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 ...
Agreed, but the time frame is a serious flaw in the case, without being an immunity issue.
“federal offices”
The commanders of Blackhawk in Iraq were “hired guns”. Nobody considered them to be federal officers.
One could say Jack Smith is a “hired gun”.
At the worst, the DoJ would have to refile paperwork and Jack Smith would have to repay Uncle Sam.
Chief Justice ‘it’s a tax’ Roberts isn’t going to want to waste Supreme Court time over Jack Smith’s lucrative payment arrangements.
Judges don’t like their time wasted on trivialities.
The big problems are:
1. Republican presidential candidate Trump is being tied up over legal BS, and
2. the politically motivated searches done by New York to dig up charges against Trump violated his Amendment IV right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.
Who would have standing to do that? I would think it is the business of any voter but then in previous cases even the candidate who had the election stolen didn’t have standing to do anything about it...
A politically motivated seizure of a major party presidential candidate’s real property would be a violation of the Amendment IV right to be secure against unreasonable seizures.
This is a vistory for Textualism - the three justices Trump appointed being textualists, like Scalia. They abide by the literal words of the constitution as they spell out the duties of the executive branch. Not liberal “it’s a living document subject to our interpretation” BS.
I see nothing but a big win for us, our nation and Pres Trump in this decision.
In honor of Independence Day, I’m not sifting through the doom and gloom to read to the contrary.
“And who gets to define, ‘official’?”
Random House (1978):
“of or pertaining to an office of duty or authority”
pertaining
“to have reference or relation”
“to belong or be connected as a part”
“to be appropriate or proper”
Definitely, and the judges who don’t seem to understand this are extremely short-sighted.
The First Amendment guarantees that we have a right to petition our government for a redress of grievances but the courts constantly tell us we have no standing, no venue, and no timing that could ever be effective to hold elections officials accountable. When you take away the ability to address these things lawfully and take away the ability for the ballot box to mean anything, you guarantee that the ammo box will eventually be used.
The courts have placed us in a pressure cooker with no release valve. SOMEBODY needs to wake the Hell up.
One man’s election interference is another Presidents duty to question/stop/investigate election fraud. Especially when that man is still the President.
Dims will cry unofficial acts every time and do the same thing when the shoe is on the other foot. We need a Chevron type case to roll back left wing fanatic judicial tyranny.
Waging a politically motivated lawfare campaign against a former president who ran against the elected President violates the Amendment IV right of a person to be secure against unreasonable seizures when that former president is compelled by any co-conspirator to present his person under color of law to answer an obviously dubious charge. The charges made by any co-conspirator to that campaign should be dismissed with prejudice.
NEW YORK CHECKS WERE WRITTEN IN 2017.
THAT IS AFTER HE TURNED OVER BUSINESSES TO SONS & AFTER HE WAS IN OVAL OFFICE....
“This saves Biden’s ass for any lawsuits resulting from American’s deaths caused by illegal aliens.”
The SCOTUS ruled many years ago that the POTUS has absolute immunity for civil liability arising out of official acts. Today’s opinion concerns criminal liability for criminal acts.
That’s the dictionary (true) definition.
In this case, it’ll be some Soros-planted judge.
“NEW YORK CHECKS WERE WRITTEN IN 2017.
THAT IS AFTER HE TURNED OVER BUSINESSES TO SONS & AFTER HE WAS IN OVAL OFFICE....”
You make a good point.
That means we can not try Clinton for Waco, Carter for Verona or Obama for Benghazi.
I was drawing up a big ol list.
“roll back left wing fanatic judicial tyranny”
In connection with a criminal or civil case where the defendant won or came within five percent of winning any federal elected office, the defendant may request and must be given transfer to another judicial district that voted along (i.e. plus or minus five percent) national percentages for the two major presidential candidates within the prior five years if such a district exists.
If a president or underling had arrested George Floyd for the allegedly counterfeit $20 and did what Chauvin did, the president or underling would not deserve more or less immunity than Chauvin IMO.
That is pretty much what I always thought.
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.