• Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      118
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Who says he can’t? The Supreme Court just said that he’s immune from “official acts” without even defining what that would mean. Who determines what is and isn’t an official act? The President? The Supreme Court? Right now, as this ruling is worded, all bets are off. There’s nothing stopping a sitting President from just arbitrarily declaring someone as a threat to national security and having them picked off by ST6 as an “official act to prevent a terrorist attack against the United States”, then just having the details classified.

      Having something criminal declared as an “official act” is piss-easy, especially when you’re in charge of the branch making the decision and you have one of the other branches in your back pocket, possibly both.

    • blazera@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      62
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Trumps own legal team has described political assassinations as qualifying as an official act as president

        • blazera@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          52
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          It is! in the dissenting opinion in which Sotomayor explicitly describes this ruling as granting immunity for political assassinations

        • potpotato@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          “Congress may not criminalize the president’s conduct in carrying out the responsibilities of the executive branch under the Constitution” makes pretty much anything fair fucking game.

          • Akuden@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            23
            ·
            4 months ago

            “The president enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law,”

            I don’t understand how you can confuse this sentence. People act like the president can commit any crime they want. That is categorically false. Crimes committed in the name in the highest office of the land are not o in an official capacity.

            The U.S. Constitution includes several provisions that limit the powers of the president and prevent the president from committing crimes without consequences:

            Article I, Section 2 and Section 3: These sections provide the House of Representatives the power to impeach the president and the Senate the power to try and convict the president. Impeachment is a process by which the president can be removed from office for committing “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Article II, Section 4: This section specifically states that the president, vice president, and all civil officers of the United States can be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

            Article II, Section 1, Clause 8: The president must take an oath of office to “faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” This oath implies a legal and ethical obligation to adhere to the law and Constitution.

            Checks and Balances: The Constitution establishes a system of checks and balances, whereby the legislative and judicial branches can limit the actions of the executive branch. Congress can pass laws, override presidential vetoes, and control the budget, while the judiciary can review the constitutionality of presidential actions through judicial review.

            Together, these provisions and principles ensure that the president is subject to the rule of law and can be held accountable for criminal actions.

    • Butt Pirate@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      There’s some hyperbole in these threads for sure, but not a lot. The president can’t handwave away the bill of rights, because nothing in the constitution gives them that power.

      However, the president does have the authority as commander in chief of authorizing lethal force against individuals. If Biden authorized Seal Team 6 to execute Trump, that is in fact an official act that he has the authority to perform. Sure maybe it is technically not legal, but that doesn’t matter since the president has complete immunity from criminal law. The house could still draft articles of impeachment but the senate would be unable to remove the president because the president is immune to criminal proceedings.

      And if Trump wants to create an organization to round up and execute all the gays (and the Jews, of course), he has the power to do that; and with today’s ruling, he will never face consequences for doing so.

      Irreparable damage has been done to American democracy today.

    • Riccosuave@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      The president can’t commit criminal acts and claim it was an official capacity, lol.

      What the fuck do you mean “lol”. That is PRECISELY what this ruling does. It removes criminal liability for anything that is done as an official act, which is entirely fucking subjective, and up to the interpretation of a corrupt, coopted judiciary. Get the fuck out of here with that bullshit.

        • Riccosuave@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          The stupidity of this statement truly strains belief given the actual verbiage in this ruling. May you suffer the full weight and consequences of that stupidity.

        • bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          A person of power cannot commit a crime and claim it was in official capacity, because the act itself is against the law and cannot be committed without consequence.

          This whole ruling is because of a person in power (Trump) who committed a crime (fake electors plot to overturn the 2020 election) and is claiming it as an official capacity of the office. That’s the whole point of the case which was appealed to the Supreme Court.

          So what consequence will Trump face for his crimes now based on this ruling?

    • djsoren19@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      You can organize a coup to overthrow the government and claim it’s an official act, there’s absolutely nothing stopping a president from claiming assassinations are an official act now. Hell, the commander in chief already organizes assassinations on foreign targets.

      The Democrats might not abuse this, but the Republicans will, and they have given themselves carte blanche to start killing political dissidents.

    • noride@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      But he can commit official acts that happen to be criminal. Semantics are fun!

    • Rakonat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Supreme court literally just said he could by saying Jan 6 was fine for President to incite

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      If they are traitors and terrorists, he may have to send them to Guantanamo.

    • EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      While i agree with you, it’s a huge grey area. Like Biden could have trump assassinated and then claim that his constitutional duties require him to protect the cotus from enemies both foreign and domestic.

      Official act or not?

        • EatATaco@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Please cite where in the ruling it says charges would be brought against him.

          • Mirshe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            4 months ago

            In fact, it would have to be the DoJ or Congress that did so - Biden could order the DoJ to stop, and arguably could have anyone in Congress killed or jailed without trial by stating that they presented a clear danger to democracy by trying to impeach him.