Comment

Comment on YSK that habeas corpus has its roots in thr Magna carta, from the 13th century.

Didn’t the Supreme Court last year basically decide that the President can do anything without restriction if it’s to execute his duties? Until someone does something about that I don’t understand the purpose of articles like this other than to be rage bait.

source

Sort:hotnew top

NotAGamer@lemmy.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
To inform. People cannot understand about corruption if they are not aware of the corruption. The U.S.is going to reach a boiling point and there will be many more Luigis.

source
aow@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
Not quite. The office of the President already had legal immunity for official acts, the only thing that SC ruling did was reiterate that and also stymie efforts to pursue a legal case against him by buying more time for him to get re-elected. That last part came from having to refer a case to the SC if there was a question over whether or not something was “official”. If we had a functional SC that wasn’t assisting the Executive, it wouldn’t have been a big deal.

Unless the American people vote out the majority of politicians who want to protect Trump to further their own agendas, there will continue to be an evisceration of decorum. He has no true legal protection, just political ones.

source
- will_a113@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  But that’s what I’m saying - From a practical perspective we’ve learned that it is essentially impossible to prosecute – let alone convict – a sitting president. They have de facto immunity, even if it’s not technically de jure.
  
  source