Taking 6 months off the clock and then this half-baked opinion which clarifies nothing, dropped as the justices go wheels up on their long vacations, leaving the courts with a pile of shit to sort through.
> dropped as the justices go wheels up on their long vacations
Yeah, I'm sure Thomas's 250k RV was idling in the parking lot, waiting for him so they could head off to some private estate for the summer.
Justice Sotomayor's warning in her dissent:
>"When [the president] uses his official powers in any way, under the majority's reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy's Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune. Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority's message today. Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done. The relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law."
"Indeed, the majority holds that the President, unlike anyone else in our country, is comparatively free to engage in criminal acts in furtherance of his official duties."
Nixon wishes he had this Supreme Court!
So, Trump can't physically grab a gun and shoot someone on 5th avenue, but he order Seal Team 6 to get their guns, shoot someone on 5th avenue, and then pardon them, preventing any prosecution for the President of the United States just outright killing US citizens.
You folks understand how fucked we are as a nation if Donald Trump is re-elected, right? The Supreme Court just gave Donald Trump a license to kill Americans.
That cannot be understated. The ONLY restriction we have on the executive branch is Congress, through impeachment, or people in the Executive Branch refusing to follow orders.
We are fucked.
Per the live coverage on SCOTUSblog
>The court holds that a former president has absolute immunity for his core constitutional powers.
>Former presidents are also entitled to at least a presumption of immunity for their official acts.
>There is no immunity, the court holds, for unofficial acts.The core constitutional powers are things like appointing ambassadors and foreign governments.
>The court explains that it does not need to decide in this case whether immunity for official acts is presumptive or absolute.
>The court in Part III of its opinion indicates that in this case "no court has thus far considered how" to distinguish between official and unofficial acts.
>Moreover, Roberts continues, "the lower courts rendered their decisions on a highly expedited basis" and "did not analyze the conduct alleged in the indictment to decide which of it should be categorized as official and which unofficial" -- and it wasn't briefed before the Supreme Court.
>So the Supreme Court isn't going to make that determination now. Instead, it will send the case back to the lower courts for further proceedings, although it does offer some guidance.
The fix is in.
They ate up 6 months of time, and now they've remanded it to the lower courts to run out the rest of the clock until well after the election. It is now (inexplicably) the duty of a lower court to decide what is an official act versus what is not after which the Supreme Court obviously will need to actually render a decision.
But Roberts specifically writes that conversations and instructions given to the Vice President, the Attorney General and other members of the government constitute official acts and enjoy complete immunity.
Project 2025 just got the green light.
I've never been so disappointed in my country.
This bullshit power grab from conservatives will have effects that fuck us over for decades. They know that their "ideals" have no place in the 21st century, so they're going to salt the earth while they can.
I really don’t believe that most Americans (not you obviously), are fully aware of the damage that the GOP have inflicted on the overall credibility of the United States on the world stage.
Once again, the court vastly expanding its own power to choose who the law protects and who it binds separately by making the definition of “official acts” subject only to its own authority.
Fucking sickening.
Biden needs to get Trump, Thomas (and his wife), and all of the Jan 6th assisting congress members arrested for Treason without the possibility of bail. Call it an official act and be done with it. Let them sit in jail and wait for an appeal.
"Thus, even a hypothetical President who admits to having ordered the assassinations of his political rivals or critics, see, e.g., Tr. of Oral Arg. 9, or one who indisputably instigates an unsuccessful coup, id., at 41–43, has a fair shot at getting immunity under the majority’s new Presidential accountability model."
Holy fucking shit
This SCOTUS ruling tears down one of the first principles of American democracy that no man is above the law. It's a wide open invitation to dictatorship.
So presidents have immunity from “official” acts but not “unofficial” ones.
Let me clear up how that’s going to work.
Acts done by REPUBLICAN presidents are OFFICIAL
While any acts by DEMOCRATIC presidents are UNOFFICIAL
>[CNN’s Harry Enten Reveals Republican Voters Believe Only Trump Should Have Immunity, But Not Another President](https://www.mediaite.com/tv/cnns-harry-enten-reveals-republican-voters-believe-only-trump-should-have-immunity-but-not-another-president/)
If they leave it to the courts to decide, as they seem to be doing, this just means if it's a trump appointed judge, they will decide it's an official act.
>Justice Jackson in her dissent: "At the end of a momentous Term, this much is clear: The tsunami of lawsuits against agencies that the Court's holdings in this case and Loper Bright have authorized has the potential to devastate the functioning of the Federal Government."
[https://x.com/KatiePhang/status/1807779354656518508](https://x.com/KatiePhang/status/1807779354656518508)
It sounds like the majority went way too far on their decision if the minority is saying that the floodgates are being opened to undermine the functioning of the executive branch.
Yes. And delays any action on trump until well after the election:
>The court explains that it does not need to decide in this case whether immunity for official acts is presumptive or absolute.
>The court in Part III of its opinion indicates that in this case "no court has thus far considered how" to distinguish between official and unofficial acts.
>Moreover, Roberts continues, "the lower courts rendered their decisions on a highly expedited basis" and "did not analyze the conduct alleged in the indictment to decide which of it should be categorized as official and which unofficial" -- and it wasn't briefed before the Supreme Court
The necessity of electing Biden just became twice as dire.
Your Facebook uncles are preparing to put a convicted felon campaigning on a platform of revenge into an office that now enjoys absolute immunity for undefined official acts.
The brain dead conservatives that see this as a win is insane. I saw 1 comment about how this a double edged sword and may not be good for a president to have this much power. “I love the poorly educated”
> Whenever the President and Vice President discuss their official re- sponsibilities, they engage in official conduct. Presiding over the Jan- uary 6 certification proceeding at which Members of Congress count the electoral votes is a constitutional and statutory duty of the Vice President. Art. II, §1, cl. 3; Amdt. 12; 3 U. S. C. §15. The indictment’s allegations that Trump attempted to pressure the Vice President to take particular acts in connection with his role at the certification proceeding thus involve official conduct, and Trump is at least presumptively immune from prosecution for such conduct.
That's insane. A president instructing the vice president to not certify the election and just deem himself the winner is just part of the job and a protected act?
From Sotomayor's dissent:
"Looking beyond the fate of this particular prosecution, the long-term consequences of today’s decision are stark. The Court effectively creates a law-free zone around the President, upsetting the status quo that has existed since the Founding. This new official-acts immunity now “lies about like a loaded weapon” for any President that wishes to place his own interests, his own political survival, or his own financial gain, above the interests of the Nation. Korematsu v. United States, 323 U. S. 214, 246 (1944) (Jackson, J., dissenting). The President of the United States is the most powerful person in the country, and possibly the world. When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. **Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune.**
This whole thing is an absolute mess. Not sure if by design, but it certainly sets up up for a tyrant:
You can't prosecute a President for an officially act... ok, makes sense
We're not going to tell you what official acts are... oh
and to prosecute, you need to prove the acts wasn't official... you can't prove a negative
And any conversations they have with officials can't be used in court... all hail the god king
So does this mean that Biden could take measures to sure up the democracy like add a bunch of additional Supreme Court Justices or jail Trump and MAGA lawmakers- and call them official acts?
Let's be clear here:
This was and is the SCOTUS laying the groundwork, clear for all to see, for a soft coup at the start of next year. We will have no democracy after this year.
“… When [the President] uses his official powers in any way, under the majority's reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy's Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune.
Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority's message today.
Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done. The relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law.
… **With fear for our democracy, I dissent.**”
—Sotomayor J., with whom Kagan J and Jackson J join, dissenting (29–30 of her judgment). Emphasis added.
The Supreme Court ruled that Presidents sometimes have immunity but only during official acts but they didn’t define what an official act is, instead they kicked it back to the lower court for them to define what an official act is and then once they do that, it can be appealed back to the Supreme Court so they can determine whether each act was in fact an official act or not. Am I understanding that correctly?
Essentially the Supreme Court has completed an unprecedented power grab. Every single law, every single lower court decision, will be challenged and appealed by bad actors to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court is now also the Supreme Legislature.
The real concern here is... that someone like Donald Trump would most definitely take advantage of loosely defined "presidential duties." For instance, he could simply decide that various large real estate businesses are a monopoly and must be disbanded... then enact an executive order making it ILLEGAL to practice a real estate business above a certain financial threshold without "presidential approval." And therefore, he could kill off all of the Trump Organization competition. Basically yeah, he could do something like this with how loosely the SCOTUS has defined their ruling.
Also, Trump could basically decide to bequeath to himself an "executive override" of election results if he "believes" that the results are "fraudulent." And he could basically decree that if an election is "aborted" for whatever reason, the sitting president has the OPTION to stay on for another term. He could do something like that, based on how loosely the SCOTUS ruled on this decision.
DEMOCRACY folks. It's going to die if Trump becomes POTUS.
At this point, the Court has ensured that democracy dies if ANY FUCKING REPUBLICAN gets into the fucking White House. Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Roberts have earned their bribes (that they have ensured are now perfectly legal!) and paved the way for an autocrat.
The fascist party only needs to sit and wait. When they get in, they'll never leave.
"I understand the court says he'd have immunity send the National Guard to the street of Democraric cities and officially ignore election results as part pf his duties -
but Biden is like really old. I can't vote for an old guy."
This is absolute fucking bonkers.
This is madness.
I was opposed to gutting the Supreme Court before this, but not now. They have shown that the great power entrusted to them cannot be wielded by them responsibly. They have just spelled the end of the current institution as we know it.
Punts to lower courts to decide what is or isn't an official act. Such individual rulings will no doubt be appealed all the way up to SCOTUS.
No clear answer. It's all going to be worked out by the courts on a case-by-case basis.
I mean if this is the game we are playing all Democrats should just deny this upcoming election if they lose and say it was stolen. Then on 1/6/25 we should all go to the capitol for a nice big bonfire. Because apparently that is how our country now functions.
Seems to me Joe Biden can now meet with the NSA / FBI / CIA and the Justice Department and if he determines someone has committed an act of treason then he can order their assassination in what is now a protected **OFFICIAL ACT** ™
Things like stealing nuclear secrets and giving them to foreign governments are acts of treason. You see where this is going.
This country is being reduced to a joke by this court. Look forward to burning rivers, poisoned waters, and extrajudicial killings of rivals as ‘official acts’
I will never forgive this country for the coddling of Trump or those that helped him. They are aiming to let him die of old age before he faces consequences. Any country that would do this and try to gloss over it, does not deserve to country. I once went to war for this country, I once felt so patriotic I could tear up watching the National Anthem honor the military during opening ceremonies of sporting events.... but today.... I wouldn't lift a finger preserve it one more minute. I know I'm not alone. I wonder if I'm so not alone, that the court whose power only exists if we collectively support it, would in truth, be powerless, if we knew how little support they actually had from us.
Buried in there (and related to the fact the president can appoint an acting AG, like Trump tried to do), is that his official acts can't be "scrutinized" to help convict him for unofficial acts. I'm not legal scholar by any means but my read on that is that if he had any conversations with Jeffrey Clark along the lines of, "I want you in that position (official act) so you can overturn the election results for me (unofficial act)," it couldn't be presented to a jury as evidence.
So then that would seem to suggest the conversations with Pence about the certification proceedings also cannot be presented as evidence, BUT they go on to fudge that a little by saying the presumption of immunity might be rebutted under certain circumstances (up to Chutkin).
Also concerning (to me, anyway): "presidents cannot be indicted based on conduct for which they are immune from prosecution" blah-blah, up to the District Court to sort out, and then it says, "testimony or private records of the president or his advisers probing such contact may not be admitted as evidence at trial." On page 7.
I dunno, seems like they are really limiting the evidence that could be presented to a jury. So, like, if there was some sort of testimony/private record in which he said, "let's find out if we can overturn the election," and his adviser said, "that's illegal," that can't be presented as evidence? That kinda baffles me, especially given there have been many leaks about private conversations that went like that.
ETA from the WAPO:
*Chief Justice Roberts’s analysis suggests that Trump talking to Pence about the Electoral College vote might not be entitled to immunity because Congress has legislated extensively to define the vice president’s role, and the president plays no direct part in that process.*
Considering that France's far right party is leading in their current parliamentary elections, maybe let's hold off for a bit on copying their homework.
When Joe Biden took office he swore an oath to protect the country from enemies foreign and domestic, now with immunity I know of a certain domestic enemy that could be given the Bin Laden special as part of an official act
67, you need a super majority. Seeing as Republicans have a lock on rural areas, and the Senate represents land over people, this will never happen, and the fascists on the Court know it.
So we basically went back to a monarchy right before we celebrate July 4th, where we literally fought against a monarchy. Cool.
This can’t be real life.
He's going to prison, yes - but over the last week the SCOTUS has enacted a lot of his goal. Chevron and APA decisions are devastating for regulations in all sectors - meaning, they cripple the administrative state that protects American citizens from exploitation and other bad behaviors by corporations.
> Presidents cannot be indicted based on conduct for which they
are immune from prosecution. On remand, the District Court must
carefully analyze the indictment’s remaining allegations to determine
whether they too involve conduct for which a President must be immune from prosecution. And the parties and the District Court must ensure that sufficient allegations support the indictment’s charges without such conduct. **Testimony or private records of the President or his advisers probing such conduct may not be admitted as evidence at trial. Pp. 30–32.**
...Throws phone...
That was Sotomayor's dissent, fyi.
> In the meantime, because the risks (and power) the Court
has now assumed are intolerable, unwarranted, and plainly
antithetical to bedrock constitutional norms, I dissent.
This was Jackson's, which is also excellent.
This seems to be the middle ground (using that term very, very loosely) that some people thought would happen.
The president is immune for official acts.
So now the debate turns to what is an official act.
All this seems to do is delay everything related to Trump while that is argued. And gives the courts a way to apply immunity to some and not others.
> There is no immunity for unofficial acts.
That would be not good for Trump’s document case, if he had even a not good judge. Also, it leaves open arguments for what is an offical and unofficial act. Was his Jan 6 rally an official act? Biden has to win so he can replace Alito and Thomas when they croak from the fear of a second Biden term so there can be a case to establish that ordering assassinations of political rivals isn’t an official act.
The official act vs. unofficial act caveat just gives the SCOTUS more power. Any future challenge to what is an official/unofficial act by the President will undoubtedly end up in the Supreme Court. They now have the power to determine what is an official act and what is not. This gives them the freedom to prosecute some presidents by declaring their actions do not rise to the level of "official" and the power to shield other presidents from prosecution by declaring their actions "official". They could now have the final authority to determine which presidents can and cannot be prosecuted.
So can Biden just shoot Trump in the middle of Times Square and claim it was an "official act"? Then kick it to the lower court to deliberate the definition of an official act for a few years?
Cool, so if Biden loses he is well within his right to stage his own coup and block the transfer of power. Got it. I look forward to the Democrat version of Jan 6th where he orders the troops to make them certify him as the winner.
You know what’s an official act of the president? Appointing Supreme Court justices. Biden should just appoint a few more now. (Liberal fantasy…I know)
Unofficial Act: Assassinating a political rival yourself.
Official Act: Tell Seal Team 6 to assassinate your political rival.
> Never in the history of our Republic has a President had reason to believe that he would be immune from criminal prosecution if he used the trappings of his office to violate criminal law. -- Sotomayor
Time for Biden to officially cancel the election and officially transfer power to Gavin Newsome and officially have Trump placed in Leavenworth for life.
Officially.
I want to highlight that the reason the Magna Carta is so foundational in the UK is because it was the first tentative example of the principle that the monarch is subject to the law in the same way as it applies to their subjects.
It was signed in 1215.
The year is 2024 and the United States still hasn't figured this out yet.
We had it figured out. Every president before Trump basically acted under this assumption. Nixon resigned when his crimes were made public. He accepted a pardon for them. The right has worked very hard to gain control of the courts and that has paid off by this lawless ruling granting Trump immunity.
“Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune.”
-Justice Sonia Sotomayor
Okay Biden, let’s get this show started!
Biden should send the Secret Service over to the Supreme Court and put all the justices that voted for this on a slow boat to Guantanamo bay. He can say he was just calling a meeting there. That would be an official act, right? Or at least, Biden can claim that it is. As of today, anyone challenging that assertion would have to draft a lawsuit and get in line at the court. Hmmm.... how does a hearing in January sound?
These recent SCOTUS decisions are so incredibly eff'd up. The solution for slow legislative processes is to impose even slower judicial processes? The way to keep the President law abiding is is to add miles of legal red tape to any prosecution?
So if in the course of his presidential duties the president were to order the CIA to assassinate his rival Democrat candidate, he would be immune from proscecution, yes? He does after all have the right to give orders to subordinates. Would like to see a constitutional attorney's take on this... I suspect we won't have long to wait.
summary of specific allegations:
**Specific Allegations:**
* Allegations involving Trump's interactions with the Acting Attorney General fall within his official duties and are protected by absolute immunity.
* Allegations involving Trump's pressure on the Vice President during the certification process require further analysis to determine if they fall under official acts.
* Allegations involving Trump's interactions with state officials, private parties, and public comments need careful scrutiny to categorize them as official or unofficial.
Hey the President who's in office is immune for official acts in office! So now Biden can just call up his Justice Dept and corral all the Justices and put them in jail. Right Repubs?
Better yet, order US Generals from the Oval Office to march on all Republicans in Congress and put them in prison so they can't vote.
What'd you say?
Right Repubs?
Thanks to the Supreme Court, the next president will have the powers of a king. That’s not what the founders intended. Quite the opposite. So far they've overturned Roe which took power from women. Today's decision takes power from all of us.
Okay Biden, you just heard it from the courts, everything you do, as long as they're "official acts" is now immune, so now go ham and show them why this decision was a mistake and teach them they shouldn't have done this.
Life is about to get real shitty with all the recent decisions from the Supreme Court of corporation.
That being said does anyone know how to move abroad when your poor?
So... the president has complete immunity from any and all official acts, and the courts are the sole arbiter of what acts are considered official. Do I have that correct?
Yes, they are trying to trash the balance of powers and shitting on the constitution. I think we should take a page from the military as soldiers have a duty to disregard unlawful orders.
The conservative justices currently staining SCOTUS are making rulings highly opposed to the ethos of the country itself. They just crossed the rubicon. I hope there is still a constructive way out of this that increases the flourishing of everyone in the nation.
I fear this is impossible if we compromise with republicans in the slightest. They’ve proven they cannot be trusted or bargained with. Appeasement was worthless with Hitler, so too is it a waste with the modern MAGA fascist.
"Absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for acts within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority"
Absolute. Immunity.
Power. Unlimited power
I think we can all bank on this SC ruling in whatever way helps Trump the most. Which I assume is a punt of some sort, to force more wrangling and delay.
So then it would be ok for Biden to have the illegitimate right wing radical "judges" of the SCOTUS removed and imprisoned?
If I'm reading the opinion correctly that sure seems within his right as King to do so. Isn't that right SCOTUS?
It looks like basically the court has eliminated statute of limitations for challenging federal rules. The ruling says that even though the rule in this case existed before the plaintiff's company existed the timer for challenging it started when they were "injured" by the rule. i.e. the day they started the business. Jackson writes in the dissent that "there is effectively no longer any limitations period for lawsuits that challenge agency regulations on their face."
It sounds like they are making it even easier for people to challenge government regulations. Combined with the overturning of Chevron, this should make the dismantling of the US Government much easier.
Yay?
That's the point, Trump's attorneys can now argue his acts in these cases were official, which will likely need to go back up the track to the Supreme Court. Allowing even further delay.
The court holds that a former president has absolute immunity for his core constitutional powers. Former presidents are also entitled to at least a presumption of immunity for their official acts. There is no immunity, the court holds, for unofficial acts.
I'm a little worried that they didn't give more guidance on the distinction between official and unofficial acts.
Remember: Some of the things Trump's attorney deemed official acts included assassination of a political rival.
Moreover, this creates the possibility of another eventual appeal to the Supreme Court about whether the lower court made this distinction correctly.
Here's a summary of the decision for those interested:
# Summary:
**Background:**
* Trump was indicted on four counts related to actions taken to overturn the 2020 election results.
* Trump claimed he had absolute presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his official duties.
* The District Court and the D.C. Circuit rejected this claim, stating former Presidents do not possess such immunity.
**Supreme Court Ruling:**
* The Court held that a former President has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his exclusive constitutional authority and presumptive immunity for other official acts.
* There is no immunity for unofficial acts.
**Key Points:**
1. **Constitutional Basis:**
* The President's executive power, vested by Article II, grants some immunity from prosecution for official acts to ensure the President can perform duties without undue caution.
* Absolute immunity applies to actions within the President's exclusive authority.
* Presumptive immunity applies to other official actions, rebuttable only if it does not intrude on executive functions.
2. **Distinguishing Official from Unofficial Acts:**
* Official acts involve constitutional and statutory authority, falling within the "outer perimeter" of presidential responsibilities.
* Unofficial acts do not have immunity, as they are beyond the scope of presidential duties.
3. **Specific Allegations:**
* Allegations involving Trump's interactions with the Acting Attorney General fall within his official duties and are protected by absolute immunity.
* Allegations involving Trump's pressure on the Vice President during the certification process require further analysis to determine if they fall under official acts.
* Allegations involving Trump's interactions with state officials, private parties, and public comments need careful scrutiny to categorize them as official or unofficial.
**Conclusion:**
* The Supreme Court vacated and remanded the lower court's decision for further analysis to distinguish between Trump's official and unofficial actions related to the indictment.
* The President is not above the law, but there are protections to ensure the effective functioning of the executive branch.
My interpretation of this is that SOCTUS interfered to achieve nothing. Lower courts need to decide what is an official act and what isn't, which can be appealed back to SCOTUS.
>Justice Thomas writes a concurring opinion in which he questions the validity of Jack Smith's appointment as special counsel. "If this unprecedented prosecution is to proceed, it must be conducted by someone authorized to do so by the American people."
Clarence doing his best to defeat Alito as the worst SCOTUS justice.
See the larger chessboard. Republicans know they're about to cement perpetual power with their actions. Once Trump takes over they'll never give up power again. They'll hold all 3 branches for the rest of your lives. This granting of immunity is just preparing the ground for the Executive branch to be able to wield the Military and Law Enforcement entities without fear of reprisal.
This might as well be part of Project 2025. They've got a plan. They've given themselves the structure to wield the power now all they have to do is put the Orange idiot back into power and they'll install their ChristoFascist wet dream.
I think people are getting it wrong. They punted. They did the thing we thought they were going to do - let the lower courts decide what is "official" and "unofficial" acts.
More delay, but maybe those trials for determination can be eye-opening for the evidence
I’ve got a bucket sitting next to me in preparation for the vomiting I’m about to do when the SC announces that Trump is officially an all-powerful god emperor.
SCOUTS is so corrupt.
Gave him partial immunity. Kicks the other 2 issues down to a lower court, then theyll just intercede again to rule once shes ruled.
They're wholly corrupt and playing politics here.
"As President, a few hours ago, my first official act has been to recognize the friendship that links our beautiful country with the big and strong state of Russia. As proof of this friendship, I have directed our agencies to share all our beautiful intelligence with Mr Putin, the greatest ally this nation has ever seen. We are at war with the corrupt Ukraine, and I have ordered the arrest or crooked Joe Biden and his crime family, which includes Hillary by the way. Would you believe that? Crooked Hillary and Crooked Joe, they're all crooked! In unrelated news, I have received an anonymous 200 billion dollars in donation towards my reelection fund, which makes me the richest guy in the world! I have also started directing the construction of Trump Tower Moscow."
Well that's one hell of a pivot away from the topic at hand. But whether SCOTUS realizes it or not, they just ruled on Trump's guilt. Encouraging a large, armed mob to attack the Capitol for the purpose of preventing Congress from doing their job is not one of the duties of a U.S. President.
The immunity ruling could go a few different ways today, but the leading theory is that they will create some sort of "test" for an "official act" and kick it back to Chutkan for review.
If they go this route, it sucks because it essentially gives Trump the gift they keep on giving - delay.
But there is a tiny silver lining to that decision:
Chutkan would then hold an evidentiary hearing. And she can start it almost immediately.
This creates a "mini-trial" of sorts which allows a judge to hear testimony, evidence and whatever is necessary for Chutkan to reach a determination.
Since that determination delves deep into the heart of the prosecution, this means we could hear new testimony under oath from huge figures like Pence, the public could learn about previously-undisclosed evidence regarding Jan. 6, etc.
It gives Jack Smith at least an avenue to produce some pretty damning material that will become public knowledge - and possibly for months leading up to the election.
It absolutely pales in comparison to, y'know... A criminal trial. But given the circumstances, it'll be interesting to see unfold.
What I’m gathering from this decision is that Biden should have Trump thrown in the gulags as an “Official Act” to save our country from a felonious dictator wannabe
The supreme court decided already that the states cannot determine whether an act qualifies as an insurrection against the federal government. But now the same state courts can supposedly determine whether an act is an official act or not? It doesn't make any sense.
I think the nightmare scenario is that they rule that Trump has broad immunity, but put in a Bush v. Gore-esque statement that it only applies to Trump and these circumstances specifically.
>The third SCOTUS opinion today: the immunity decision. Written by Justice Roberts.
[https://x.com/KatiePhang/status/1807783361366114603](https://x.com/KatiePhang/status/1807783361366114603)
>Held: Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts. Pp. 5–43.
One of the enumerated powers in Article II is "Pursuant to the Oath of Office, will preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."
That provides an awfully broad umbrella for 'official acts'.
This was the outcome I expected from the court. I even posted as much weeks and days ago.
The Supreme Court sure scooted their asses quickly when those Republicans in Colorado sued to keep Trump off the ballot there.
But they moved at a snail's pace to help prevent Trump from being convicted a second time before the election.
They hide behind procedure in a snide and cynical way as a cop out excuse that they were just doing their job the correct way. But in reality, they are helping fascism.
My stomach is in knots. I fear they will either directly protect 45 (and no one else) or trigger an infinite series of back and forth with lower courts that will kill any chance of holding dude accountable this year.
> infinite series of back and forth with lower courts that will kill any chance of holding dude accountable this year
There's no chance of him being held accountable unless he loses the election.
There is basically no chance he will be held accountable for anything held up by this before the election.
Punting it down is exactly what I think is going to happen
The court has lost all credibility. I hope everyone who decided not to vote for Hillary in 2016 is happy with these decisions the past 2 years. They're only going to get worse.
On the Trump immunity. I'm not surprised by the decision. They were going to give immunity for something. They still punted it back to a lower court and in effect, will delay the trial until after the election, where it may not happen at all.
They could have issued this a month ago, but they're actively working for MAGA and it's a blatant attempt to influence the election.
A lower court will find that trump's attempt were not an "official" act, because all of his attempts to overturn the election were done as a candidate for President. He won't win, but my god I never thought SCOTUS would be this bad.
If you're a Democratic President, everything is "unofficial"
If you're a Republican President, everything is "official" and you can get away with anything.
There. That's a summary of the decision.
Could a President in an official act cancel elections due to "election interference" and be shielded from prosecution per this opinion?
You know that Civil War movie from earlier this year starting to look more and more like a documentary.
> "In dividing official from unofficial conduct, courts may not inquire
into the President’s motives."
He could literally go on TV and say that he told Seal Team Six to assassinate his rivals so that he could win an election. And there is absolutely nothing the courts could do about it.
Biden and team. This plus other rulings end the united states as we know it. You can do whatever you want, it won't make the US any worse but it could fix this. Stop following rules and laws. You don't have to anymore. Then we can get back to normal.
Surely nothing bad will come from this...
"With fear for our democracy, I dissent."
"Never in the history of our Republic has a President had reason to believe that he would be immune from criminal prosecution if he used the trappings of his office to violatethe criminal law. Moving forward, however, all formerPresidents will be cloaked in such immunity. If the occupant of that office misuses official power for personal gain,
the criminal law that the rest of us must abide will not provide a backstop.
With fear for our democracy, I dissent."
-SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting
"The majority of my colleagues seems to have put theirtrust in our Court’s ability to prevent Presidents from becoming Kings through case-by-case application of the indeterminate standards of their new Presidential accountability paradigm. I fear that they are wrong. But, for all our sakes, I hope that they are right.In the meantime, because the risks (and power) the Courthas now assumed are intolerable, unwarranted, and plainly antithetical to bedrock constitutional norms, I dissent."
- JACKSON, J., dissenting
Absolute immunity: the defendant has immunity and it cannot be challenged.
Presumptive immunity: the defendant has a _presumption_ of immunity, but it can be challenged.
Many forms of immunity only apply given certain facts or circumstances and the defendant has to demonstrate that they are immune. Under presumptive immunity, the immunity is presumed to be valid by the Court and the plaintiff/prosecutor has to make a case that the immunity should be rebutted.
Immunity for “official acts” but not “unofficial acts”. What a fuckin wishy-washy bullshit decision.
[удалено]
He officially incited a riot at the Capitol, but that is not something a President officially should be doing, so they can fry his ass.
Taking 6 months off the clock and then this half-baked opinion which clarifies nothing, dropped as the justices go wheels up on their long vacations, leaving the courts with a pile of shit to sort through.
> dropped as the justices go wheels up on their long vacations Yeah, I'm sure Thomas's 250k RV was idling in the parking lot, waiting for him so they could head off to some private estate for the summer.
6 months off the clock only to remand it back to the lower courts. The fix is in.
Justice Sotomayor's warning in her dissent: >"When [the president] uses his official powers in any way, under the majority's reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy's Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune. Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority's message today. Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done. The relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law."
[удалено]
"Indeed, the majority holds that the President, unlike anyone else in our country, is comparatively free to engage in criminal acts in furtherance of his official duties." Nixon wishes he had this Supreme Court!
So, Trump can't physically grab a gun and shoot someone on 5th avenue, but he order Seal Team 6 to get their guns, shoot someone on 5th avenue, and then pardon them, preventing any prosecution for the President of the United States just outright killing US citizens. You folks understand how fucked we are as a nation if Donald Trump is re-elected, right? The Supreme Court just gave Donald Trump a license to kill Americans. That cannot be understated. The ONLY restriction we have on the executive branch is Congress, through impeachment, or people in the Executive Branch refusing to follow orders. We are fucked.
Pardon Seal Team 6 for what? It is a completely official act. Already Immune!
Per the live coverage on SCOTUSblog >The court holds that a former president has absolute immunity for his core constitutional powers. >Former presidents are also entitled to at least a presumption of immunity for their official acts. >There is no immunity, the court holds, for unofficial acts.The core constitutional powers are things like appointing ambassadors and foreign governments. >The court explains that it does not need to decide in this case whether immunity for official acts is presumptive or absolute. >The court in Part III of its opinion indicates that in this case "no court has thus far considered how" to distinguish between official and unofficial acts. >Moreover, Roberts continues, "the lower courts rendered their decisions on a highly expedited basis" and "did not analyze the conduct alleged in the indictment to decide which of it should be categorized as official and which unofficial" -- and it wasn't briefed before the Supreme Court. >So the Supreme Court isn't going to make that determination now. Instead, it will send the case back to the lower courts for further proceedings, although it does offer some guidance. The fix is in. They ate up 6 months of time, and now they've remanded it to the lower courts to run out the rest of the clock until well after the election. It is now (inexplicably) the duty of a lower court to decide what is an official act versus what is not after which the Supreme Court obviously will need to actually render a decision. But Roberts specifically writes that conversations and instructions given to the Vice President, the Attorney General and other members of the government constitute official acts and enjoy complete immunity. Project 2025 just got the green light.
Fuck John Roberts. The case handed to them was fucking airtight. Straight up political hackery and an embarrassment to our country.
Justice Barrett joking about 'this is not the case you are here for' like it's all a joke.
For the fascists this is all a game.
Man. It really can’t be overstated: The 2016 election was most definitely a fork in the road
Even earlier. Citizens united and the tea party showed where we were headed.
The Supreme Court announcing that presidents are basically now kings during July 4th week is quite a choice.
I've never been so disappointed in my country. This bullshit power grab from conservatives will have effects that fuck us over for decades. They know that their "ideals" have no place in the 21st century, so they're going to salt the earth while they can.
I really don’t believe that most Americans (not you obviously), are fully aware of the damage that the GOP have inflicted on the overall credibility of the United States on the world stage.
Once again, the court vastly expanding its own power to choose who the law protects and who it binds separately by making the definition of “official acts” subject only to its own authority. Fucking sickening.
Having a Democrat murdered? Official act. Having a Republican murdered? No immunity.
Wow. The court worked really hard to dismantle the administrative state this term. Wtf..
That's why the Federalist Society exists, to concentrate power to whatever level conservatives and the wealthy hold it.
Remember, they set out a tip jar for themselves labeled “gratuity” then transferred all the power of the administrative in their own hands.
One key side effect of this decision: SCOTUS has immeasurably *increased* the incentive for thoroughly corrupt people to seek the presidency.
Biden needs to get Trump, Thomas (and his wife), and all of the Jan 6th assisting congress members arrested for Treason without the possibility of bail. Call it an official act and be done with it. Let them sit in jail and wait for an appeal.
"Thus, even a hypothetical President who admits to having ordered the assassinations of his political rivals or critics, see, e.g., Tr. of Oral Arg. 9, or one who indisputably instigates an unsuccessful coup, id., at 41–43, has a fair shot at getting immunity under the majority’s new Presidential accountability model." Holy fucking shit
This SCOTUS ruling tears down one of the first principles of American democracy that no man is above the law. It's a wide open invitation to dictatorship.
So presidents have immunity from “official” acts but not “unofficial” ones. Let me clear up how that’s going to work. Acts done by REPUBLICAN presidents are OFFICIAL While any acts by DEMOCRATIC presidents are UNOFFICIAL
>[CNN’s Harry Enten Reveals Republican Voters Believe Only Trump Should Have Immunity, But Not Another President](https://www.mediaite.com/tv/cnns-harry-enten-reveals-republican-voters-believe-only-trump-should-have-immunity-but-not-another-president/)
If they leave it to the courts to decide, as they seem to be doing, this just means if it's a trump appointed judge, they will decide it's an official act.
[удалено]
They worked really hard on the timing.
>Justice Jackson in her dissent: "At the end of a momentous Term, this much is clear: The tsunami of lawsuits against agencies that the Court's holdings in this case and Loper Bright have authorized has the potential to devastate the functioning of the Federal Government." [https://x.com/KatiePhang/status/1807779354656518508](https://x.com/KatiePhang/status/1807779354656518508)
It sounds like the majority went way too far on their decision if the minority is saying that the floodgates are being opened to undermine the functioning of the executive branch.
So...if I'm reading this right...its a punt?
Yes. And delays any action on trump until well after the election: >The court explains that it does not need to decide in this case whether immunity for official acts is presumptive or absolute. >The court in Part III of its opinion indicates that in this case "no court has thus far considered how" to distinguish between official and unofficial acts. >Moreover, Roberts continues, "the lower courts rendered their decisions on a highly expedited basis" and "did not analyze the conduct alleged in the indictment to decide which of it should be categorized as official and which unofficial" -- and it wasn't briefed before the Supreme Court
The key thing is official vs unofficial acts. Thats a punt. Stall tactics activated.
The necessity of electing Biden just became twice as dire. Your Facebook uncles are preparing to put a convicted felon campaigning on a platform of revenge into an office that now enjoys absolute immunity for undefined official acts.
The brain dead conservatives that see this as a win is insane. I saw 1 comment about how this a double edged sword and may not be good for a president to have this much power. “I love the poorly educated”
“A republic, *if you can keep it.*” Narrator: They could not.
> Whenever the President and Vice President discuss their official re- sponsibilities, they engage in official conduct. Presiding over the Jan- uary 6 certification proceeding at which Members of Congress count the electoral votes is a constitutional and statutory duty of the Vice President. Art. II, §1, cl. 3; Amdt. 12; 3 U. S. C. §15. The indictment’s allegations that Trump attempted to pressure the Vice President to take particular acts in connection with his role at the certification proceeding thus involve official conduct, and Trump is at least presumptively immune from prosecution for such conduct. That's insane. A president instructing the vice president to not certify the election and just deem himself the winner is just part of the job and a protected act?
From Sotomayor's dissent: "Looking beyond the fate of this particular prosecution, the long-term consequences of today’s decision are stark. The Court effectively creates a law-free zone around the President, upsetting the status quo that has existed since the Founding. This new official-acts immunity now “lies about like a loaded weapon” for any President that wishes to place his own interests, his own political survival, or his own financial gain, above the interests of the Nation. Korematsu v. United States, 323 U. S. 214, 246 (1944) (Jackson, J., dissenting). The President of the United States is the most powerful person in the country, and possibly the world. When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. **Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune.**
This whole thing is an absolute mess. Not sure if by design, but it certainly sets up up for a tyrant: You can't prosecute a President for an officially act... ok, makes sense We're not going to tell you what official acts are... oh and to prosecute, you need to prove the acts wasn't official... you can't prove a negative And any conversations they have with officials can't be used in court... all hail the god king
So does this mean that Biden could take measures to sure up the democracy like add a bunch of additional Supreme Court Justices or jail Trump and MAGA lawmakers- and call them official acts?
If this isn’t a wake up call for anyone to get out and vote, then I don’t know what to tell you. Vote like your life depends on it.
If you are undecided at this point there is no hope for you.
Let's be clear here: This was and is the SCOTUS laying the groundwork, clear for all to see, for a soft coup at the start of next year. We will have no democracy after this year.
The coup is already started
They just peed all over the intent of the entire US Constitution.
And who decides which acts are official and which aren't? That's right, this SCOTUS.
“… When [the President] uses his official powers in any way, under the majority's reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy's Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune. Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority's message today. Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done. The relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law. … **With fear for our democracy, I dissent.**” —Sotomayor J., with whom Kagan J and Jackson J join, dissenting (29–30 of her judgment). Emphasis added.
The Supreme Court ruled that Presidents sometimes have immunity but only during official acts but they didn’t define what an official act is, instead they kicked it back to the lower court for them to define what an official act is and then once they do that, it can be appealed back to the Supreme Court so they can determine whether each act was in fact an official act or not. Am I understanding that correctly?
Essentially the Supreme Court has completed an unprecedented power grab. Every single law, every single lower court decision, will be challenged and appealed by bad actors to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is now also the Supreme Legislature.
The Supreme Court: What's this Project 2025? The Supreme Court: Fuck that, why wait and let's make it 1000x worse,
Oh look. MIA Alito showed up today. Seeing that the 4th is just 3 days away…yeah.
The real concern here is... that someone like Donald Trump would most definitely take advantage of loosely defined "presidential duties." For instance, he could simply decide that various large real estate businesses are a monopoly and must be disbanded... then enact an executive order making it ILLEGAL to practice a real estate business above a certain financial threshold without "presidential approval." And therefore, he could kill off all of the Trump Organization competition. Basically yeah, he could do something like this with how loosely the SCOTUS has defined their ruling. Also, Trump could basically decide to bequeath to himself an "executive override" of election results if he "believes" that the results are "fraudulent." And he could basically decree that if an election is "aborted" for whatever reason, the sitting president has the OPTION to stay on for another term. He could do something like that, based on how loosely the SCOTUS ruled on this decision. DEMOCRACY folks. It's going to die if Trump becomes POTUS.
At this point, the Court has ensured that democracy dies if ANY FUCKING REPUBLICAN gets into the fucking White House. Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Roberts have earned their bribes (that they have ensured are now perfectly legal!) and paved the way for an autocrat. The fascist party only needs to sit and wait. When they get in, they'll never leave.
"I understand the court says he'd have immunity send the National Guard to the street of Democraric cities and officially ignore election results as part pf his duties - but Biden is like really old. I can't vote for an old guy."
This is absolute fucking bonkers. This is madness. I was opposed to gutting the Supreme Court before this, but not now. They have shown that the great power entrusted to them cannot be wielded by them responsibly. They have just spelled the end of the current institution as we know it.
Dear Jesus......everyone vote. It's more important than ever to keep rump away from any office.
Wow glad we got this ruling that clears 0 fucking things up, very cool
This is expert delay tactics isn't it? Took them like 2 months to say nothing. So is the prosecution case still on hold?
Shocker that they punted. They could have done this months ago but it’s delay delay delay
Punts to lower courts to decide what is or isn't an official act. Such individual rulings will no doubt be appealed all the way up to SCOTUS. No clear answer. It's all going to be worked out by the courts on a case-by-case basis.
I mean if this is the game we are playing all Democrats should just deny this upcoming election if they lose and say it was stolen. Then on 1/6/25 we should all go to the capitol for a nice big bonfire. Because apparently that is how our country now functions.
Seems to me Joe Biden can now meet with the NSA / FBI / CIA and the Justice Department and if he determines someone has committed an act of treason then he can order their assassination in what is now a protected **OFFICIAL ACT** ™ Things like stealing nuclear secrets and giving them to foreign governments are acts of treason. You see where this is going.
Or even supreme court justices.
This country is being reduced to a joke by this court. Look forward to burning rivers, poisoned waters, and extrajudicial killings of rivals as ‘official acts’
Anyone of us could be killed if we're deemed a threat (not voting for their party)
I will never forgive this country for the coddling of Trump or those that helped him. They are aiming to let him die of old age before he faces consequences. Any country that would do this and try to gloss over it, does not deserve to country. I once went to war for this country, I once felt so patriotic I could tear up watching the National Anthem honor the military during opening ceremonies of sporting events.... but today.... I wouldn't lift a finger preserve it one more minute. I know I'm not alone. I wonder if I'm so not alone, that the court whose power only exists if we collectively support it, would in truth, be powerless, if we knew how little support they actually had from us.
Buried in there (and related to the fact the president can appoint an acting AG, like Trump tried to do), is that his official acts can't be "scrutinized" to help convict him for unofficial acts. I'm not legal scholar by any means but my read on that is that if he had any conversations with Jeffrey Clark along the lines of, "I want you in that position (official act) so you can overturn the election results for me (unofficial act)," it couldn't be presented to a jury as evidence. So then that would seem to suggest the conversations with Pence about the certification proceedings also cannot be presented as evidence, BUT they go on to fudge that a little by saying the presumption of immunity might be rebutted under certain circumstances (up to Chutkin). Also concerning (to me, anyway): "presidents cannot be indicted based on conduct for which they are immune from prosecution" blah-blah, up to the District Court to sort out, and then it says, "testimony or private records of the president or his advisers probing such contact may not be admitted as evidence at trial." On page 7. I dunno, seems like they are really limiting the evidence that could be presented to a jury. So, like, if there was some sort of testimony/private record in which he said, "let's find out if we can overturn the election," and his adviser said, "that's illegal," that can't be presented as evidence? That kinda baffles me, especially given there have been many leaks about private conversations that went like that. ETA from the WAPO: *Chief Justice Roberts’s analysis suggests that Trump talking to Pence about the Electoral College vote might not be entitled to immunity because Congress has legislated extensively to define the vice president’s role, and the president plays no direct part in that process.*
The US needs to learn from France.
Considering that France's far right party is leading in their current parliamentary elections, maybe let's hold off for a bit on copying their homework.
It's basically confirmed at this point that trump will fight the results no matter what they are and scotus will side with him.
How can they still claim they are unbiased?! Unbelievable
When Joe Biden took office he swore an oath to protect the country from enemies foreign and domestic, now with immunity I know of a certain domestic enemy that could be given the Bin Laden special as part of an official act
How many democrats need to be in the senate in order to vote and impeach these justices?
67, you need a super majority. Seeing as Republicans have a lock on rural areas, and the Senate represents land over people, this will never happen, and the fascists on the Court know it.
But a simple majority need to vote for a president who can then stack the fuck out of the courts. 27 Justices.
Biden now has the opportunity to create several SCOTUS vacancies in the funniest ways possible.
So we basically went back to a monarchy right before we celebrate July 4th, where we literally fought against a monarchy. Cool. This can’t be real life.
While we wait, remember that Bannon is headed to prison today. You’re welcome.
He's going to prison, yes - but over the last week the SCOTUS has enacted a lot of his goal. Chevron and APA decisions are devastating for regulations in all sectors - meaning, they cripple the administrative state that protects American citizens from exploitation and other bad behaviors by corporations.
> Presidents cannot be indicted based on conduct for which they are immune from prosecution. On remand, the District Court must carefully analyze the indictment’s remaining allegations to determine whether they too involve conduct for which a President must be immune from prosecution. And the parties and the District Court must ensure that sufficient allegations support the indictment’s charges without such conduct. **Testimony or private records of the President or his advisers probing such conduct may not be admitted as evidence at trial. Pp. 30–32.** ...Throws phone...
>With fear for our democracy, I dissent. Justice Jackson
That was Sotomayor's dissent, fyi. > In the meantime, because the risks (and power) the Court has now assumed are intolerable, unwarranted, and plainly antithetical to bedrock constitutional norms, I dissent. This was Jackson's, which is also excellent.
What is an official vs an unofficial act then? Inciting a riot an official act? Who decides that?
This seems to be the middle ground (using that term very, very loosely) that some people thought would happen. The president is immune for official acts. So now the debate turns to what is an official act. All this seems to do is delay everything related to Trump while that is argued. And gives the courts a way to apply immunity to some and not others.
> There is no immunity for unofficial acts. That would be not good for Trump’s document case, if he had even a not good judge. Also, it leaves open arguments for what is an offical and unofficial act. Was his Jan 6 rally an official act? Biden has to win so he can replace Alito and Thomas when they croak from the fear of a second Biden term so there can be a case to establish that ordering assassinations of political rivals isn’t an official act.
The official act vs. unofficial act caveat just gives the SCOTUS more power. Any future challenge to what is an official/unofficial act by the President will undoubtedly end up in the Supreme Court. They now have the power to determine what is an official act and what is not. This gives them the freedom to prosecute some presidents by declaring their actions do not rise to the level of "official" and the power to shield other presidents from prosecution by declaring their actions "official". They could now have the final authority to determine which presidents can and cannot be prosecuted.
So an official act of Joe Biden should be to LOCK. HIM. UP. (Trump in prison of course) And he's immune after doing so ;)
So can Biden just shoot Trump in the middle of Times Square and claim it was an "official act"? Then kick it to the lower court to deliberate the definition of an official act for a few years?
As Biden’s next “official” act, he should have the compromised justices removed.
Cool, so if Biden loses he is well within his right to stage his own coup and block the transfer of power. Got it. I look forward to the Democrat version of Jan 6th where he orders the troops to make them certify him as the winner.
You know what’s an official act of the president? Appointing Supreme Court justices. Biden should just appoint a few more now. (Liberal fantasy…I know)
Unofficial Act: Assassinating a political rival yourself. Official Act: Tell Seal Team 6 to assassinate your political rival. > Never in the history of our Republic has a President had reason to believe that he would be immune from criminal prosecution if he used the trappings of his office to violate criminal law. -- Sotomayor
Trump just posted the following on TS: "Big win for our constitution and democracy!" Trump will end our country as we know it if he is re-elected.
Time for Biden to officially cancel the election and officially transfer power to Gavin Newsome and officially have Trump placed in Leavenworth for life. Officially.
I want to highlight that the reason the Magna Carta is so foundational in the UK is because it was the first tentative example of the principle that the monarch is subject to the law in the same way as it applies to their subjects. It was signed in 1215. The year is 2024 and the United States still hasn't figured this out yet.
We had it figured out. Every president before Trump basically acted under this assumption. Nixon resigned when his crimes were made public. He accepted a pardon for them. The right has worked very hard to gain control of the courts and that has paid off by this lawless ruling granting Trump immunity.
So you’re saying Joe Biden has absolute immunity to hold Trump accountable without due process?
And remove corrupt judges from the court?
“Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune.” -Justice Sonia Sotomayor Okay Biden, let’s get this show started!
Biden should send the Secret Service over to the Supreme Court and put all the justices that voted for this on a slow boat to Guantanamo bay. He can say he was just calling a meeting there. That would be an official act, right? Or at least, Biden can claim that it is. As of today, anyone challenging that assertion would have to draft a lawsuit and get in line at the court. Hmmm.... how does a hearing in January sound? These recent SCOTUS decisions are so incredibly eff'd up. The solution for slow legislative processes is to impose even slower judicial processes? The way to keep the President law abiding is is to add miles of legal red tape to any prosecution?
So if Joe Biden declared today that November’s election is canceled and ordered the military to keep him in power, would that be an “official act”?
Gotta love a good Supreme Court opinion that raises 100x more questions than it answers.
"I think we're done causing maximum chaos here. Time to go on vacation. Hey Clarence, your RV ready to go?" "It's. A. Motorcoach."
So if in the course of his presidential duties the president were to order the CIA to assassinate his rival Democrat candidate, he would be immune from proscecution, yes? He does after all have the right to give orders to subordinates. Would like to see a constitutional attorney's take on this... I suspect we won't have long to wait.
We all found out we have stage 6 cancer today
summary of specific allegations: **Specific Allegations:** * Allegations involving Trump's interactions with the Acting Attorney General fall within his official duties and are protected by absolute immunity. * Allegations involving Trump's pressure on the Vice President during the certification process require further analysis to determine if they fall under official acts. * Allegations involving Trump's interactions with state officials, private parties, and public comments need careful scrutiny to categorize them as official or unofficial.
Hey the President who's in office is immune for official acts in office! So now Biden can just call up his Justice Dept and corral all the Justices and put them in jail. Right Repubs? Better yet, order US Generals from the Oval Office to march on all Republicans in Congress and put them in prison so they can't vote. What'd you say? Right Repubs?
I’m praying Biden starts playing dirty. We need to stop going high when they go low.
Thanks to the Supreme Court, the next president will have the powers of a king. That’s not what the founders intended. Quite the opposite. So far they've overturned Roe which took power from women. Today's decision takes power from all of us.
Prepare for severe disappointment in our judicial system today. That’s the only advice I can offer.
Okay Biden, you just heard it from the courts, everything you do, as long as they're "official acts" is now immune, so now go ham and show them why this decision was a mistake and teach them they shouldn't have done this.
The Supreme Court is a joke
Life is about to get real shitty with all the recent decisions from the Supreme Court of corporation. That being said does anyone know how to move abroad when your poor?
So... the president has complete immunity from any and all official acts, and the courts are the sole arbiter of what acts are considered official. Do I have that correct?
Yes, they are trying to trash the balance of powers and shitting on the constitution. I think we should take a page from the military as soldiers have a duty to disregard unlawful orders. The conservative justices currently staining SCOTUS are making rulings highly opposed to the ethos of the country itself. They just crossed the rubicon. I hope there is still a constructive way out of this that increases the flourishing of everyone in the nation. I fear this is impossible if we compromise with republicans in the slightest. They’ve proven they cannot be trusted or bargained with. Appeasement was worthless with Hitler, so too is it a waste with the modern MAGA fascist.
So if they grant immunity Biden can just kill every Republican in Congress?
Yes!
"Absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for acts within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority" Absolute. Immunity. Power. Unlimited power
Time for Biden to lock up Trump! Immunity, right?
Six Supreme Court justices, too.
Yeah, after all he'd be stopping a traitor so I'd say that's under his official duties.
Make an official decision to expand the court.
Remember when Trump won in 2016? It still rears its ugly head in 2024. Please, don’t let it happen again. Biden may be old but he’s not Putin-backed.
American democracy is officially dead.
I think we can all bank on this SC ruling in whatever way helps Trump the most. Which I assume is a punt of some sort, to force more wrangling and delay.
So then it would be ok for Biden to have the illegitimate right wing radical "judges" of the SCOTUS removed and imprisoned? If I'm reading the opinion correctly that sure seems within his right as King to do so. Isn't that right SCOTUS?
Biden should launch a Tomahawk on Trump Tower and claim it’s national security Official acts enjoy immunity, they said
It's only 9am, is it too early to start drinking? Because reading this immunity decision just makes me want to drink.
Since it was 6-3 with the good justices dissenting, I assume that the APA ruling is a bad thing, but I'm going to need an explainer.
It's an attack on regulations. Now there is effectively not a statute of limitations if you want to challenge a regulation.
It looks like basically the court has eliminated statute of limitations for challenging federal rules. The ruling says that even though the rule in this case existed before the plaintiff's company existed the timer for challenging it started when they were "injured" by the rule. i.e. the day they started the business. Jackson writes in the dissent that "there is effectively no longer any limitations period for lawsuits that challenge agency regulations on their face."
It sounds like they are making it even easier for people to challenge government regulations. Combined with the overturning of Chevron, this should make the dismantling of the US Government much easier. Yay?
No immunity for unofficial acts. What is unofficial or official
That's the point, Trump's attorneys can now argue his acts in these cases were official, which will likely need to go back up the track to the Supreme Court. Allowing even further delay.
The court holds that a former president has absolute immunity for his core constitutional powers. Former presidents are also entitled to at least a presumption of immunity for their official acts. There is no immunity, the court holds, for unofficial acts.
I'm a little worried that they didn't give more guidance on the distinction between official and unofficial acts. Remember: Some of the things Trump's attorney deemed official acts included assassination of a political rival. Moreover, this creates the possibility of another eventual appeal to the Supreme Court about whether the lower court made this distinction correctly.
Here's a summary of the decision for those interested: # Summary: **Background:** * Trump was indicted on four counts related to actions taken to overturn the 2020 election results. * Trump claimed he had absolute presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his official duties. * The District Court and the D.C. Circuit rejected this claim, stating former Presidents do not possess such immunity. **Supreme Court Ruling:** * The Court held that a former President has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his exclusive constitutional authority and presumptive immunity for other official acts. * There is no immunity for unofficial acts. **Key Points:** 1. **Constitutional Basis:** * The President's executive power, vested by Article II, grants some immunity from prosecution for official acts to ensure the President can perform duties without undue caution. * Absolute immunity applies to actions within the President's exclusive authority. * Presumptive immunity applies to other official actions, rebuttable only if it does not intrude on executive functions. 2. **Distinguishing Official from Unofficial Acts:** * Official acts involve constitutional and statutory authority, falling within the "outer perimeter" of presidential responsibilities. * Unofficial acts do not have immunity, as they are beyond the scope of presidential duties. 3. **Specific Allegations:** * Allegations involving Trump's interactions with the Acting Attorney General fall within his official duties and are protected by absolute immunity. * Allegations involving Trump's pressure on the Vice President during the certification process require further analysis to determine if they fall under official acts. * Allegations involving Trump's interactions with state officials, private parties, and public comments need careful scrutiny to categorize them as official or unofficial. **Conclusion:** * The Supreme Court vacated and remanded the lower court's decision for further analysis to distinguish between Trump's official and unofficial actions related to the indictment. * The President is not above the law, but there are protections to ensure the effective functioning of the executive branch.
My interpretation of this is that SOCTUS interfered to achieve nothing. Lower courts need to decide what is an official act and what isn't, which can be appealed back to SCOTUS.
>Justice Thomas writes a concurring opinion in which he questions the validity of Jack Smith's appointment as special counsel. "If this unprecedented prosecution is to proceed, it must be conducted by someone authorized to do so by the American people." Clarence doing his best to defeat Alito as the worst SCOTUS justice.
Project 2025 is coming to fruition in real time.
See the larger chessboard. Republicans know they're about to cement perpetual power with their actions. Once Trump takes over they'll never give up power again. They'll hold all 3 branches for the rest of your lives. This granting of immunity is just preparing the ground for the Executive branch to be able to wield the Military and Law Enforcement entities without fear of reprisal. This might as well be part of Project 2025. They've got a plan. They've given themselves the structure to wield the power now all they have to do is put the Orange idiot back into power and they'll install their ChristoFascist wet dream.
I think people are getting it wrong. They punted. They did the thing we thought they were going to do - let the lower courts decide what is "official" and "unofficial" acts. More delay, but maybe those trials for determination can be eye-opening for the evidence
and once the lower court makes that decision it will be appealed right back to supreme court where they will ultimately make the decision.
*"A republic, if you can keep it"* **We failed**
Seems to me that President Biden can now just say he will remain the President regardless of the outcome of the election. Easy call.
I’ve got a bucket sitting next to me in preparation for the vomiting I’m about to do when the SC announces that Trump is officially an all-powerful god emperor.
They're really leaving the immunity decision dead last lol
such a fucking cop out what the ever fuck
I guess it was expected. It is a Republican Dominated SC after all.
SCOUTS is so corrupt. Gave him partial immunity. Kicks the other 2 issues down to a lower court, then theyll just intercede again to rule once shes ruled. They're wholly corrupt and playing politics here.
"As President, a few hours ago, my first official act has been to recognize the friendship that links our beautiful country with the big and strong state of Russia. As proof of this friendship, I have directed our agencies to share all our beautiful intelligence with Mr Putin, the greatest ally this nation has ever seen. We are at war with the corrupt Ukraine, and I have ordered the arrest or crooked Joe Biden and his crime family, which includes Hillary by the way. Would you believe that? Crooked Hillary and Crooked Joe, they're all crooked! In unrelated news, I have received an anonymous 200 billion dollars in donation towards my reelection fund, which makes me the richest guy in the world! I have also started directing the construction of Trump Tower Moscow."
Well that's one hell of a pivot away from the topic at hand. But whether SCOTUS realizes it or not, they just ruled on Trump's guilt. Encouraging a large, armed mob to attack the Capitol for the purpose of preventing Congress from doing their job is not one of the duties of a U.S. President.
The immunity ruling could go a few different ways today, but the leading theory is that they will create some sort of "test" for an "official act" and kick it back to Chutkan for review. If they go this route, it sucks because it essentially gives Trump the gift they keep on giving - delay. But there is a tiny silver lining to that decision: Chutkan would then hold an evidentiary hearing. And she can start it almost immediately. This creates a "mini-trial" of sorts which allows a judge to hear testimony, evidence and whatever is necessary for Chutkan to reach a determination. Since that determination delves deep into the heart of the prosecution, this means we could hear new testimony under oath from huge figures like Pence, the public could learn about previously-undisclosed evidence regarding Jan. 6, etc. It gives Jack Smith at least an avenue to produce some pretty damning material that will become public knowledge - and possibly for months leading up to the election. It absolutely pales in comparison to, y'know... A criminal trial. But given the circumstances, it'll be interesting to see unfold.
We'll never escape the damage 2016 did, not in any of our lifetimes.
What I’m gathering from this decision is that Biden should have Trump thrown in the gulags as an “Official Act” to save our country from a felonious dictator wannabe
The supreme court decided already that the states cannot determine whether an act qualifies as an insurrection against the federal government. But now the same state courts can supposedly determine whether an act is an official act or not? It doesn't make any sense.
I guess we can stop saying No ONe Is ABovE tHE LaW..
Its time for the average citizen to radicalize against this. We shouldn’t sit quietly while our freedoms are taken by religious bigots.
I think the nightmare scenario is that they rule that Trump has broad immunity, but put in a Bush v. Gore-esque statement that it only applies to Trump and these circumstances specifically.
[удалено]
>The third SCOTUS opinion today: the immunity decision. Written by Justice Roberts. [https://x.com/KatiePhang/status/1807783361366114603](https://x.com/KatiePhang/status/1807783361366114603) >Held: Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts. Pp. 5–43.
Now to determine what's an official act and what's not.
Ok, so, what’s an unofficial act then?
Could Biden just dismantle the Supreme Court now?
Only if he says “my official Constitutional duty” before doing it.
I believed this would be the outcome, but some part of me still hoped I would be wrong.
SCOTUS kicked the can to the lower courts, Chutkan will decide that campaigning is not an official act of the Executive Branch
The court has marked the Pence interactions as zero immunity.
Now I know how the senator from Naboo felt
Joe needs to remove the dunning-Kruger six by any means necessary in an “official” act. They just turned this joint into a monarchy.
Me thinks Biden should issue some sort of official act that would seriously derail Trump's presidency....
One of the enumerated powers in Article II is "Pursuant to the Oath of Office, will preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." That provides an awfully broad umbrella for 'official acts'.
This was the outcome I expected from the court. I even posted as much weeks and days ago. The Supreme Court sure scooted their asses quickly when those Republicans in Colorado sued to keep Trump off the ballot there. But they moved at a snail's pace to help prevent Trump from being convicted a second time before the election. They hide behind procedure in a snide and cynical way as a cop out excuse that they were just doing their job the correct way. But in reality, they are helping fascism.
Supreme Court are we cooked? Yes, yes we are.
SCOTUS: "Imma fuck up your day" Me: "You already did" SCOTUS: "No, I mean again"
My stomach is in knots. I fear they will either directly protect 45 (and no one else) or trigger an infinite series of back and forth with lower courts that will kill any chance of holding dude accountable this year.
> infinite series of back and forth with lower courts that will kill any chance of holding dude accountable this year There's no chance of him being held accountable unless he loses the election.
There is basically no chance he will be held accountable for anything held up by this before the election. Punting it down is exactly what I think is going to happen
> There is no immunity for unofficial acts. That seems like a big cavet.
what is an unofficial act? Is calling someone on the phone and demanding 10K votes unofficial ? who knows anymore.
Joe Biden needs to go apeshit while he is in office. I mean burn it down right?
The court has lost all credibility. I hope everyone who decided not to vote for Hillary in 2016 is happy with these decisions the past 2 years. They're only going to get worse. On the Trump immunity. I'm not surprised by the decision. They were going to give immunity for something. They still punted it back to a lower court and in effect, will delay the trial until after the election, where it may not happen at all. They could have issued this a month ago, but they're actively working for MAGA and it's a blatant attempt to influence the election. A lower court will find that trump's attempt were not an "official" act, because all of his attempts to overturn the election were done as a candidate for President. He won't win, but my god I never thought SCOTUS would be this bad.
If you're a Democratic President, everything is "unofficial" If you're a Republican President, everything is "official" and you can get away with anything. There. That's a summary of the decision.
Could a President in an official act cancel elections due to "election interference" and be shielded from prosecution per this opinion? You know that Civil War movie from earlier this year starting to look more and more like a documentary.
If Democrats lose election, just have Biden stage a coup since he’s officially still president and it’s an official act.
> "In dividing official from unofficial conduct, courts may not inquire into the President’s motives." He could literally go on TV and say that he told Seal Team Six to assassinate his rivals so that he could win an election. And there is absolutely nothing the courts could do about it.
Biden and team. This plus other rulings end the united states as we know it. You can do whatever you want, it won't make the US any worse but it could fix this. Stop following rules and laws. You don't have to anymore. Then we can get back to normal.
“In retrospect, Mr. President, do you still think it was wise to disband the FBI?”
Nothing says freedom like a 4th of July riot across the entire country.
Surely nothing bad will come from this... "With fear for our democracy, I dissent." "Never in the history of our Republic has a President had reason to believe that he would be immune from criminal prosecution if he used the trappings of his office to violatethe criminal law. Moving forward, however, all formerPresidents will be cloaked in such immunity. If the occupant of that office misuses official power for personal gain, the criminal law that the rest of us must abide will not provide a backstop. With fear for our democracy, I dissent." -SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting "The majority of my colleagues seems to have put theirtrust in our Court’s ability to prevent Presidents from becoming Kings through case-by-case application of the indeterminate standards of their new Presidential accountability paradigm. I fear that they are wrong. But, for all our sakes, I hope that they are right.In the meantime, because the risks (and power) the Courthas now assumed are intolerable, unwarranted, and plainly antithetical to bedrock constitutional norms, I dissent." - JACKSON, J., dissenting
What is meant by “presumptive immunity”?
Republican or Democrat basically.
Absolute immunity: the defendant has immunity and it cannot be challenged. Presumptive immunity: the defendant has a _presumption_ of immunity, but it can be challenged. Many forms of immunity only apply given certain facts or circumstances and the defendant has to demonstrate that they are immune. Under presumptive immunity, the immunity is presumed to be valid by the Court and the plaintiff/prosecutor has to make a case that the immunity should be rebutted.