franklin

I have trouble believing this nasty hag is still at it. 80 years old, and has spent most of it destroying things.


129 posted on 07/01/2024 8:50:29 PM PDT by umbagi (Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it. [Twain])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chuck allen

A court cannot overturn an impeachment.

In fact, this was Robert Barnes’s criticism of the immunity decision, in that he thought they punted on the key issue of impeachment.

His position was that there were NO crimes because Congress never impeached or convicted him. But that lays aside what “official” and “unoffi8cial” acts are. (I.e., a president cannot murder his wife in the Oval Office).

Barnes’s take on the reason the Supes went “official/unofficial” vs impeachment/conviction was purely institutional: Roberts & Kavanaugh wanted the power to determine such stuff in the COURTS, not CONGRESS.


130 posted on 07/02/2024 6:35:48 AM PDT by LS ("Castles made of sand, fall in the sea . . . eventually." Jimi Hendrix)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: umbagi
I have trouble believing this nasty hag is still at it. 80 years old, and has spent most of it destroying things.

She is still alive and kicking. She's an elitist, leftist, NY Jew who reports on SCOTUS for NPR.
131 posted on 07/02/2024 7:04:26 AM PDT by Dr. Franklin ("A republic, if you can keep it." )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-131 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson